Noah and Erik discuss austerity, the new frontier of globalization away from China, and economic nationalism. Timestamps below. Thanks to Daffy and NetSuite for sponsoring this episode. Daffy is offering Econ 102 listeners a free $25 for the charity of their choice when they join: www.daffy.org/econ102 If you’re looking for an ERP platform head to NetSuite ✅ netsuite.com/102 and download your own customized KPI checklist. TIMESTAMPS: (00:00) Episode Preview (01:24 - 23:48) Age of Austerity (04:27) Reducing the deficit (02:47) What spending cuts will we see? (06:10) What’s the bottom line for growth? (18:38) Sponsors: Daffy and Netsuite (23:49) Adjust your graphs for inflation! (25:22) Why a cheaper US dollar is actually a weapon (26:55) Chinese “dumping” (29:42) The next wave of globalization is going to be awesome (32:29) China is a nuts country (33:35) Are we deglobalizing? (35:51) South and Southeast Asia (43:19) Economic Nationalism is here to stay (46:57) Globalization moving forward is about reducing our dependency on China
The incompatibility among lower deficits, higher spending, and lower taxes is the first major awareness I had about politics, back in the 1980 US Presidential campaign. As a kid, I face-palmed wondering what in the world adults were thinking. It seems people still want all of the above. One possible way to resolve this could be to have national votes on issues, like many state and local governments do with propositions and initiatives. Ask citizens to vote on the level of two of those budget variables, such as their preferred level of surplus or deficit (selecting a % of GDP or % of spending rather than just voting yes or no), and their preferred % change in spending compared to now. Then the third variable will be determined for us. The order the questions are asked, and their wording, might make a big difference.
Hi, in some future episode, could you expand on why and how was globalization different with China vs what is going on now with Alt Asia? Why are american workers benefit now vs suffered with Chinese globalization?
Just on the off chance that Noah sees this comment, I think it would be a really interesting exchange of perspectives if you were to have a conversation with the economist Bryan Caplan. Just a thought. Possibly about international trade or his theory of rational irrationality. I'll tell him the same thing as well.
Hey I’ve got an idiosyncratic example of expansionary austerity: Finland. Turns out that if ~all your mortgages are variable rate and you’re in a monetary union with countries engaging in austerity, it may compel the CB to lower your mortgage interest to zero or below, giving you and your compatriots lots of extra money to spend. And the CB may even go QE on the (covered) bonds financing the construction of your housing companies. And if the rental market is deregulated with heavy rent subsidies, and you bribe cities to go full YIMBY on their zoning, those bonds are going to turn into a LOT of apartments fast. The caveat is that it’s not your misery (austerity) expanding your economy, but the misery of others! The benefits to Finland was enough to offset the US equivalent of half of NASDAQ going bust in 2 years and losing almost all trade with China while everybody else are in deep recession for 5 years.
I gotta be real. This guy’s certainty yet lack of discussion on any real economic principles leads me to think he’s a gov agent or something. What he’s essentially saying (at least so far. I’m not done yet) is: 1. that the government has had insanely high debt spending on low interest rates. They did this because everyone just likes it (which does not explain the why it would be that everyone likes it. Most people don’t even related to this high level Econ stuff so to gather the political will, would not be because the people want it, but because they were sold that it’s a good idea) 2. We are going back to high interest rate austerity. Since the entire country is debt leveraged 120%, we will need to be handing everything over to who ever it is that we have been owing all this time. And who we are is apparently wasn’t ourselves. 3. We will be stuck between two options:A. borrowing more which is even more enslavement and collapse OR B. we will cut everything that supports our whole country. This whole argument has holes, not because it’s a wrong prediction, but because it sounds more like a plan to forces our hand in a certain way without there actually being a reason for the force. For example, who could we be a owing our whole economy (120%) to that would demand that we suddenly Entirely collapse if we don’t pay them fast enough? If it is the same trillion dollar debt that we have been rolling over since the 80’s and we never planned to pay it all back in this system anyway, then why would it matter if the interest rate was even higher? He does not explain these things. He just says them. These timelines and predictions to me sound like a plan, far more than just an observation. And the what he talks about political parties is almost as if they both play roles to do whatever to execute this plan. Neither side has any political principles because they both end up switching roles w/o to suddenly have a strong political case even though they have been arguing the same stances for years. Why would there be a political break through now? I get the impression that he is trying to sell that we just “naturally and randomly” walked ourselves into this situation. No engage meant with the political process or how it emerges, yet some how we walked oops daisy into debt slavery. I don’t buy it. I can only guess that stuff like this is just the groundwork to market to us why it will be so, rather than actually break down what is going on. I’ll finish the interview and see if I change my mind but yeah. Bad vibes all around really.
I think it's pretty simple every democracy has always eventually figured out they can vote for people that will give them free stuff and claim they will not have to pay it back someone else will pay it back either the rich or someone in the future. Pretty much no one is a fiscal conservative anymore and most people don't see any issues with huge deficits and debt. And then the politicians sell the people what they want to hear which is yeah that doesn't really matter and if you want to cut spending then you're against the poor or the needy or even yourself because you paid into it. I don't think most Americans know that the average baby boomer that retires today will take about $700, 000 out with SSI Medicare Medicaid etc than they paid in and they definitely won't vote for cuts or tax increases. Every American thinks they can be smarter than the IRS and they can figure out how to get more out of the system than they pay in.
Lol listening to Noah express all this certainty about the future just shows how clueless this guy is. He’s anti-oil but pro-globalization? Bro the only way globalization works is if oil production rises to lower prices to offset the cost of shipping stuff 10,000 miles away.
And this necessity for oil is a fact of the universe? Is it physically impossible for globalization to occur with less oil production? No possibility for an alternative energy source to offset the decrease in oil use either for cargo ships or in other sections in the production of goods?
![HIWWHEE | OHM [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OJJLtTLqLag/mqdefault.jpg)
Noah and Erik discuss austerity, the new frontier of globalization away from China, and economic nationalism. Timestamps below. Thanks to Daffy and NetSuite for sponsoring this episode.
Daffy is offering Econ 102 listeners a free $25 for the charity of their choice when they join: www.daffy.org/econ102
If you’re looking for an ERP platform head to NetSuite ✅ netsuite.com/102 and download your own customized KPI checklist.
TIMESTAMPS:
(00:00) Episode Preview
(01:24 - 23:48) Age of Austerity
(04:27) Reducing the deficit
(02:47) What spending cuts will we see?
(06:10) What’s the bottom line for growth?
(18:38) Sponsors: Daffy and Netsuite
(23:49) Adjust your graphs for inflation!
(25:22) Why a cheaper US dollar is actually a weapon
(26:55) Chinese “dumping”
(29:42) The next wave of globalization is going to be awesome
(32:29) China is a nuts country
(33:35) Are we deglobalizing?
(35:51) South and Southeast Asia
(43:19) Economic Nationalism is here to stay
(46:57) Globalization moving forward is about reducing our dependency on China
Leftist each chamber. Pour your self another glass of Soy Milk. Beta male
Man Noah is one of the few progressives I actuslly enjoy listening to and thinking about
Geroge Sr. Actually cut debt as well. He raised some taxes which partly helped with cutting the debt.
The incompatibility among lower deficits, higher spending, and lower taxes is the first major awareness I had about politics, back in the 1980 US Presidential campaign. As a kid, I face-palmed wondering what in the world adults were thinking. It seems people still want all of the above.
One possible way to resolve this could be to have national votes on issues, like many state and local governments do with propositions and initiatives. Ask citizens to vote on the level of two of those budget variables, such as their preferred level of surplus or deficit (selecting a % of GDP or % of spending rather than just voting yes or no), and their preferred % change in spending compared to now. Then the third variable will be determined for us. The order the questions are asked, and their wording, might make a big difference.
Hi, in some future episode, could you expand on why and how was globalization different with China vs what is going on now with Alt Asia? Why are american workers benefit now vs suffered with Chinese globalization?
Just on the off chance that Noah sees this comment, I think it would be a really interesting exchange of perspectives if you were to have a conversation with the economist Bryan Caplan. Just a thought. Possibly about international trade or his theory of rational irrationality.
I'll tell him the same thing as well.
Hey I’ve got an idiosyncratic example of expansionary austerity: Finland. Turns out that if ~all your mortgages are variable rate and you’re in a monetary union with countries engaging in austerity, it may compel the CB to lower your mortgage interest to zero or below, giving you and your compatriots lots of extra money to spend. And the CB may even go QE on the (covered) bonds financing the construction of your housing companies. And if the rental market is deregulated with heavy rent subsidies, and you bribe cities to go full YIMBY on their zoning, those bonds are going to turn into a LOT of apartments fast. The caveat is that it’s not your misery (austerity) expanding your economy, but the misery of others!
The benefits to Finland was enough to offset the US equivalent of half of NASDAQ going bust in 2 years and losing almost all trade with China while everybody else are in deep recession for 5 years.
I gotta be real. This guy’s certainty yet lack of discussion on any real economic principles leads me to think he’s a gov agent or something.
What he’s essentially saying (at least so far. I’m not done yet) is:
1. that the government has had insanely high debt spending on low interest rates. They did this because everyone just likes it (which does not explain the why it would be that everyone likes it. Most people don’t even related to this high level Econ stuff so to gather the political will, would not be because the people want it, but because they were sold that it’s a good idea)
2. We are going back to high interest rate austerity. Since the entire country is debt leveraged 120%, we will need to be handing everything over to who ever it is that we have been owing all this time. And who we are is apparently wasn’t ourselves.
3. We will be stuck between two options:A. borrowing more which is even more enslavement and collapse OR B. we will cut everything that supports our whole country.
This whole argument has holes, not because it’s a wrong prediction, but because it sounds more like a plan to forces our hand in a certain way without there actually being a reason for the force.
For example, who could we be a owing our whole economy (120%) to that would demand that we suddenly Entirely collapse if we don’t pay them fast enough? If it is the same trillion dollar debt that we have been rolling over since the 80’s and we never planned to pay it all back in this system anyway, then why would it matter if the interest rate was even higher? He does not explain these things. He just says them.
These timelines and predictions to me sound like a plan, far more than just an observation. And the what he talks about political parties is almost as if they both play roles to do whatever to execute this plan. Neither side has any political principles because they both end up switching roles w/o to suddenly have a strong political case even though they have been arguing the same stances for years. Why would there be a political break through now?
I get the impression that he is trying to sell that we just “naturally and randomly” walked ourselves into this situation. No engage meant with the political process or how it emerges, yet some how we walked oops daisy into debt slavery. I don’t buy it.
I can only guess that stuff like this is just the groundwork to market to us why it will be so, rather than actually break down what is going on.
I’ll finish the interview and see if I change my mind but yeah. Bad vibes all around really.
Oh absolutely the dude is Pax Americanist.
I think it's pretty simple every democracy has always eventually figured out they can vote for people that will give them free stuff and claim they will not have to pay it back someone else will pay it back either the rich or someone in the future. Pretty much no one is a fiscal conservative anymore and most people don't see any issues with huge deficits and debt. And then the politicians sell the people what they want to hear which is yeah that doesn't really matter and if you want to cut spending then you're against the poor or the needy or even yourself because you paid into it. I don't think most Americans know that the average baby boomer that retires today will take about $700, 000 out with SSI Medicare Medicaid etc than they paid in and they definitely won't vote for cuts or tax increases. Every American thinks they can be smarter than the IRS and they can figure out how to get more out of the system than they pay in.
Lol listening to Noah express all this certainty about the future just shows how clueless this guy is. He’s anti-oil but pro-globalization? Bro the only way globalization works is if oil production rises to lower prices to offset the cost of shipping stuff 10,000 miles away.
And this necessity for oil is a fact of the universe? Is it physically impossible for globalization to occur with less oil production? No possibility for an alternative energy source to offset the decrease in oil use either for cargo ships or in other sections in the production of goods?
The show has gone down into dem central - including vivek show - great for ratings in team blue echo chamber
Trump, or DeSantis, or Vivek, or RFK 2024 !
There is no way this is not a bot
@@zzouplornfluke503 your mom Is a bot
@@zzouplornfluke503 DeSantis 2024 with RFK as Secretary of State! But I would be happy with Trump or Vivek.
@@AndreAnyone Actual bot behavior confirmed, this account has been spamming the same thing under every reply of every video
@@zzouplornfluke503 lol like i said your mom is a bot. Soy BOY, YOU ABOUT TO CRY?