Economics

Die Zähmung Donald Trumps

Nov 11, 2016 Nouriel Roubini

NEW YORK – Nachdem Donald Trump unerwartet die US-Präsidentschaftswahlen gewonnen hat, ist es nun eine offene Frage, ob er im Einklang mit dem radikalen Populismus seines Wahlkampfs regieren oder einen pragmatischen, gemäßigten Ansatz verfolgen wird.

Wenn Trump entsprechend dem Wahlkampf regiert, der ihm den Wahlsieg beschert hat, können wir Marktängste in den USA und weltweit sowie potentiell erhebliche wirtschaftliche Schäden erwarten. Doch es besteht Grund zu der Annahme, dass er ganz anders regieren wird.

Ein radikaler, populistischer Trump würde die Transpazifische Partnerschaft (TPP) kippen, das Nordamerikanische Freihandelsabkommen (NAFTA) rückgängig machen und hohe Zölle auf chinesische Importe erheben. Er würde zudem seine versprochene Mauer entlang der Grenze der USA zu Mexiko bauen, Millionen illegaler Arbeiter deportieren, H1B-Visa für die im Technologiesektor benötigten gut ausgebildeten Arbeiter beschränken und den Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) rückgängig machen, was Millionen von Menschen die Krankenversicherung nehmen würde.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Nouriel Roubini

Writing for PS since 2007
181 Commentaries

Nouriel Roubini, Professor Emeritus of Economics at New York University’s Stern School of Business, is Chief Economist at Atlas Capital Team, CEO of Roubini Macro Associates, Co-Founder of TheBoomBust.com, and author of MegaThreats: Ten Dangerous Trends That Imperil Our Future, and How to Survive Them (Little, Brown and Company, 2022). He is a former senior economist for international affairs in the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton Administration and has worked for the International Monetary Fund, the US Federal Reserve, and the World Bank. His website is NourielRoubini.com, and he is the host of NourielToday.com.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 21 Comments on this article

Helmut Suttor Nov 23, 2016

"And, given Trump’s inexperience, he will be all the more dependent on his advisers, just as former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush were". May be.
But, politically, Trump is at the same time the most independent President since - I dont know, perhabs Franklin D. Roosevelt. He won against he's party, public opinion and liberal media etc. This could change his ambitions, make him self- and overconfident.
My be there is an alternative scenario:
Trump defines himself as the leader of a movement, not just of a campaign. He could choose a political programmatic, covering the needs of an sector of the Republicans and the Reagen-Sanders-Democrats. Such a program, complemented by red meat and populistic anti-establishment-propaganda could make his public support more broader and more sustainable. So he could gain a position to to act also against the Republican Leadership in the congress, perhaps in coalition with Democrats there.
Roubinis scenarios are interesting and informative, but may be to much enframed in ways of thinking of the past and not the present or the future.
Helmut Suttor / Germany
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Nov 15, 2016

Much of the post-election media coverage has already turned negative. The media has now turned way too much of its focus on protest and plans to destabilize democracy in an effort that appears almost geared to intentionally stir the pot and emotionally agitate Americans.

During the eight years, Obama has been in office, America doubled the National Debt to 20 trillion dollars. History will likely show it produced a false illusion of prosperity but little more. The article below delves into whether Trump will be allowed an opportunity to govern or his efforts be sabotaged by Washington insiders.

http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2016/11/post-election-news-shifts-to-negative.html
- Edward Laxton Nov 15, 2016
  
  Protesting against Trump = destabilising democracy and emotionally agitating Americans
  
  Trump's rallies, calling for bans on Muslims, calling Mexicans rapists, calling for Clinton to be jailed = healthy democracy
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Delia Ruhe Nov 14, 2016

There's really nothing to celebrate in either alternative. Trump might as well stick with his kind of radicalism and get the worst over with fast.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jeff miles Nov 14, 2016

Author, did you mean "Trump probably will build his wall...." I think you may have been he probably will not based on the rest of the sentence.

I think that this piece is far too optimistic. His cabinet choices point to a far more radical and less educated presidency.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Lloyd-Jones Nov 14, 2016

Nouriel,

Calling Newt Gingrich a mainstream Republican is a bit of a stretch. He's a disgraced ex-Speaker, and weirdie loose cannon.

One could speculate that these make him a mainstream Trumper, but Republican? No.

-dlj.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Curtis Carpenter Nov 12, 2016

However a Trump administration seeks to govern, I suspect that (1) his supporters will find their prospects worse in four years than they are now and (2) that the political precedent Trump has set in this election will haunt the American people for quite some time. These
two factors, to my view, point to a grim future.

If the country's problems (which, remarkably, are understood in similar ways by both the left and the right) are to be solved, we need common ground -- but this election cycle has made finding that ground exponentially more difficult.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Neil Gundel Nov 12, 2016

"Trump will also be pushed more to the center by Congress, with which he will have to work to pass any legislation."
That's a cheerful thought - that the Congress that seems to care only about cutting taxes, unleashing the Koch- and Exxon-owned Alberta Tar Sands and scuttling the Paris Climate Agreement, THAT Congress, will be a restraint on Trump's crazier ideas.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
The Syndicate Nov 12, 2016

So what you're saying is that the dude who stood on a ticket of opposing liar politicians and draining the swamp should immediately become a liar politician himself. That's his problem. He committed the most basic error of expectations management: he set expectations way too high and the blue collar and Reagan Democrats who supported him will turn against him, savagely. This then opens the door for genuinely extreme candidates to appear.
- Neil Gundel Nov 12, 2016
  
  I agree that he will disappoint his supporters. When they turn against him, we've already seen how he's likely to react: He'll become genuinely extreme himself.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
patrick neid Nov 12, 2016

Everyone likes to predict the future despite the failure rate. I think a better approach to what will unfold is his posted "first 100 days" That's the blueprint going forward. I seriously doubt it was just a campaign gambit. Instead, if you read it very closely most of the items are very doable, aside from NAFTA and Obamacare. Those will simply be dialed back and made to work better. Even Canada and Mexico like the idea of reworking NAFTA. The agreement is long in the tooth and Trump was savvy enough to know it needs tweaking. TPP is already dead--Obama himself gave up on yesterday. Until we see otherwise we should expect Trump's management style to be similar to his TV show. He will delegate tasks, demand the results he wants or you will be fired. There is going to be a lot of head rolling providing great entertainment.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
stephan Edwards Nov 11, 2016

There is a practical limit to how far to the "Center" he can go. If reverts to Globalism and trickle down economics AKA pro corporations to hell with the working class. The next response from the factions who put him in office (AKA the LOSERS of globalization) is going to be 5.56 NATO and IED's didn't this election give any of you folks on Wallstreet and in the Ivory towers even the faintest clue how much the average person on the street hates Globalization and the Multinationals who benefit by it? If Trump goes to business has usual like you think I would guess 60 - 75% chance he is dead by 2018. The situation in the rust belt and the large and growing numbers of LOSERS to globalization is a lot more volatile then you folks in your Limo driven cocoons seem to realize or perhaps you don't care? But we are hitting the point where all it would is single match to light it off. A return to business as usual would surely light it off.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Chinman Nov 11, 2016

You're probably right on economic realities, but what you're calling "symbolic red meat" is likely to be appointing a bucket of regressive Supreme Court justices, with long-lasting, very nonsymbolic repercussions.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
shanmugham anand Nov 11, 2016

a pragmatic commentary!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Nov 11, 2016

Alas, a pragmatic centrist approach was not on offer this year.

That aside, Trump's populism is looking like the classic right-wing variant. Talk of extreme deregulationists across the board. They will likely gut the EPA and the feeble and symbolic regulations currently in place on finance. With control of the house, the senate, and an open supreme court seat, this is something Trump is likely to accomplish.

Donna Brazile should be proud (/sarc /bitterly). By helping make sure Clinton her shot this year, and suppressing a genuine and benevolent populist in Sanders, we now instead get this. But realistically, further ascendance of the deregulationists is the last thing core DNC people are concerned about.

If we are lucky, the Trump administration will be impeded in the ambitions of its more militaristic members, whoever they are to be.

The D party has its work cut out for it. First thing should to fire their director of sales and marketing, whoever it is.

The strategy of painting opposing voters as personally to blame for the morai failings of opposing candidates is *inept* to a degree I did not expect from normally marketing-savvy Democrats.

The second thing the D party needs to do is let go of the Clinton way as a path into the future.

The nation will need at least a fraction of Trump supporters to change their position, if there is someday having an actual "centrist pragmatic". Clinton and anyone associated with her isn't just an obstacle to this, she is a minefield, a Himalaya.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
William Wallace Nov 11, 2016

Let's hope you are right. However, if Trump does not deliver and continues to fill his team with K Street advisors, soon enough he'll have the alt-right at his heels as a traitor. Regardless of this administration, the fascist genie will be hard to put back in the bottle, and many more goose steppers will run for office in future. The democratic firewall Trump broke by expressing blatant authoritarian themes, and being then rewarded for them in votes, guarantees many more will be fishing in these same foul waters.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Nov 11, 2016

I think you missed the boat here, professor. And as much as you missed it, Russel Brand nailed it in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3Ou5uFFn8Q

Basically, you cannot hope Trump returns everything to normal because the conditions that created Trump will still exist and will continue to grow. Basically, there has to be 'real change' and it is a question of whether that change is constructive or destructive.

Simply hoping that he won't damage 'the markets' and 'growth' is reminds me of the denialism of Neville Chamberlin saying we should 'avoid war' with Hitler at all costs.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jonathan Story Nov 11, 2016

A credible prognosis. The question is what the red meat will be, because he will have to throw red meat. Going after illegal immigrants is possibly the easiest at least to launch; corporate tax cuts to onshore; major revision of Obamacare to do for the poor what Obama was not able to do; promote energy independence further; simplify tax(not mentioned here); find some particularly obvious surplus trade offenders, and pick them offf. The reality is that despite talk of US decline(much aided by congentially anti Americans in Europe), the US has never been so powerful. Demonstrating that cheaply should not be a problem.
- Michael Public Nov 11, 2016
  
  Maybe he should launch a reality show called "Red Meat" where he turns away immigrants at the border, denies people medical treatment and bombs some village in Afghanistan until the sand glows red. Do you think that would do it?
  
  /S
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.