My hot take of the day is that 2018-19 were #actually banner years for trade economists. Nobody bats 1.000, but on tariffs, trade balances, diversion vs reshoring, uncertainty, manufacturing, currency, etc, the economists* were generally right. /1
*real ones, not pundits
*real ones, not pundits
Whether this matters for US politics is entirely a different matter, but the folks who *actually study this stuff for a living* have a LOT to look back on over the last 2 yrs and say (politely) "just as predicted" (aka "told ya so")
Eg:
✅Tariff incidence & downstream effects
✅Retaliation & exclusions
✅Tariffs & currency (USD/RMB/etc)
✅Trade uncertainty's US/global effects
✅Bilateral disputes' regional impact
✅Supply chains, reshoring, trade diversion
✅Trade balances & tariffs/taxes/mfg output
✅Steel
✅Tariff incidence & downstream effects
✅Retaliation & exclusions
✅Tariffs & currency (USD/RMB/etc)
✅Trade uncertainty's US/global effects
✅Bilateral disputes' regional impact
✅Supply chains, reshoring, trade diversion
✅Trade balances & tariffs/taxes/mfg output
✅Steel
And that's just off the top of my head.
Even on the "China Shock," which supposedly tarnished trade econ forever, 2018-19 saw a TON of excellent scholarship adding necessary nuance/context that has (unsurprisingly) been ignored by the anti-economist folks & the punditocracy
Even on the "China Shock," which supposedly tarnished trade econ forever, 2018-19 saw a TON of excellent scholarship adding necessary nuance/context that has (unsurprisingly) been ignored by the anti-economist folks & the punditocracy
So, congrats, nerds. Take a bow & ignore the haters. And keep up the great work.
