Showing posts with label economic policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economic policy. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

A global petrochemical shift to China from Europe

Bad news! This seems to follow the typical playbook of the Communist Party of China like solar panels, rare earth metals processing and other products before! Produce large quantities, export excess, use price dumping, exploit free trade.

When will Western countries finally wake up! President Trump is right to oppose this managed foreign trade by China! This is not free trade, but an attempt to dominate certain industries to the benefit of China. China got away with this for too long!

"The global petrochemicals landscape is undergoing a massive shift. According to a ranking of the top 100 chemicals firms by ICIS, China’s majority state-owned Sinopec has supplanted BASF at the top of the list, with three other Chinese firms in the top 10. That will come as no surprise to anyone with half an eye on this sector, since China has been supporting domestic firms to aggressively build new integrated petrochemicals plants to turn the country from a net importer of petrochemicals to an exporter."

Sinopec overtakes BASF as world's largest chemical company amid China's petrochemicals expansion | Chemistry World (no public access) "China’s rapid capacity expansion fuels global oversupply, leading plant closures in Europe and elsewhere"

Friday, May 24, 2024

Schweiz: Fünf Phasen des industriepolitischen Scheiterns

Empfehlenswert! Die besonnen Schweizer!

"Am Mittwoch hat der Bundesrat seinen Bericht zur Industriepolitik verabschiedet. Er erteilt darin eine Absage an die Forderungen, ausgewählte Branchen staatlich zu unterstützen. Bereits vor zwei Monaten hat sich Avenir Suisse in einer umfassenden Studie gegen Industriepolitik ausgesprochen. Jürg Müller hat diese Woche zudem das historische Beispiel des subventionierten Atomreaktors in Lucens unter die Lupe genommen, bei dem es 1969 zu einem Unfall kam."


Fünf Phasen des industriepolitischen Scheiterns - Avenir Suisse

Friday, March 31, 2023

Wirtschaftsweise Grimm: Ganz andere Zeiten kommen auf uns zu. Wirklich!

Ist das eine Quotenfrau in der Bananenrepublik D.? 

Laut Wikipedia ist ihr Resume sehr dürftig! Laut Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar hat sie viel publiziert, aber sie wird sehr wenig zitiert!

Manche Wirtschaftswissenschaftler basteln lebenslang an grimmigen und Fantasie vollen Prognosen!

Sie neigt auch zur Gewalttätigkeit!

"... Für diese Schritte hält es die Ökonomin Veronika Grimm für wichtig, dass die Politik mehr mit den Bürgern kommuniziert und erklärt, was passiert. „Man muss den Menschen klarmachen: Es sind ganz andere Zeiten, die auf uns zukommen“ ...
Mit Blick auf den Regierungsstreit um Klimaschutz und Heizungen nennt es Grimm einen großen Fehler, den Emissionshandel nicht zu etablieren. „Man hätte der FDP auch die Pistole auf die Brust setzen können“, sagte sie auf dem Panel zum jüngsten Koalitionsausschuss."

Wirtschaftsweise Grimm: Ganz andere Zeiten kommen auf uns zu Der Weg zum Klimaschutz führt über die CO₂-Bepreisung: Ökonomin Veronika Grimm fordert auf dem F.A.Z.-Kongress den Ausbau des Emissionshandels. Sie warnt davor, dass Deutschland überholt wird.

Wie naiv ist diese Wirtschaftsweise?


Saturday, January 14, 2023

Sunday, July 21, 2019

President Trump's Three Major Economic Challenges

Posted: 7/21/2019  Updated: 7/22/2019

President Trump’s three major challenges are:
  1. Fiscal irresponsibility and fiscal profligacy: The federal deficit is sliding again from roughly $600 billion in 2016 to now about $1 trillion dollars. This can not go on!
  2. Dangerous federal indebtedness: As a consequence of out of control deficit spending, the federal debt stands now above $22 trillion or about 105% of GDP. Since the year 2000 ($5.7 trillion or 54% of GDP) , federal debt has nearly quadrupled! This cannot go on!
  3. Reckless and irresponsible monetary policy:  Since Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan were the short term interest rates kept artificially at historically very low values. These irresponsibly low interest rates have allowed the public and private sector to pile on more and more debt like never before! 

Seriously complicating matters is the fact that the federal deficit and the ultra low interest rates are intrinsically linked. A one percentage point rise in the long term interest rate would very quickly and significantly increase the federal deficit via higher federal expenditures on servicing federal debt.

President Trump could certainly address the first challenge either by aggressively shutting down irrelevant federal  agencies or by massively downsizing or even privatizing federal agencies as much as is possible! The federal government and all its agencies is bloated! To some extent, I believe, Trump is working on this already.

So far President Trump has largely ignored these three challenges to the peril of the American economy. Left unmitigated, these challenges have the power to undermine the standing of the U.S. in global politics!

Sources (S):

Wednesday, July 04, 2018

Many Economists Are Bankrupt

Posted: 7/4/2018

Introduction

I have previously posted several critical blogs here about economics and several prominent economists here.

Summary

Here is an attempt to summarize:
  1. Many are not dispassionate scientists, but active advocates for big government, central planning, and mercantilism. They are the mouthpieces for government programs
  2. Rarely do economists criticize government for economic recessions although governments are often heavily responsible for their cause and/or their severity and/or their prolongation
  3. Many are socialists in what they do and in what they present in public
  4. Humanity does not really benefit from many economists

A Supreme Example

Government mandated minimum wages:
  1. How many economists openly protest the introduction of any new minimum wages or any hikes?
  2. How many economists have ever advocated to lower minimum wages?
  3. Why is it not taught in public (government) schools that minimum wages are a form of government price controls? That it is one of many grave government interventions in economic affairs that severely interfere with the working of free markets and the choices of free individuals

Thursday, June 30, 2016

Importance Of Government For Economic Growth Nonsense

Posted: 6/30/2016

Trigger

Just read this Great inventions are important for growth. So is policy. I pick this article, because I believe their are a lot more economists or intellectuals out there who would argue along similar lines. That such laughable articles are published by the American Enterprise Institute is a bit shocking.

A Critique

The article opens with this paragraph:
“In both research papers and his excellent book “The Rise and Fall of American Growth,” economist Robert Gordon writes about the huge economic impact of some “could only happen once” inventions: the internal combustion engine, running water and indoor toilets, electrification. Newer inventions — the IT revolution today, robotics and AI tomorrow — won’t provide the same transformational oomph to productivity going forward, he argues.” (emphasis added)
This is already highly arguable whether contemporary inventions/innovations are having lesser an impact than the older ones.

Then the article goes on to argue that:
  1. “we present a more optimistic historical narrative in which government policy and institutional design have the power to support technological progress. … And the researchers illustrate this point by comparing the rise of patenting (a measure of innovation) to the establishment of post offices (a measure of government “infrastructural” capacity). The theory here is that having a post office around made it easier to patent because mail service made it easier to obtain new knowledge and information, made it easier to submit patent application, suggested a functioning government ”
    [What a baloney! A measure of innovation, what a joke! Without government there still would have been some kind of private postal service, if customers had found it useful. Patents, or government enforced, temporary monopolies, are actually a considerable impediment to growth and innovation.]
  2. “... We find a significant correlation between a history of state presence–using the number of post offices as a proxy–and patenting in US counties. … This relationship is not only statistically significant, but also economically meaningful. … Taken together–while we do not establish unambiguously that the post office and greater state capacity caused an increase in patenting-–our results highlight an intriguing correlation and suggest that the infrastructural capacity of the US state played an important role in sustaining 19th century innovation and technological change. ”
    [What a baloney again! The typical confusion of correlation and causation!]

Sunday, May 15, 2016

A Critical Analysis Of Donald Trump's Positions

Posted: 5/15/2016

Introduction

This a work in progress! I will try to address here only some of Trump’s positions.

This is based on Donald J. Trumps website, i.e. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions. His positions are a selected view and not very comprehensive. Hot topics like entitlement reform are missing (however, this might be a smart tactical move).

The Best Of Trump’s Positions

His very best position is the proposed corporate tax reform and the abolishment of the estate tax. His personal income tax reforms are much more questionable.

To reduce the business income tax to a low of 15% for businesses of all sizes has the potential for a jumpstart of  an enormous economic boom the world has been waiting for since the global housing bubble burst in 2007. The Great Recession the world has suffered since then would quickly become distant memory.

His proposal to introduce a “one-time deemed repatriation of corporate cash held overseas at a significantly discounted 10% tax rate” is long overdue. Why the Republicans in the U.S. Congress have failed so miserably to act on this and to counteract the Obama administration’s stupid attempts to curtail corporate inversions is shameful.

Huge caveat: If Trump e.g. does not follow up with a drastic downsizing of federal government and a much more limited federal government plus promoting more federalism and state sovereignty, his business tax reform may likely not have the expected positive effects on the economy.

Second Best Of Trump’s Positions

Trump proposes to repeal ObamaCare, in particular to eliminate the individual mandate! This monster of government run health care has to go fast if the U.S. wants to survive as the country where the great experiment of human exceptionalism in individual freedom and responsibility started. Unfortunately, stupid politicians have already introduced too many socialist experiments to exert power and control over health care in the U.S. covering millions of Americans, e.g. MediCare and MediCaid!

The role of the U.S. Supreme Court justices (Chief Justice Roberts stands out) to defend ObamaCare was shameful! It only tells us, We The People, that these supreme justices have no clue about the Declaration of Independence and the intense discourse about the U.S. Constitution between Federalists and Antifederalists.

I am running out of time here, but I would say that most of Trump’s proposals regarding health care reform make a lot of sense. They are piecemeal, but appear politically feasible and they go in the right direction of more individual, private health care and more competition in health care.



A Critique of Trump’s Personal Income Tax Positions

I presume, Trumps position on this is based more on political feasibility than on principled convictions.

For any meaningful, rational personal income tax reform to be considered, some fundamental principles of a tax system should be first declared (which Trump has not):
  1. What should be used as a base of taxation for government revenues (I presuppose that most people agree that government is but a necessary evil and needs revenues), e.g. income versus sales taxes or property taxes or sin taxes? Greedy politicians like to tax as many bases as they can to maximize revenues and to influence human behavior etc., which is wrong! Income from economic activity is the only base, which should be used as a base for taxation.
  2. A tax system should be so conceived as to generate revenues only for the government. This means, the tax system should fair, mostly free of distortions, and simple and foremost be free of any welfare, subsidy or other social engineering considerations. Latter considerations should only occur on the expenditure side of the budget for all citizens to be able to be reviewed. E.g. the mortgage interest rate deduction is a serious violation of stated principles here (e.g. because it treats renters and homeowners very unfairly) and should be phased out. Similarly, the outrageous tax benefits for employer sponsored health care.
  3. Is a separate corporate income tax (as is the case in many OECD countries) justified? Probably not!
  4. A personal income tax should be very simple and fair. A poll tax or a flat tax rate would qualify. Any progressivity in the tax code should be avoided or eliminated. Any progressive taxation is truly a sin tax promoted by greedy, demagogue politicians propagandizing envy and class warfare

Back to Trump’s positions on personal income tax reform after having stated some fundamental principles of taxation first. Here is my summary:
  1. Tax exempt income of $25,000/$50,000 for single/household taxpayers. Trump claims that about 75 million households would then pay no taxes and would have to file only an extremely simple tax return
  2. Reduction of the current seven to four income tax brackets of  0%, 10%, 20%, and 25%. Thus, creating a new low 25% tax rate for top income earners. This would indeed create the lowest tax rates since before World War II in the U.S. To those many of the American citizens, who are challenged with remembering or knowing U.S. income tax history, the U.S. was attempting socialism by introducing and maintaining confiscatory high income tax rates for decades. Why the U.S. Supreme Court justices have ever allowed the U.S. Congress and the responsible U.S. Presidents to get away with that is shameful.
  3. Elimination of the marriage penalty and the terrible Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT (introduced in 1969) was clearly one of those too many socialist experiments in the U.S. This AMT is one of those glaring examples of legislation by too many incompetent, elected politicians. Why the Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. Congress at least since President Reagan have allowed this awful AMT to exist any longer is shameful. Why the US. Supreme Court justices did not strike down the AMT is shameful.

Trump’s positions on personal income tax reform sound great or don’t they:
  1. It is absolutely a bad idea to remove “over 50% [of households] – from the income tax rolls”. In principle all or most households should share the burden of paying for government! Freedom is not free! As long as there is taxation, this is absolutely crucial for a civilized society to survive!
  2. Trump obviously exposes and even exacerbates the known problems of graduated income taxation (using multiple brackets)! So over 50% of households would pay no taxes, but a taxpayer making $25,001 or one dollar more than the bracket amount would have to pay 10% or $2,500 in taxes? How fair is that? Why would any household like to make more than $50,000 annual income, to pay a minimum of $5,000 in taxes? This is a huge disincentive! Similarly, why would anyone like to earn more than $50,000 to pay then 20% taxes as opposed to 10% or couples to make more than $100,000.

Trump’s Position On Health Care For Veterans

Again, like with personal income taxation, Trump is fishing for votes in a particular group of voters. A principled approach gives way to political expediency.

What principles were sacrificed?
  1. There should never have been a huge, (federal) government run health care system for veterans in the U.S. in the first place! This is another, terrible example how socialism encroached in the U.S. even in the country of the free and brave! It is shameful! Dependency on government hand outs etc.
  2. Most of the medical needs of veterans can be handled by the private sector health care system
  3. Yes, veterans ought to be treated special, but it their needs could be covered by federal and/or state government spending etc. when veterans need medical care or return to civilian life

Trump’s Position On U.S. China Trade

This is definitely not one of Trump’s finest hours. Clearly, he is trying to fish for votes more than anything else. Trump like so many other politicians uses terrible, political jargon like “level playing field” or “fair trade”. Like beauty, “fair trade” is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Brief summary of Trump’s position and comments:
  1. China is a “currency manipulator”.  
    [Well Mr. Trump, the worst currency manipulator has been the U.S. for at least over a decade! Even if China was supposedly a “currency manipulator”, a government controlled valuation of a currency is both beneficial and disadvantageous. This is probably one of his dumbest positions of Mr. Trump]
  2. “America has always been a trading nation.”
    [Unfortunately, the U.S. has been everything else but a free trading nation since the beginning in 1787. Trade protectionism has always been a part of U.S. policy. Alexander Hamilton was proponent of the misguided infant industry argument. E.g. the terrible Smoot-Hawley Tariffs of 1930, which contributed to the Great Depression.]
  3. “Since China joined the WTO, Americans have witnessed the closure of more than 50,000 factories and the loss of tens of millions of jobs. It was  not a good deal for America then and it’s a bad deal now. It is a typical example of how politicians in Washington have failed our country.”
    [This, Mr. Trump, is a very short-sighted argument! The U.S. has and will benefit greatly that 100s of millions of Chinese people have experienced prosperity thanks to the opening of the U.S. market for Chinese goods. Chinese customers are buying U.S. products. Large numbers of Chinese tourists and investors are coming to the U.S. for leisure and to do business. Outsourcing as every intelligent and educated person knows is only one, very narrow side of the story, e.g. insourcing and investment are other ones.]
  4. “Our goal is not protectionism but accountability. America fully opened its markets to China but China has not reciprocated. Its Great Wall of Protectionism uses unlawful tariff and non-tariff barriers to keep American companies out of China and to tilt the playing field in their favor.”
    [As I said above, the U.S. is infamous for its many trade protections in favor of special interests (e.g. agriculture, steel and many more). If China negotiates to lift U.S. trade protections, then Trump will have to relent or?]
  5. “If you give American workers a level playing field, they will win. At its heart, this plan is a negotiating strategy to bring fairness to our trade with China.”
    [As I alluded above, fairness is a two way street.]
  6. “Protect American ingenuity and investment by forcing China to uphold intellectual property laws and stop their unfair and unlawful practice of forcing U.S. companies to share proprietary technology with Chinese competitors as a condition of entry to China’s market.”
    [China (or India) could well argue that Western intellectual property rights are extreme and excessive and that China (or India) do not want any part of this. Trump has a point when he criticizes the Chinese practice of forcing technology sharing on Western companies doing business in China.]
  7. “Reclaim millions of American jobs and reviving American manufacturing by putting an end to China’s illegal export subsidies and lax labor and environmental standards. …  China’s woeful lack of reasonable environmental and labor standards represent yet another form of unacceptable export subsidy. … Chinese manufacturers and other exporters receive numerous illegal export subsidies from the Chinese government. These include - in direct contradiction to WTO rules - free or nearly free rent, utilities, raw materials, and many other services. China’s state-run banks routinely extend loans these enterprises at below market rates or without the expectation they will be repaid. China even offers them illegal tax breaks or rebates as well as cash bonuses to stimulate exports.”
    [Trump is totally wrong here!. The U.S. subsidizes its exports too. Again, China (or India) cannot be forced to follow the frequently excessive and exaggerated environmental protection standards of Western countries. Western environmental standards have served many times as justifications for numerous forms of trade protectionism. Environmental protection can be done in many different ways and so forth, perhaps China (or India) will come up with even better solutions. If the Chinese government is willing to bankrupt itself with those kind of profligate largesse, why not let them do it.]
  8. Strengthen our negotiating position by lowering our corporate tax rate to keep American companies and jobs here at home, attacking our debt and deficit so China cannot use financial blackmail against us, and bolstering the U.S. military presence in the East and South China Seas to discourage Chinese adventurism.”
    [One of the very few things on foreign trade, where Trump gets it right! Unilateral measures like strengthening the domestic economy by improving competition or by promoting fiscal prudence and sound fiscal finance are so much better for more free trade than managed trade or trade protectionism!]
  9. China’s ongoing theft of intellectual property may be the greatest transfer of wealth in history. This theft costs the U.S. over $300 billion and millions of jobs each year. China’s government ignores this rampant cyber crime and, in other cases, actively encourages or even sponsors it –without any real consequences. China’s cyber lawlessness threatens our prosperity, privacy and national security. ”
    [I am not sure why Trump put this point under U.S. - China Trade Reform positions. If the Chinese government engages in this kind of cybercrime it should be publicly exposed by Western governments and the perpetrators in China should be indicted.]


Preliminary And Brief Conclusion

Despite Trump’s many severe mistakes, two of his positions stand out so much that he is electable in lieu of a better alternative:
  1. Trump’s business tax reforms
  2. Trump’s position on health care reform

Friday, April 17, 2015

Robert J. Shiller - A Dismal Economist

Posted: 4/17/2015


Trigger


Just read “Debt and Delusion” on the Project Syndicate website.


I said it before on my blog post, it amazes me how many top economists have written absurd pieces for this Project Syndicate.


I have written a number of blog posts here on contemporary dismal economists. I guess, it could be called a series of posts.


Who Is Shiller?


“Robert J. Shiller, a 2013 Nobel laureate in economics, is Professor of Economics at Yale University and the co-creator of the Case-Shiller Index of US house prices. He is the author of Irrational Exuberance, the third edition of which was published in January 2015, and, most recently, Finance and the Good Society.”


Shiller’s Delusions Or Banalities


The whole article is about what seems an obsession by this top economist to show that a particular economic indicator is “artificial” “and often irrelevant”. His singular focus and by exclusion of a lot of stuff related to government indebtedness and its consequences this economist has done a dismal job.


Following are salient quotes from the above article and my comments (emphasis added):
  1. “Could it be that people think that a country becomes insolvent when its debt exceeds 100% of GDP?”
    [What a stupid remark is that by an ivy league professor! Yes, indeed it could happen, e.g. when interest rates are back to normal and if the economy is sputtering.]
  2. “There is nothing special about using a year as that unit. A year is the time that it takes for the earth to orbit the sun, which, except for seasonal industries like agriculture, has no particular economic significance.”
    [First, this is a non sequitur argument. What is this banality all about? A year or a quarter or a month is a practical, useful period of time to define an indicator like debt to GDP ratio. This has been common and best practices for a decades if not longer. Indebtedness is usually a process that happens over time.]
  3. “We should remember this from high school science: always pay attention to units of measurement. Get the units wrong and you are totally befuddled.”
    [Thank you so much for another banality.]
  4. “Speaking from personal experience, I have to say that they can, because even I, a professional economist, have occasionally had to stop myself from making exactly the same error.”
    [The only passage of his article where he expresses something significant. He errs.]
  5. Economists who adhere to rational-expectations models of the world will never admit it, but a lot of what happens in markets is driven by pure stupidity – or, rather, inattention, misinformation about fundamentals, and an exaggerated focus on currently circulating stories.” [Like so many economists do not admit that they are driven by pure stupidity and would not so often misinform the public. Most economists know that rational expectations is an abstraction or simplification, but that over time a majority of individuals act more or less rationally in their economic transactions.]
  6. “What is really happening in Greece is the operation of a social-feedback mechanism. Something started to cause investors to fear that Greek debt had a slightly higher risk of eventual default. Lower demand for Greek debt caused its price to fall, meaning that its yield in terms of market interest rates rose. The higher rates made it more costly for Greece to refinance its debt, creating a fiscal crisis that has forced the government to impose severe austerity measures, leading to public unrest and an economic collapse that has fueled even greater investor skepticism about Greece’s ability to service its debt.”
    [Had this Nobel Laureate done his homework, he would have known that Greece heavily overspends on military and public sector. Further, too much of the economy is run by the government etc. Thus, so called “austerity measures” [a red herring anyway] were not necessary, but some serious economic reforms to liberate the economy was asked for, which the Greek politicians refuse.]
  7. “A paper written last year by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, called “Growth in a Time of Debt,” has been widely quoted for its analysis of 44 countries over 200 years, which found that when government debt exceeds 90% of GDP, countries suffer slower growth, losing about one percentage point on the annual rate. One might be misled into thinking that, because 90% sounds awfully close to 100%, awful things start happening to countries that get into such a mess. But if one reads their paper carefully, it is clear that Reinhart and Rogoff picked the 90% figure almost arbitrarily. They chose, without explanation, to divide debt-to-GDP ratios into the following categories: under 30%, 30-60%, 60-90%, and over 90%. And it turns out that growth rates decline in all of these categories as the debt-to-GDP ratio increases, only somewhat more in the last category.”
    [I cannot believe, Prof. Shiller wrote this nonsense! Well, yes, perhaps the classification chosen by Reinhart/Rogoff is somewhat arbitrary, but I would guess, with different brackets the results would have come out similar. Perhaps, something else is flawed with this study and needs correction.]
  8. “There is also the issue of reverse causality. Debt-to-GDP ratios tend to increase for countries that are in economic trouble. If this is part of the reason that higher debt-to-GDP ratios correspond to lower economic growth, there is less reason to think that countries should avoid a higher ratio, as Keynesian theory implies that fiscal austerity would undermine, rather than boost, economic performance.”
    [Many economists would know that government failure is often the cause of economic trouble. The public debt to GDP ratio is only one indicator to quickly gauge this situation. Keynesianism has been debunked so many times that one must get the impression that economists like Shiller are incorrigible dogmatic, never learning from their mistakes.]
  9. “The fundamental problem that much of the world faces today is that investors are overreacting to debt-to-GDP ratios, fearful of some magic threshold, and demanding fiscal-austerity programs too soon. They are asking governments to cut expenditure while their economies are still vulnerable. Households are running scared, so they cut expenditures as well, and businesses are being dissuaded from borrowing to finance capital expenditures.
    The lesson is simple: We should worry less about debt ratios and thresholds, and more about our inability to see these indicators for the artificial – and often irrelevant – constructs that they are.”
    [How about that certain governments are underreacting to increasing public debt to GDP ratios. Investors do not demand austerity, but meaningful reforms to liberate the economy. Austerity is most of the times only demanded by economists or international, governmental institutions like the IMF]