stiglitz267_BRYAN R. SMITHAFP via Getty Images_trumpstockmarket

A verdade sobre a economia de Trump

Jan 17, 2020 Joseph E. Stiglitz

NOVA IORQUE – À medida que as elites empresariais do mundo viajam para Davos para a sua reunião anual, as pessoas deveriam fazer uma pergunta simples: será que superaram a sua paixão pelo presidente dos EUA, Donald Trump?

Há dois anos, muitos poucos líderes empresariais estavam preocupados com as alterações climáticas ou chateados com a misoginia e intolerância de Trump. A maioria, no entanto, estava a comemorar os cortes do presidente nos impostos a bilionários e corporações e aguardava ansiosamente os seus esforços para desregular a economia. Isso permitiria que as empresas poluíssem mais o ar, atraíssem mais americanos para os opiáceos, incentivassem mais crianças a comer alimentos indutores de diabetes e se envolvessem no tipo de manobras ardilosas financeiras que provocaram a crise de 2008.

Hoje, muitos chefes empresariais ainda falam sobre o crescimento contínuo do PIB e os preços históricos das ações. Mas nem o PIB nem o índice Dow Jones são bons avaliadores do desempenho económico. Nenhum diz nada sobre o que está a acontecer com o padrão de vida dos cidadãos comuns, nem nada sobre a sustentabilidade. De facto, o desempenho económico dos EUA nos últimos quatro anos é a Prova A da acusação para não confiar nesses indicadores.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Get unlimited access to PS premium content, including in-depth commentaries, book reviews, exclusive interviews, On Point, the Big Picture, the PS Archive, and our annual year-ahead magazine.

Already have an account or want to create one to read two commentaries for free? Log in

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

0 Comments on this paragraph, 94 in all 94 Comments on this article

luciano trani Feb 12, 2020

unfortunately, there is good evidence that re-election is related to GDP and Dow not to other indicators :-(
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
B Wilds Jan 24, 2020

Questioning the whole "Trump Economy" may seem in poor taste to those who have benefited so much but it is something we should do. What is being ignored is the structural issues that haunt America's competitiveness and far outweigh the benefits of lower taxes. We must also face the fact that deficit spending can only take the economy so far and carries with it a fair amount of negatives. The article below explores Trumponomics in all its glory and why this won't end well.

https://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-trump-economy-is-mirage-based-on.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Davis Jan 21, 2020

Let's use a balanced time period for statistics used....This paragraph seems to imply and well overstate the impact of Trump's first year in office and its impact on "deaths of despair". It seems any other author could cite the prior 8 years of the prior President and state an awful record on health as well, a time period that would match better with a long-term trend statistic.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Econ Oneoone Jan 20, 2020

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
- Michael Public Jan 22, 2020
  
  This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- P. Kamath Jan 21, 2020
  
  This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Dane Allen Jan 20, 2020
  
  This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Rodrigo Dias Jan 20, 2020

It's sad how "climate change" has dominated the environmental agenda. Nobody ever talks about biodiversity anymore. How many species are we extinguishing every year?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020

RE: the truth about the XXX economy:

The following sentence is the header at the top of my personal Credit Union checking account.

"No pending transactions exist for this product"

What is the message that is conveyed to you?

What is the real product of the XXX economy?

How long can that kind of economy last, when at this point in time the only action that is really sustaining the XXX economy is the birth rate.

Whose?

I got the real message of the XXX economy a long time ago have you?

Do you comprehend the irony of my message and your message?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
D. V. Gendre Jan 20, 2020

To be an economist these days is so easy. Everything that is bad its The Trump. And everything that's good is clearly because of his predecessor.

We don't need any economists at all. Close all departments of economics at Universities. We just need Obama to write down his entire economic agenda and the planet would be saved!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
D. V. Gendre Jan 20, 2020

Its all about purchasing power! When looking at all the goods and services that are consumed by the American people I can't see any constrain because of wages. US citizens have more from everything in any regard. Yes it is also a matter of the sophisticated credit instruments that didn't really exist for workers in the 60's. But the fact that the US consumer recieves that much credit speaks for itself.

Mr. Stiglitz should be happy that wages are stagnant and US consumerism is faltering. It's good for Mr. Stiglitz' agenda about climate change! The best way to save energy is not to use it! So every good that is not produced and shipped to the US is a saving of energy and rescues the planet ;-)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ben Leet Jan 19, 2020

Comments I've read so far are inaccurate. Stiglitz mostly describes things well. My comment:

The Social Security Administration report on wages shows that 83 million workers on the low end of the wage scale, representing half of all workers, earn in wages collectively either 6.8% or 8.0% of the national income (depending on whether you take the Bureau of Economic Analysis total national income amount or favor the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation total amount).
The average wage income for 83 million workers is $14,725 a year. In comparison, the yearly income of a minimum wage worker, full-time year-round, is $15,080. (See SSA report: https://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2018)

The high-earning 7.1% of taxpayers, representing 12 million taxpayers, earn 38.9% of all income, their average income is $495,000 a year. (This is data from the Joint Committee on Taxation, Overview, March 2019) The differential between the two groups is 34 times.
Another report compares the income of the top 1% of U.S. adults with the lower 50%, reporting that the income differential is 81 times, and that in 1980 the differential was 27 times. (from Distributional National Accounts, 2016, Washington Center for Equitable Growth)

Our economy has separated into the high earners and low earners. The United Way charity reports in its ALICE report that 40% of adults face hardship or poverty. It also reports that 40% of workers earn $15 or less per hour. While the stock market may be booming, wage growth has stalled, and more and more jobs are low-wage low-hour jobs. The Jobs Quality Index reports that since 1990 62.5% of the new additional private sector jobs are these low-wage low-hour jobs. (https://www.jobqualityindex.com/)
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that “average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers”, representing 82% of all workers, were higher in December 1964 than in December 2019, 55 years ago. -- https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031 -- During that 55 years the BEA (dot gov) reports that the per capita disposable income has tripled from $14,350 to $44,455, "real disposable per capita income". (Table 2.1, Personal Income)

A dynamic similar to this, a booming stock market and slumping wage growth, resulted in the Great Depression. Marriner Eccles, the chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1935 to 1946 cited this dynamic as the cause of the Great Depression.
My blog: http://benL88.blogspot.com --
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
  
  Good for you. Nice and short. You'd think a few of the top economists and Davos attendees would include those as top liners in their PR narratives. But, just like this little article, what real truth is really presented in any level of consequential significantly written narrative with communicative deliberate reasonably intelligent focus? When the narrative is promoted to conceal, dispute and obfuscate all interpretations of reality, all you get is chaos. So, they are getting what they want. The fight is to balance the narrative to reveal that everybody else is NOT getting what they want. However, even with super-human rebalancing efforts, there still needs to be some real product other than the present global product. OR, we all will really see a resurgence of real cannibalism. Up to the present, cannibalism has been exerted force with some focus. It's starting to become a more random activity to specific paradigms with certain strategized horizontal scale.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andreas Boecker Jan 19, 2020

This paragraph is symptomatic of the entire article: Cherry-picked statistics are thrown at the reader without any meaningful context provided, especially acknowledging a realistic time frame for change. Countries like Norway, Finland, Sweden and Iceland have indeed much higher female employment rates than the US but that has been the case for more than the last three decades. Most OECD countries have lower female employment rates than the US and the OECD average is 5 points below that of the US. So, what's the point of this paragraph?
- Patrick O'Connor Jan 19, 2020
  
  I seem to remember that US employment rates men and women are higher in some OECD countries, and lower in others, and have been for some time. They reflect policies and customs in these countries. But that's really beside the point.
  
  The point being made in this paragraph and the next is that the percentage of working-age Americans participating in the economy (via paid labour) is growing more slowly than it was under Obama, despite Administration rhetoric. Non-workers are entering the paid economy, but in lower proportions than before. This is not good news for an economy that supposed to be booming, regardless of whether US participation rates are lower or higher than in other countries, and regardless of whether US rates have historically always been so -- at least not good news for ordinary Americans. If Trump's 'booming' economy were really benefiting ordinary Americans, their participation rates should be increasing MORE than under Obama, it should be sucking every potential working-age American into the workforce. The fact that it isn't speaks to the article's main point that ordinary Americans aren't doing significantly better under the Trump economy, while the rich are doing much, much better.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Viktor Adamovich Jan 19, 2020

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tom Larkin Jan 19, 2020

This is my standard package on global warming: Global warming is pure
fraud. If anyone is truly interested, simply go to YouTube and start
watching global warming videos. Those videos are overwhelmingly
negative towards climate change. Here are three videos to get you
started: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo7U_yfCyeU&t=146s ,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbalx6UyAXY and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke26J0N74YI&t=14s The global warming
fraud has cost the US Treasury on the order of $500 billion over
thirty years for unnecessary alternative energy subsidies. For
example, the Arctic is not melting, watch the second video. The
problem is the corruption of the data. Almost ALL of the warming is
adjusted data. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgk3xFHvWLE&t=59s Also
try https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krrimqxDBMI and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk An early video to frame
the problem is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQPGU85cm4A One other
point: most of the pro-climate change articles are published in
publications that do not allow general comments. the result is climate
claims that have no basis in fact are allowed to stand unchallenged.
The definitive video of why we have this problem:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj43O98HL5c I have many more videos
like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNy7tTY0Vek and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8KxVQFoyT0&t=1404s
- P. Kamath Jan 20, 2020
  
  Most of you guys are living in a La-La land to hold these views!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Rodrigo Dias Jan 20, 2020
  
  That's why it's so sad that "climate change" (or even worse, "global warming") had dominated the environmental agenda. It's too easy to be dismissed. A much more solid argument for the environment is erosion of biodiversity. Do you think it's a fraud, too?
  - howard thomas Apr 14, 2020
    
    climate change the environmentalist are pushing did 97% of scientists age of myth we do not affect the climate to any significant degree the temperature study they did was rigged they left out decade or two to fit their agenda it was debunked climate change is part of the Earth's natural cycle it's the way he spins and goes around and up and down to do universe it's been a baller ice before and or be a baller ice again but not by us how about a handed us who caused the other I say to one you know not humans
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - howard thomas Apr 14, 2020
    
    climate change the environmentalist are pushing did 97% of scientists age of myth we do not affect the climate to any significant degree the temperature study they did was rigged they left out decade or two to fit their agenda it was debunked climate change is part of the Earth's natural cycle it's the way he spins and goes around and up and down to do universe it's been a baller ice before and or be a baller ice again but not by us how about a handed us who caused the other I say to one you know not humans
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Patrick O'Connor Jan 19, 2020
  
  You get your information on climate change from UTube videos????? You choose to believe videos posted by God-knows-who who makes money every time you click on their video? C'mon.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert REYNOLDS Jan 19, 2020

I would like to thank Joe Stiglitz for this extremely well thought through, perspicacious and insightful piece.

In his essay, Joe presents an accurate and succinct picture of how Donald Trump has adversely affected life in America (and indirectly the rest of the world).

It is a sad indictment of human nature that so many of those who have chosen to respond so negatively to Joe's essay have so much trouble acknowledging reality. These people must start to understand that you cannot make a crisis go away by simply denying that it exists at all, or by being critical of the person who is highlighting the crisis and its causes.
- P. Kamath Jan 21, 2020
  
  Agree with you!
  - Robert REYNOLDS Jan 21, 2020
    
    Thank you for your supporting comment P.
    - P. Kamath Jan 21, 2020
      
      You are welcome, for you have saved a great deal of time for one finger typist like me. At this time I am watching another extremely important events ie. ongoing Senate impeachment trials. This the 3rd one that I have been doing in real time- which bear far reaching importance to American democracy.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
  
  It would be nice if Stiglitiz really focussed on the real causes. Perhaps he is soliciting followers to demonstrate at Davos? Just how far do you think any demonstrators would get to any boundaries that prevent any real rational verbal discourse? Davos supports themselves on wholesaling of intercourse, and enslavement to benefit the Saudis.
  
  Here's another lovely current example of a "shenanigan" scenario just for grins and giggles.
  This one is from lovely Angola, via the New York Times:
  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/world/africa/isabel-dos-santos-angola.html
  
  If you follow the verbal clues to analysis from the content of the narrative, just who is supporting who, and the ultimate FUND winners???
  
  Been to Dubai lately?
  
  Besides having his own personal agenda to not-"liking" the NYT, there's some big reasons why there has been much promotion to "NOT" like the NYT. Even if Krugman and Stiglitz have been to Dubai, and I won't go any further for any personal self-expression about that.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Harrington Jan 19, 2020

There are serious social dislocations and misallocations associated with the global economy, but most are due to central bank policies and crony capitalism that predate the policies of the Trump administration. U6 numbers do not capture this well, but the labor participation rate shows positive signs after its free fall under Obama. It doesn’t help policy makers when anti-Trump political bias distorts the record.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
  
  There has not been one effective result of any positive action for the people of this Nation that even approaches the edge of any volition to any action to reveal any ONE positive result from the effort of the POTUS at this time. He is too busy pursuing his own self interests, and further developing his own personal business empire. He is really not that much different than Obama. But, at least after Obama left office, anyone can drive around through Main streets of America and see a change in the street lights, and perhaps imagine that there has been some minimal improvement in the infrastructure somewhere under some of the streets and to some of the homes, and businesses in the communities. Now, the US has predatory opportunity zones for off-shore MNE to funnel ownership and rights to access of any business transactional activities that still remain anywhere within the geographical boundaries that are presently labelled the US. That two letter brand has been fleeced big time!!! This present administration is the icing to cover up all facts!
  - Michael Harrington Jan 20, 2020
    
    Q. E. D.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dallas Weaver, Ph.D. Jan 19, 2020

Sorry, I hadn't read further for my previous comment. However, the failure now goes back to the progressive policies such as anti-coal regulations without supports for the people.
- Sancho Trout Jan 22, 2020
  
  You do know that the reason coal is dying has nothing to do with environmental regulations, which have always coddled the industries for both the mining and the burning of coal, don't you? It's just more expensive than fracked natural gas, wind and solar. Even strip mining is too expensive compared to these. it has nothing to do with "progressive" regulatory policies. Please--facts are important, and easily available, in a discussion like this.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dallas Weaver, Ph.D. Jan 19, 2020

If you are going to use the increased mortality in middle age, please get the facts correct. A decrease in medical treatment and insurance was not the cause. Social factors of addiction and losing employment to the "green economy" are more important. As this issue started before Trump, look to the liberal policy failures first.
- Patrick O'Connor Jan 19, 2020
  
  The article does not claim that the declining health coverage is the PRIMARY cause of Americans' lower life expectancy and poorer health relative to other developed countries. Pls read his next paragraph, for example. The claim in this paragraph is that Trump policies are only making things worse, because access to health care is one factor that contributes to life expectancy and health. And for this last claim there is a mountain of available evidence.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kent Webb Jan 19, 2020

Opiate deaths are now declining.
https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/478768-trump-drug-policy-director-touts-decline-in-overdose-related-deaths-in-30-years
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
nigel southway Jan 19, 2020

Joe has become a sad sack of sad thoughts... he must get over it.
- Robert REYNOLDS Jan 19, 2020
  
  The really sad thing is Nigel, that this orange colored, narcissistic and mercurial buffoon who is responsible for all the economic, social, educational and health-care carnage you see in America, may be given the opportunity to make things even worse for the next four years.
  - nigel southway Jan 20, 2020
    
    It could be a lot worse.. we could have had another Clinton in the white house.... we in the western world cannot continue to allow globalism to continue to act as a wealth transfer machine.. plus we need to wise up to climate change being a hoax... Trump has got it right on so many levels.... shame he is being delayed by anti democratic activity..
    - Robert REYNOLDS Jan 20, 2020
      
      Thank you for your reply Nigel.
      
      I have to strongly disagree with your assertion that "it could be a lot worse" (than Donald Trump). To me Nigel, having Donald Trump as POTUS represents a very significant nadir in American politics. Without putting too fine a point on it, it makes America the laughing stock of the world.
      
      Personally, I thought that Nixon was bad, then along came Ronald Reagan (who, you may recall was instrumental (along with his British contemporary, Margaret Thatcher) in implementing the globalist economic policies which you seem to strongly disagree with. I certainly disagree with the way globalism has been implemented but there is not the space here to go into that issue in any depth.
      
      Some years later we had George W. Bush as POTUS. He almost made Reagan look good. I thought that with Bush we had reached the proverbial 'bottom of the barrel, but no, along came Trump. How any sane person could vote for this character is one of the mysteries of the universe as far as I am concerned.
      
      I think that your comment about "climate change being a hoax", is also somewhat questionable. I tend to think that there is probably something in this scientific hypothesis but I am also keeping an open mind about it.
      - Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
        
        I think the direction of your conversation is pretty reasonable. I think there is much deliberate confusion over use of "position", "man", "system", "power" in strategize d narrative that has been developed for popular political elections. Have you examined the software and key people that are behind the narratives that are being used for the various political candidates? Each political party has to unite over specific narrative focus and goal-for-change, if goal-for-change even exists anymore with any further time-line and real goals over a 10,20 or more year focus. I really question the integrity and motivation of a number of the key people that are the key strategists for the present people vying for candidacy for the Democratic party. I don't think there is any integrity left at all within the Republican party. No integrity may be the status for both parties in the US.
        
        Presently, not only this POTUS, but all human beings are being "challenged" with the issue of immediacy due to AI, especially with a populace that can at least attempt to hit the MSM from all directions that creates chaotic messaging, and could cause populace revolts. That is very real. But, "globalization" is the real clincher for focus, rather than climate issues at this time. Environmental constraints are more obvious and are somewhat easier to remedy due to visibility of the problems. Globalization is being promoted as all the people globally can get along together just wonderfully, and the wealthy are really helping etc. etc. Are they? The facts reveal just the opposite. Historically, facts have revealed just the opposite. However, we don't have the relative luxury of allowing time to reveal the progression of the facts, nor the analysis of the facts, nor the interpretation of the facts. The REAL Globalization that is the happening of the moment (a 40+year moment) is really revealed by the NYT article: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/world/africa/isabel-dos-santos-angola.html
        You can list the activities of that "model-in-action", and easily transfer to AMAZON, FACEBOOK, UBER, WE-WORK, GOOGLE, and those are just the American MNE.
        
        When you view from other nations, India, China, Saudis (primarily), Russia, etc. etc. the results are the same.
        
        Have you read the letter to Cabot from Henry VII? from back in the 15th century?
        You might want to ASAP to understand monopoly, patent, discovery and
        rights.
        
        The present generation of youth will have to be PERMITTED, GIVEN ACCESS, with right to be allowed to establish worthwhile transactional activities. Social contracts are extremely important. They cannot become meaningless words. Democracy is experiencing the biggest fight for its life to keep that from happening globally.
        
        AND, I am definitely not able to acknowledge that the present POTUS has any integrity in action whatsoever. Some of the present candidates are too old to be in the game, and are all well past their mental prime, if they ever had a stage of intelligent apex.
        
        Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
        
        the Cabot letter from Henry VII that I mention:
        
        http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/History/Maritime/Sources/1496cabotpatent.htm
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Henry Miller Jan 19, 2020

So such is the desperation of the Left Professor Stiglitz, with his argumentum ab auctoritate, would have us reject the evidence of our own lying eyes. Understandable, I suppose, but that makes the argument no less a fallacy.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ian Maitland Jan 19, 2020

This hatchet job really needs no comment. Stiglitz is parodying himself. But let me take just one example. Stiglitz says that the IMF has found that equality is essential for growth. But he has been caught red-handed cherrypicking his evidence. He completely passes over work suggesting the opposite like a study by Morelli & Atkinson (Economic Crises and Inequality (November 7, 2011) of the same vintage (as I recall) as the IMF's study. The late Sir Tony Atkinson was the dean of inequality studies. He also ignores the findings of 2019 Nobelists Banerjee & Duflo (2003) that changes in inequality (in any direction) are associated with reduced growth in the next period. Not to mention the elephant in the room: For decades China experienced extraordinary growth rates and widening inequality.

If, as Stiglitz says, trust is essential for economic growth, then Stiglitz is a one-man wrecking ball in our economy.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
  
  RE:"Not to mention the elephant in the room: For decades China experienced extraordinary growth rates and widening inequality."
  
  Chinese leadership is not oblivious to the inequality factors and rates. If China does not lose the organizational operations that were established under Xiaoping, China could very well establish systems that can function at much better scale than what WAS attempted in the US. I haven't quite finished Vogel's biography of Xiaoping, but it is very informative (considering access/bias limitations) of China as a working dynamic economic system. Analysis is worthless without implication of systems that create positive functional systems for people's IMPROVING survival, without destroying the natural environment. Very fine balance. The Chinese and Indians have systems that have worked for centuries. Implementing changes to create similar democratic systems is very challenging. When deliberate corruption of positive change becomes the overwhelming force of effort, then all is lost.
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
    
    RE:"Implementing changes to create similar democratic systems is very challenging." I do not mean to imply that the "ancient" systems were democratic by any means, or at any levels. What is important today is to implement democratic processes to enable more ancient, and even modern "systems" to be able to become democratic systems. It is the process of evolving to positive functionally balanced democratic systems that can create change that can be interpreted as growth, with a positive dynamic. Utilizing and relying only on the natural dynamics due to population growth is not the solution. The present stagnation is evidentiary "proof". Financialization is not the solution.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Patrick O'Connor Jan 19, 2020
  
  I just looked at Morelli &Atkinson. They conclude the results are mixed, not what you claim. Also, it seems to me you're doing just what you're accusing Steiglitz of doing: cherry picking. There's lots of research out there that would repay wide reading. Have you read the IMF report?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jacques Saint-Pierre Jan 19, 2020

Trump influence on stock prices
Too many people attribute to Trump an impact on the increase of the U.S. stock prices without looking at what is happening elsewhere. For the last 12 months the S&P500 index increased by 24.67% and the CAC 40 (France) increased by 25.12%. Another example: The NYSE composite index increased by 16,72% for the same period, while the NIKKEI 225 (Tokyo Stock exchange) increased by 16.33%.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
The Capitalist Jan 19, 2020

Stieglitz is dishing out the same nonsense every other liberal media outlet is - attempting to attack Trump on the economy. He says GDP growth doesn’t recent the economy, then compares Trumps to Obamas. Well if doesnt reflect the economy, why are you comparing to Obamas? And you can bet the farm, that if Obama had high GDP growth, GDP growth would “reflect” the economy. But he didn’t. It was a stagnant sub 2%.his next claim - the stock market doesn’t reflect the either. Well, just because some folks don’t invest in the stock market doesn’t mean the market doesn’t reflect the economy. However, I guess it DID reflect the economy back in December of 2018, right? The market took a big hit. What was the news at the top of every hour on CNN and MSNBC? Recession coming! Well, that didn’t happen. So the stock market only reflects the economy when it’s going down?? And the other reason why it doesn’t now - the S&P rose only 1.4% during Obama’s last 2 years in office. Starting the day after Trump won the election, the S&P is up over 50%. Ha, that’s why the stock market suddenly doesn’t count. Within 2 years of Trumps election, manufacturing job had their greatest increase in 30 years. (Google Marketwatch Manufacturing jobs). Yes, they have leveled off now, but they are way higher then their collapse under Obama. Trump reversed a lions swath of Obama’s economic polices, and the economy and a to market is roaring. In men’s either declined or remained stagnant during the entirety of Obama’s presidency. They are finally rising now. Yes, deficits have risen, but with 2 years of the Bush tax cuts deficits collapsed. Time will tell on that. Stiglitz is just like every other leftist, using deception to further their narrative, and depending on the low info voter to nod their head in agreement. The informed voter is a liberals worst nightmare.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tad Furtado Jan 19, 2020

It’s hard to read past this point. Certainly, the parade of horribles listed may be unintended or at least willingly traded off consequences of tax cuts, deregulation, etc. But they are hardly their primary goal.
- Rodrigo Dias Jan 20, 2020
  
  "That would allow" is very different from "Their primary goal is".
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Carl Stoll Jan 19, 2020
  
  Yeah, well then what IS their primary goal, wise guy? It has long been proven that deregulation does not raise growth rates or employment. So what is the purpose of those measures if not to wreck society?
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 20, 2020
    
    Certain people do not understand what regulations really accomplish. I like to view regulations as very similar to the types of valves that can be used in a complex hydraulic system. I also conclude that most politicians on both sides of the fence don't know anything about hydraulics, and could care less, until their own sewer-line's back flow valve explodes in their face.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Tad Furtado Jan 19, 2020
    
    I’m not saying they are good actors, just that their goal is not to wreck society. More profits. That’s the goal of pushing for fewer regulations, which normally means reduced costs and greater opportunities.
    
    That you and the author think that hurting people or the environment is a primary goal, well I don’t know what to think of it.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jacques Saint-Pierre Jan 19, 2020

You are right about the economic illiteracy of the plebians but wrong about the percentage of Stiglitz’s readers. Surely less than 5%.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Gordon Jan 19, 2020

Well Stiglitz makes some comments, his political bias is obvious. I suggest he get out and walk around in the real world. People are busy. So busy it is hard to find good help. To blame Trump for the declining health of US citizens based on policies implemented in his first three years is to attribute more power to him than even Trump boasts of. And to suggest removal of some regulations is somehow necessarily a step backwards is just naive.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kent Webb Jan 19, 2020

If you follow life expectancy, the clear causes of our lower expectancy have been suicide, opiates, obesity and severe flu seasons. The causes of the first three and their upward trends predated Trump and the flu season severity has more to do with the strains and vaccines than with the President.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 19, 2020

"....Reagan who handed the keys to power to business,..."

That might have been his intention, but it's the bankers who have them now. And the bankers are only playing zero sum games. That only ever ends one way.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 19, 2020

When any US president finds it normal and reasonable and when supporting political partys' members find it normal and reasonable to lament "why can't the US pay bribes like everyone else to do business???", I think any discussion about who, what, where, why, and how about any economy is definitely way off any reasonable focus for any talking point. The situation is way beyond critical, way beyond explosive, and definitely way beyond any hope.
- Dalal Karama Jan 19, 2020
  
  My MA thesis was titled Ease of doing business with an emphasis on corruption and rule of law! It’s on REPAC
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 19, 2020
  
  https://www.nber.org/papers/w22172.pdf
  
  There needs to be a followup to the above linked narrative by a few guys in-the-know, rather than ending on a rather abrupt "hang" that takes everyone nowhere.
  
  Come on guys. I know you can do it. Get together!
  - Elizabeth Pula Jan 19, 2020
    
    A good link that exemplifies "The XXX Economy": ( VA governor preparatory actions are just a half-step or so trailing behind, or tale-dragging- the-dead-dog in the fox-trot to the "shenanigans???- one of the absolute worst euphemistic expressions that MSM is hyping right now-to explain "The XXX Economy". way behind silly! really undermines the drama of the whole scenario!)
    
    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/lebanon-anti-government-protests-turn-violent-beirut-200118160101017.html
    
    relevant, interpretive-quote from that link:
    
    "Commenting on the developments, Rami Khouri, a journalism professor at the American University of Beirut said that "people are exasperated by what they see as total disdain by their government.
    
    "There have been three months of protest but there are very few statements from the government. It barely talks to the people and that is what angers them [the protesters].
    
    "People are expressing extreme anger at leaders they see as in cahoots with each other, at the banking system and political elite working together."
    
    Do any of those sentences ring any bells for the XXX economy? See any graphic comparisons for the XXX economy any where else?
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
georges makhtouf Jan 19, 2020

"Real median weekly earnings are just 2.6% above their level when Trump took office. And these increases have not offset long periods of wage stagnation."

Presumably the long periods of wage stagnation include the 8 years of Obama administration, so the Trump economy, with a 2.6% increase in real median weekly earnings represents a massive improvement.
- Patrick O'Connor Jan 19, 2020
  
  If you recall, the de-regulated US financial sector plunged the US and most of the developed world into a deep recession in 2007, which caused massive income and employment loss to ordinary Americans. You may have forgotten this........
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Ben Leet Jan 19, 2020
  
  Try looking at BLS data for the 82% of workers who are nonsupervisory. It shows that "average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers" was higher in December 1964 than in December 2019, 55 years of wage stagnation for 80% of workers. The economy per capita disposable income tripled, it's now $44,455 in "real" inflation terms, when it was $15,000 in 1964. BEA.gov, Table 2.1. For the nonsupervisory workers see: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 19, 2020
  
  That would obviously depend on the real rate of inflation in the two periods being compared. And the real rate of inflation is a mystery because most of it is hidden in the asset markets and doesn't show up in the high street economy 'shopping basket' metrics.
  
  Given that unemployment figures don't reflect the reality of employment (specifically under-employment) , and inflation figures don't reflect the reality of real inflation the government's economic managers are flying blind.
  
  So the President can make whatever claims he wishes based on spurious headline figures. As indeed can the rest of us, because we don't have meaningful data.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael McMaster Jan 19, 2020

Let’s see. In thirty six months Trump has successfully caused the deaths and despair of millions of Americans. Get a grip! Nothing Trump has done has effected climate change. People still have the same health care. Just because regulations were removed doesn’t mean we went into a deep dive into oblivion.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 19, 2020
  
  "... Just because regulations were removed doesn’t mean we went into a deep dive into oblivion."
  
  How about a shallow dive into oblivion. Does that feel okay ?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Klaus Kastner Jan 19, 2020

And this author is the holder of a Nobel Prize in economics? Good president comes in and life expectancy goes up. Bad president comes in and life expectancy goes down immediately. Or not? Anyone who has respect for Keynes would consider employment the number 1 priority of economic policy. Check how employment developed since 2017! Or rather: how unemployment has gone down.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 19, 2020
  
  It's not recorded unemployment figures that count. What counts is under-employment of the nation's principle resource it's labor force. That figure is nearer to twenty percent than the current official unemployment figures. And by a country mile. Keep ignoring that and the country is in economic fantasy land.
  - Klaus Kastner Jan 20, 2020
    
    I remember Paul Krugman asking the day after the 2016 election and after the initial DOW drop "Will the economy ever recover?" and he answered his own question with "Never!"
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Klaus Kastner Jan 20, 2020
    
    Focus on comparing apples with apples. Otherwise you will always find a statistic which proves your point. The simple question is: is the economy today stronger than 4 years ago and it seems that the answer is obvious.
    - Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 20, 2020
      
      "....is the economy today stronger than 4 years ago and it seems that the answer is obvious...."
      
      Obviously....? stronger or not ? It looks stronger, but is that at the risk of greater instability ? Do you think the finance sector is more or less liable to sudden collapse than it was in 2008. (4 years is neither here nor there)
      
      Much of what I'm reading suggests more money sloshing about, in the rarefied financial markets, more, and more complex, derivative-type trading vehicles and too little matching investment in productive economy is a recipe for a repeat financial and banking crash. A stronger economy needs a foundation and I'm deeply skeptical about the current foundations being more substantial than a bubble of methane and potentially just as explosive. :-(
      - Klaus Kastner Jan 20, 2020
        
        I share your concern about the risks in the financial sector where my favorite analyst predicts a "Great Reset" at some point in the 2020's. Perhaps in 2029 to celebrate an anniversary? But I don't see what the Fed's policy has to do with the responsibility of the administration.
        
        Trump may or may not be the greatest con man on Earth but he certainly has conned the American economic agents, private and corporate, into believing that the best is yet to come and optimism grows on optimism. Psychology is half the game in economics. The vast majority of economic news which have come out of the US in the last 2-3 years have been positive news, and positive news feed on themselves. So I truly think the US economy is booming relative to 4 years ago and Trump's personality and conmanship has a lot to do with it.
        
        A new reply to this comment has been posted.
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Douglas Knauer Jan 19, 2020
    
    That's strange, when we said the economy was a shambles, we were tracking unemployment figures. Oh, wait, under this president (whether he deserves credit or not) those numbers have decreased massively! What are the whingers to gripe about now? Oh, let's move on to UNDERemployment so you can still claim the president is a failure.
    
    I call that moving the goal posts. Changing the rules. Maybe even sour grapes.
    - Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 20, 2020
      
      I'm not suggesting under-employment is something new or down to the Trump presidency. I'm suggesting that figures representative of reality would make economic planning less of a guessing game.
      
      For the record I didn't rate Obama as much of a president; he was just very adept at staying beneath the radar. Trump's style is very different, brash and 'populist', but it's content that matters more than style. The Donald is very good talking-up what seems to me to be policy achievements lacking in substance. It will be interesting to see if he can keep the illusion going through a second term (I'm assuming he'll win a second term).
      A new reply to this comment has been posted.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
About Face Jan 19, 2020

For all the brilliance of Joseph Stizlger's analysis as an economist, this is not read by the 95% of voters. When Trump can obfuscate, segregate, the statistics of individual deaths, incarcerations, under employment, the plebians don't see, don't hear, don't know and thus, don't react. This is the Trump magic. Warm the frog in slow boil, the frog becomes comfortable- new normal, doze off into being cooked. Trump, is a master sorcerer and hard to beat.
- Kevin Remillard Jan 19, 2020
  
  Stiglitz Analysis is Syllogistic Fallacy
  
  Death by homicide and transportation combined are twice the rates than in other developed countries. Obesity is another measurement effecting life expectancy and we, the U.S., lead the world. The ACA's low Medicaid payment rates are the primary reason physicians indicate for lack of participation in the program. 91% of GPs accept new patients with private insurance, 89% accept new Medicare patients, and 68% for Medicaid. Stating that a President has worked hard to make sure that more Americans lack health insurance could be re-purposed by asking; What policies contribute to Americans having, particularly the poor, access to quality, timely, and lower cost health care? When you start assuming one of the major or minor premises to be true, even though they're not based in fact, you have Syllogistic Fallacy.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
bruce birkett Jan 19, 2020

let's acknowlege that Obamacare is still creating part-time only jobs due to its employer insurance mandates, the average empyer cost of which in 2019 was usd 20,000 per year.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kevin Remillard Jan 19, 2020

Death by homicide and transportation combined are twice the rates than in other developed countries. Obesity is another measurement effecting life expectancy and we, the U.S., lead the world. The ACA's low Medicaid payment rates are the primary reason physicians indicate for lack of participation in the program. 91% of GPs accept new patients with private insurance, 89% accept new Medicare patients, and 68% for Medicaid. Stating that a President has worked hard to make sure that more Americans lack health insurance could be re-purposed by asking; What policies contribute to Americans having, particularly the poor, access to quality, timely, and lower cost health care? When you start assuming one of the major or minor premises to be true, even though they're not based in fact, you have Syllogistic Fallacy.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Yoshimichi Moriyama Jan 19, 2020

Trump is reported to have heavily relied on poor whites' votes in the last election but he has done nothing to respond to their expectation. Those people do not know they have been deceived. "When people lose their jobs and income and see their lives falling apart they react in strange ways, many times not in their best interest," as someone commented on Justin Gest/The New Minority, amazon usa.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020

Both political parties are branding the same "things". When one group exits the front door. The new group already have their "marketing licenses-in-hand, with the NEW brand names". The
rotating ownerships are the right and left hands of essentially the same elite power groups. For a few years the Kochs get their skim, then for a few years, the Kochs might "sell" to the Murdochs, then the Murdochs might sell back to the Sussexes ad infinitum. Throw in the names of the Saudis, Hong Kong, Germans, Jews, any will fill in for the "brand" just as nicely as any other in the past, such as Hilton, etc. The rotation of "owners" can continue for quite a while still. Just keep shuffling the cards, that have already been taken off the table that most of humanity will never be able to grab, even as they imitate their masters for the next few generations. Once you have market monopoly you are set for at least 3 generations.

See how the Obama, King and Winfrey "families", or some of the smart African elite gain monopolizing market power. Grab as you can. Who has the best place in Dubai?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020

Uh, what about the real loss of real land ownership, access to even the opportunity for property rights, loss of real legal rights in the US? There is no entrepreneurial opportunities for REAL mom and pop enterprise, REAL home ownership and extended property rights, as medical bankruptcies become the "rollover-of-choice" for the private opportunities financialized tertiary predatory fund claimers across the US, the real stakeholders are primarily the myriad of funds that leave more than bread crumbs back to the Saudi Investment Fund's global reach.

Uh, the "good'guys" that are the mouthpieces leading the Dems presently must be totally oblivious to Taqiya-in-action. One political party is the front-end servicing infrastructure for Saudi Arabia. The other political party is the back-end servicing infrastructure for Saudi Arabia. Follow the money. Follow the political messaging. Follow the Pakistani involvement in the Dems propaganda machinations. Neither party is working for the voting citizens in the US. Both parties are working for primarily off-shore financialization schemes and global funding that supplies the shifting interim goals of Middle East infighting based in greed and debasement of all principles of any conceptualizations, interpretations, business and social-contracts of the rest of the world.

If Western and Eastern political leaders across the globe do not start comprehending, utilizing, and reframing the consequences of real conceptual applications rooted, not only in their, but others bad actions, they are absolute fools.

GDP is only a "reflection" of consequential actions and processes. GDP is NOT conclusive action.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiya
- Michael Harrington Jan 20, 2020
  
  All very true and perceptive of the underlying currents of our political financial cronyism. But Trump is just a figleaf over all this, not a causal factor.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020

Uh, yes, so true. However, the Dems are just as bad. AND, that is what is really bad about the whole US economy. Not only the US economy either.
- Paul Rudd Jan 19, 2020
  
  Is working for me, just saying.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020

Excellent paragraph.
Here's a link from CNBC that isn't too bad for what is included in the narrative. However, what's really significant is what is NOT included in the narrative. Neither the GDP nor the DOW are very good measures at all.

It's way past time for the FTC and FCC to get to work, especially focussing on what no one has focussed on at all, at least in the US.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/18/in-the-stock-market-its-become-apple-microsoft-and-alphabet-vs-everyone-else.html
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
vivek iyer Jan 18, 2020

This comment was removed by a moderator. Replies to this comment may also be deleted. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.
- Andrew (Andy) Crow Jan 19, 2020
  
  "...No doubt, GDP growth and the Dow index affect expectations and hence have a link to the real economy..."
  
  Nice idea. But how many times does it need to be pointed out that the steady (soon perhaps to be meteoric) rise of the Stock markets is fuelled by spare money sloshing about which nobody wants to invest in real production because consumer demand (in terms of ability to pay) is so very low. ??
  
  The Fed is pumping billions into wall Street big banks at present just to keep the repo market going. They've been bailing the banks since October, non stop. How long can that last ? It's froth and bubbles.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020
  
  He wants to claim "it" and brand "anything" with his last name when it's to his personal benefit. Well, let him eat humble pie, if it even gets to that. In the meantime, "the majority" of Americans did NOT create this economy. The majority are only attempting survival through it to the best of their abilities. The majority are really only indebted consumers drowning in bits of not-even-paper that today really isn't worth much at all.
  When we can't afford to buy water, then we get to see who really likes who
  and not only on the internet.
  - Michael Harrington Jan 20, 2020
    
    Again, it is the Trump bias, pro and anti, that feeds his desire to make everything about his person. He, even as POTUS, does not move the global economy or even the US economy. He merely has a Twitter feed that he uses to shape the public conversation. It works, for him.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  - Paul Rudd Jan 19, 2020
    
    Is working for me, just saying.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
华尔街文摘华尔街文摘 Jan 18, 2020

America's problems are mostly caused by Obama and little Bush, both spent too much money in wars in Middle -east, and let our market being occupied by China goods. exhausted the financial means of USA.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
packardday Jan 18, 2020

So, who are you going to believe, a world renowned author and Nobel Laureate in economics or your own lying 401K/Roth?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Murali Krishna Hari Jan 17, 2020

I respect Joseph Stiglitz comments, but his analysis of life expectancy is completely wrong. Just using some data to justify Trump is bad. In fact drugs/opiods/guns/high medical costs are not a new phenomenon. It exists for decades, we are just now seeing its long term impact.
I agree regarding lax rules in environment regulations. I feel US with its technological power should lead world in controlling carbon emissions and renewable. After internet revolution, this could be next level of economic transformation which will benefit millions all over the world.
- Elizabeth Pula Jan 18, 2020
  
  India and China both have the technological and human power to deal with the real calamity of cleaning up the water pollution from inland rivers, and lack of sanitation facilities in their territories and geographical communities, and for their populations. The Middle East, and Africa needs to do the same on the continent that they are essentially destroying and hoarding all money flows for a few. Arabs do not establish communities for their own people. Africans do not build sewers for their own people. Indians do not build sewers for their own people. And, today very few communities in the US are even updating their sewer infrastructure from the 50's or earlier.
  
  If no one wants to do some real planning and some real work, everyone is going to need more opioids to decrease their life-spans by choice, or experience shortened lifespans due to disease consequences. That's pretty much been the status quo for centuries. Mental, emotional disease is just as real as dengue fever, and typhoid.
  
  Financialization is only the equivalent of _X _ X. (No, not the first 2 letters that might come to mind, but R_S.)
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Jan 17, 2020

In an economy, like any business, most figures happening today are a result things done five years ago, or sometimes fifty years ago. Trying to tie them back to their exact causes is mostly a futile exercise. America's malaise seems to mostly go back to Reagan who handed the keys to power to business, at the expense of everyone else. Because this new ideology coasted on previous US efforts, people confused this with success and so both parties continued with trickle down neo-liberal ideas that have now proved to be bankrupt. The real question is not what the economy is doing today, but what one needs to do for a better future, five or fifty years ahead.
- Michael Harrington Jan 20, 2020
  
  Reagan was merely a product of the commercialist takeover of our culture of liberty and justice. GDP, not liberty or justice, has become the measure of all policies. The real culprit is fiat money that enables all this political discretion and removes all credit constraints.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/5Wv5EPmpt

Cookies and Privacy

A verdade sobre a economia de Trump

To continue reading, subscribe now.

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

A verdade sobre a economia de Trump

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification