Tis the time to be thinking about the future, and one big question beyond 2021 is the prospects for technology. For background, here's the BLS measure of multifactor productivity — how economists (try to) measure the overall level of technology 1/
You can see the big slowdown beginning around 1973, the decade of IT-led growth from 1995 to 2005, and the Great Stagnation since then — when we were promised flying cars but got 280 characters instead (good line, even if Peter Thiel is loathsome) 2/
This was a good post, and the Pozen-
Scheppele paper it relies on is eye-opening (Kim was my office neighbor at Princeton, and posted about Hungary on my blog). But I think there's more to add 1/
The P-S paper doesn't exactly explain why authoritarians like Trump and Bolsonaro have refused to deal with Covid; it suggests that they might have various reasons, and that their belief that they can deny reality empowers them to refuse action 2/ papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
This is clearly right. But I might somewhat speculatively add one specific reason why authoritarians don't want to deal with disasters: a punitive mindset. That is, people like Trump get satisfaction from hurting people, not helping them. 3/
So John Lott and Peter Navarro say that there was massive voter fraud, and Trump actually won. I'm sure that Mary Rosh and Ron Vara agree 1/
For those who don't know what I'm talking about, Lott was previously best known for fraudulent studies purporting to show that widespread ownership of firearms reduces crime — and also for glowing testimonials to his teaching by a former student named Mary Rosh ... 2/
The proposal for $2000 stimulus checks is divisive, and not along simple left-right lines. Lots of disagreement among progressives, with people like Bernie Sanders very pro but many others not on board. Both sides have a point 1/
My take: the economics aren't very good, but the political economy may make such checks necessary 2/ nytimes.com/2020/12/17/opi…
The key economic argument, which @crampell picks up on, is that given a slump that has affected people very unevenly, aid should concentrate on those actually suffering 3/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2000-…
Why has Trump apparently blown up the economic relief deal? I don't care, and neither should anyone else. In 24 days we can stop worrying about this terrible person's motives, and focus on the GOP backed him all the way. But there are more interesting questions 1/
One is whether $2K for most Americans is a good idea. Even some Democrats, notably Larry Summers, don't think so 2/ bloomberg.com/news/videos/20…
LS should always be listened to, but I think he's wrong here. I agree that across-the-board checks are not an ideal policy — much better to extend enhanced unemployment benefits until the economy recovers — but that's not politically on the table 3/
OK, so we're apparently getting more or less a UK-EU free trade area for goods, although service trade will de facto face new protective barriers 1/ nytimes.com/2020/12/24/bus…
This is better than no deal, although tariffs were never the important issue; the serious costs of Brexit were always going to come from red tape and border checks, which are impossible to avoid unless you have a full customs union 2/ nytimes.com/2018/07/10/opi…
Wrong to be apocalyptic here: traffic flows pretty smoothly at the border between the US and Canada, even though we only have a free trade area. But there will be some costs — probably highest in the next few months, when business is still adjusting 3/
Dems are gleefully signing on to Trump's demand for $2000 checks, hoping to embarrass Rs; fair enough. And it would do no harm, since debt is not a problem given negative real interest rates. But the way this is playing out is still bad news for the future 1/
Where we are now is that a minority of American have suffered a catastrophic loss of income, which is likely to last at least 6 months, while many have suffered no loss at all. Sending everyone a check is not a good response 2/
For someone who won't have earnings until we have mass vaccination, even a $2000 check isn't remotely enough to compensate for the loss of that $300 a week extra unemployment benefit starting in mid-March 3/