Heavily slanted to the U.S. I thought about adding sources/citations to this but Iâve had to read so much superstitious right wing barf that I should be allowed to be lazy too.
1. No country has ever attained a more advanced level of economic development via laissez faire policies.
2. Global economic growth would have been utterly stagnant since 1990s if not for China.
3. Some inflation is good. If inflation is less than 3%, it indicates a weak economy.
4. Money-based economic systems (metallic or fiat) have always been developed by highly centralized governments, never from the ground up.
5. A mature economy, if it has relatively open immigration and a middling economy, can expect to have 2% yearly growth, getting closer to 3% the better the economy gets. Less than 2% growth usually indicates either an incredibly shitty (like, crisis-level) economy or, as is very often the case in the poorer OECD countries, declining population. So when politicians tell you theyâre going to great 4% or 6% growth rates theyâre full of shit.
6. The U.S. population would be declining if it wasnât for immigration.
7. Growth matters, but isnât everything, and doesnât by necessity indicate a rising quality of life. Even your average economist will tell you this.
8. Reagan was responsible for the Savings & Loan crisis, which wiped out nearly all growth created in the first term of his administration.
9. Clinton was culpable for the financial deregulation that led to the Great Recession, which wiped out much of the fragile economic gains that happened under his administration.
10. Given 7 & 8, neoliberalism has a dismal track record as a method of governing capitalist societies.
11. Capital is more mobile than labor, as it turns out, in an industrialized society. Adam Smith based his assumptions of capitalismâs benevolence on the idea that labor would always be more mobile than capital, and thus exert stronger competitive pressure on employers rather than from employers. He knew that if that wasnât the case, then capitalism would have strong tendencies towards rentier-ism. Oops.
12. The U.S. has not experienced a tight labor market since the mid-1990s, which was a fleeting exception to the trend of lax, employer-slanted labor markets since 1979. Weâve gone so long without experiencing a seriously tight labor market that in popular culture, we have no meaningful popular memory of what one looks like. Common cyclical upticks in the labor market, like the one weâre in right now, would look pitiful in comparison to Golden Age capitalism.
13. The gender pay gap is real. It doesnât express itself in comparisons between already-filled positions, but rather in hiring and promotion practices that are well-documented. Labor economists call this âpre-marketâ discrimination.
14. Racist hiring practices are prevalent across the United States, also mainly expressed through âpre-marketâ discrimination.Â
15. Itâll take a least a generation for âthe robots to take the jobs,â and the rate of job destruction will actually not be worse than our parentsâ and grandparentsâ generations. If jobs are destroyed and not replaced, or only replaced with shitty jobs, itâll be because the U.S. neoliberal work arrangement sucks at increasing aggregate demand (paying people enough so that they actually boost the economy and new job creation).
16. The vast majority of private profits made off of low-wage work in the U.S. is subsidized by the U.S. government in the form of food stamps.
17. Oklahoma and Mississippi have standards of living that are about the same as the average of Mexicoâs. Ditto for big chunks of most Southern and Appalachian states.
18. Immigrants canât âtake all the jobs.â In a snowglobe economy, a person that works generates enough demand via consumption to employ at least one other person. This effect is actually increased in cities, mainly because of the thickening of social networks. If a section of the labor force seems to be causing wages to go down, itâs either a very temporary situation, or (as is extremely likely) it is being consciously perpetuated by employers to keep overall paid wages down.
19. Austrian economics (hardcore libertarianism) is held in such low esteem among economists that only one U.S. economics department specializes in it. There are more departments that specialize in marxian economics (a whopping 2), despite explicit ideological suppression. There are way more post-Keynesian (the leftier side of center-left) departments. The presence of Austrianism in academia is almost entirely subsidized by free Koch Brothers money, usually in Political Science departments, ironically. They tend to operate within hermetically-sealed âinstitutes.â
20. Mortgage-backed securities were a major instrument leading to the 2007 crash. Since the crash, theyâve rapidly begun to be replaced by rent-backed securities, and amazingly, patent-backed securities. Nothinâ changes.
21. Very few financial firms create wealth or facilitate productivity. Big whoop, we all know that. Whatâs interesting is that this is an openly-accepted axiom in finance culture. Theyâll admit it to your face and in their classrooms. Only low-tier finance bros and politicians pretend that this isnât the case.
22. The Founding Fathers had little concept of a free market society as we know it today. They assumed that the U.S. would be settled by large gentry estates. The surviving Founders in the early 1800s, including Jefferson, were horrified when Andrew Jackson abolished slow government apportion of land to this purpose.
23. Projecting free market principles onto Enlightenment thought is dumb for a simple reason: Economies were overwhelmingly dominated by local monopolies. People, including intellectuals, couldnât even conceive of a society with nearly as much commodification or competition as exists in the U.S. today. From their perspective, the expansion of industry would create a nation of dispersed towns economically dominated by 1-2 families (which they thought would be awesome lol), mainly due to the techno-social dynamics of water mill power. Even the type of industrialization and socio-spatial dynamics that occurred in the 1800s was entirely beyond their imagination.
24. The skills gap is a myth. If one believes in a free labor market, then companies should take on the burdens of training new employees. When the most in-demand skills are easily teachable at relatively low cost (such as computer-related skills), employers are simply holding out for the government to take on training costs for them. Given the laxity of neoliberal U.S. labor markets, they can afford to hold out.
25. There arenât âtoo many people in college.â U.S. colleges take on training responsibilities which are less commonly taken on by universities in other OECD countries, where labor unions and technical schools take up the slack, in comparison. This isnât bad or good, just different. Also, given the dysfunctionality of U.S. labor markets, most individuals are incentivized to credential up as a means for competing for a much-too-small pool of good jobs. People going to college are, overwhelmingly, acting rationally.
26. Supposed free-market economic development success stories arenât free market based at all. Singaporeâs government owns most of the countryâs land, and a huge chunk of the countryâs firms. Taiwan avoided a left-wing revolution by copying communist land redistribution policies, and it actually laid the groundwork for their success under capitalism.
27. Most scientific research (approximately 70%) around the world is publicly funded. Thereâs no sign that this will ever stop being the case.
28. The year you were born permanently affects your earnings. If you enter the labor market during a trough, employers, even after the economy recovers later on, will look down on you for having a âspottierâ work history during your prime years, compared to your younger peers who are just entering their prime working years. Economists whoâs crunched the data have shown that the negative impact on your earnings will last throughout your entire life.
29. The U.S. Rustbelt is still the most manufacturing-centric region of the economy, and actually increased its share of national manufacturing output after the recession. This is because it retained most high-end industrial activity, while the lower-tier activity that moved to the U.S. South was utterly decimated by the 2000s wave of deindustrialization.
30Â The 2000s wave of deindustrialization destroyed more jobs than the 1970s wave.
31. Most jobs created in the 1990s were created by Walmart. Yes, I mean that literally.
32. When Walmart began in the Ozarks, they justified their low wages by claiming that they didnât need to pay their workers enough to eat, since Ozark women (their main employees) supposedly grew their own food.
33. After about 35 hours a week, weekly worker productivity sharply declines.
34. U.S. manufacturers have, historically, done very little to oppose increased imports and outsourcing. The AFL-CIO is the only major organization that has seriously pushed for an environmental externality tax or offshoring disincentives. The National Association of Manufacturers never has. This is because manufacturers like being able to move their capital abroad or cash out to private equity firms, or even simplify their operations by âhollowingâ them out. This is why Trumpâs industrial policy, if he ever actually meant it, would fail.
35. Regionalization is at least as important of an economic trend as globalization. Quantitative economic geographers have found that since the 1980s, the âinputsâ and âoutputsâ (purchased goods and capital) a regional economy are increasingly dispersed across different city-regions (i.e., some service or tangible good is increasingly likely to be made outside of your region, and what you make in your region is increasingly likely to be consumed outside of it). Interestingly, this also causes city-regions to become increasingly different from each other in economic structure, because city-regions continually specialize in specific industries as a result, or even specific sections of specific industries. This drastically flies in the face of common wisdom about how globalization is playing out.
36. Assigning a credit score to someone based on their history was an explicit attempt, spearheaded by JP Morgan, to inject Christian moralism into the Gilded Age economy. Itâs one of the most important predecessors to the religious right, and is one of the reasons fundamentalist Christianity is so synergistic with modern capitalism: It provides a means to easily sort people.