Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
Related: About this forumWhy Is It So Acceptable to Lie to Promote Trade Deals?
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/dean-baker/56167/why-is-it-so-acceptable-to-lie-to-promote-trade-dealsWhy Is It So Acceptable to Lie to Promote Trade Deals?
by Dean Baker | May 31, 2014 - 9:18am
It's not polite to use the "L" word here in Washington, but it's hard not to be more than a bit disgusted with the frequency with which trade pacts are sold as great engines of job creation and economic growth, when they clearly are not. The latest offender in this area is Bruce Ackerman, a Yale Law professor.
In a Washington Post column Ackerman called on President Obama to push for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Pact (TTIP), which he described as, "opening the path for job-creating opportunities for workers on both continents." Really, what evidence does Professor Ackerman have for this assertion?
The most widely cited projections for the growth impact of the TTIP are from the Centre for Economic Policy Research in London (no connection to my CEPR) which shows the pact leading to an increase in GDP of 0.4 percent in the U.S. when its effects are fully felt in 2027, and 0.5 percent in the European Union. The analysis explicitly says that it will not lead to more jobs since the models are full employment models. It may lead to somewhat higher wages, but it is not a way to employ the unemployed. Furthermore, the discussion notes that in the transition, some workers may end up unemployed as the economies adjust to the new rules.
Implying that a deal that raises GDP by 0.4 or 0.5 percent 13 years out means "job-creating opportunities for workers on both continents" is just dishonest. The increment to annual growth is on the order of 0.03 percentage points. Good luck finding that in the data.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 883 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Is It So Acceptable to Lie to Promote Trade Deals? (Original Post)
unhappycamper
Jun 2014
OP
Leme
(1,092 posts)1. from my understanding
an increase in GDP does not lead to jobs in and of itself.
-
and as stated "job-creating opportunities for workers on both continents" is just dishonest.
--
There are job-creating opportunities no matter whether GDP goes up/down/ or remains steady.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)2. Cash. nt
GeorgeGist
(25,294 posts)3. Cha ching for the oligarchs.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)4. It's the international version of right to work laws.
We have the right to work as slaves for the 1%, live in cardboard boxes
and eat canned beans. What more could us ungrateful proles ask for?
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)5. baker is being too kind. in dc it's acceptable to lie to promote everything
Trade deals, wars, subsistence cuts, tax cuts, insurance handouts, ...