He says not a lot of support here for protectionism. He is not very worried about it at all for advanced countries.
He almost sounds a like Paul Bairoch here, the West did not get rich by colonialism or slavery or imperialism (Surprise!), and won't get very much poorer or much less prosperous, relatively speaking, with less of it under protectionism anyway!
He almost sounds a like Paul Bairoch here, the West did not get rich by colonialism or slavery or imperialism (Surprise!), and won't get very much poorer or much less prosperous, relatively speaking, with less of it under protectionism anyway!
He returns to the theme of his globalization, it is mainly necessary to benefit poor countries like Balgladesh, and Viet Nam, whereas rich countries don't really need it that much and can do without it a lot better.
Globalization for Krugman is mainly for the ultra poor of color whom the white West can keep on helping.
He appears to seriously think that one can lift about 4 billion mostly starving coloreds up out of poverty, without enormously frogging the already heavy environmental drag on the planet, while at the same time eliminating global warming, and still increasing Western relative prosperity itself.
The best way for me to describe this is Pollyanna Economics.
Few people seem to realize that he is not operating with a full deck.
He appears to seriously think that one can lift about 4 billion mostly starving coloreds up out of poverty, without enormously frogging the already heavy environmental drag on the planet, while at the same time eliminating global warming, and still increasing Western relative prosperity itself.
The best way for me to describe this is Pollyanna Economics.
Few people seem to realize that he is not operating with a full deck.
No comments:
Post a Comment