BRIEFLY NOTED: For 2024-05-23 Th
Dani Rodrik on industrial policy; American real generational income levels; very briefly noted; it is not a new bipartisan majority, but rather a collapse of Republican obstructionist Senate party discipline, & Dan Drezner is unhappy, somewhat, with David Leonhardt; the “pausing” of the Sky voice smells 100% like guilt on the part of an OpenAI trying to minimize damage claims; Biden faces a much higher bar; Google allows people to undertake a web search; &: This, from the “Financial Times” Editorial Board, Neither Tells It Straight Nor Plays Its Proper Position. So What to Do?; PODCAST: Hexapodia LX: DeLong Smackdown Watch: Snatching Back the Baton for Supply-Side Progressivism Edition; PROJECT SYNDICATE: The Threat of Trumpflation, & a Fed War; HOISTED FROM THE ARCHIVES: The Panic of 1825; NOTES: On the Puzzling Classical Socialist Belief of Both the Necessity & the Ease of Building a Non-Market Economic System; HenryFarrellBot: LLMs as Cultural Technologies; BRIEFLY NOTED: For 2024-05-16 Th…
ONE VIDEO: Dani Rodrik (2020): Industrial Policy: Old & New:
ONE IMAGE: American Generational Real Income Levels:
A visualization greatly hindered by the fact that it is not a log chart.
Very Briefly Noted:
Journamalism: Matthew Yglesias: What I’ve learned on Substack: ‘New York Times executive editor Joseph Kahn’s… takeaway seems to be that the Times should trivialize the threat a not-defeated-after-all Trump poses to American institutions while continuing to grind an ax about Joe Biden not doing a sit-down interview with the paper…. Thus the NYT remains stridently [“]neutral[”] in its core political coverage, but quite left-wing in other areas. Pieces like “What Is ‘Queer Food’? A Conference Explores (and Tastes) Some Answers” or Ethicist columns where the dilemma is that your kid likes toy guns… <https://www.slowboring.com/p/reflections-on-almost-four-years>
Economics: Noah Smith: Why is China producing so many export goods, anyway?: ‘So which theory is right?… It’s possible that the objectives of war production, industrial policy, forced deindustrialization of rivals, and recession-fighting simply align in the minds of China’s leaders. And it’s possible that natural forces like China’s recession and a long-term shift of manufacturing to China are lending a helping hand to the government’s effort. All of these theories could be true at once. Or perhaps only some subset of them… <https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/why-is-china-producing-so-many-export>
Paul Krugman: Is Disinflation Back on Track?: ‘My best guess? The acceleration in measured inflation over the past few months was probably a statistical illusion; inflation wasn’t as low as it seemed in late 2023 but probably hasn’t risen much, if at all. Underlying annual inflation is probably around 2.5 percent, maybe even less. So my guess is that we’ve already won this war — that we have basically achieved a soft landing, with low unemployment and acceptably low inflation. But I could be wrong, and even if I’m right, it’s going to take at least a few more months of good inflation news before this happy reality sinks in… <https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05/14/opinion/thepoint#krugman-inflation-soft-landing>
Matt Yglesias: The economics of the New Cold War: ‘Right now, American politics is being torn apart by the edge case question of how to deal with floods of people making asylum claims. But the historical foundation of America’s emergence as a great power was the deliberate cultivation of a large population via legal immigration. There is so much the United States could do to boost our domestic production capabilities by legalizing more housing growth and more immigration of skilled workers. On both fronts, though, I worry that the country has gotten mired in some slightly odd fantasies of autarky, where we try to have entire supply chains fully within our borders, even while the labor force shrinks. That doesn’t make any sense, and in an increasingly competitive world, we don’t have the luxury of indulging in nonsense… <https://www.slowboring.com/p/the-economics-of-the-new-cold-war>
Rana Faroohar: Not all American tariffs are created equal: ‘Unlike Trump’s policies, the Biden trade strategy aims to build domestic industrial capacity and could be good for US allies…. Emmanuel Macron’s recent speeches… statements by other[s]… including… Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi…. Europe may finally be ready to have a real conversation about shared labour and environmental standards as well as a common approach to global trade imbalances…. Chinese overcapacity and the WTO’s failures have changed the equation in ways that require a radical new approach to trade. And unlike those who would like to equate the political economies and approaches of the US and China, Macron points out that “we [Europe] are not equidistant [between the two]. We are allies of the Americans”. I’m hopeful that if Biden is re-elected, we will see Europe finally embrace the idea that this administration has put forward — the world has changed, and trade must change, too. Saying so isn’t protectionist. It’s realistic… <https://www.ft.com/content/d81f1e71-ab56-4347-a83d-6ac1b19c478d>
The Verge: ‘This is not a joke: Google will now let you perform a “web” search. The optional setting filters out almost all the other blocks of content that Google crams into a search results page, leaving you with links and text — and Google confirms to The Verge that it will block the company’s new AI Overviews as well… <https://www.threads.net/@verge/post/C6_UDERLMui>
The Economic History: Bill Hogeland’s The Hamilton Scheme is approaching launch: William Hogeland: ‘Finally getting to see the generous blurbs on an actual hardcover, beautifully produced by @fsgbooks. Thanks very much to @delong, @rickperlstein, @DWaldstreicher, and @agordonreed: “‘America’s exceptional wealth relative to other North Atlantic economies is, to a remarkable degree, Alexander Hamilton’s creation. And so is America’s remarkable tolerance for high inequality. William Hogeland is the best guide I have found to understanding how we today are, for good and evil, children of Alexander.’—J. BRADFORD DELONG…. ‘I’ve always loved William Hogeland’s writing, especially the confidence and verve wich which he knocks down others’ stupid sentimentalities in favor of a smart sentimentality that’s actually worth holding on to: that America can truly be democratic. This book recalls a knock-down, drag-out class war that hid in plain sight, over what kind of ecocomy America should have. It makes for as riveting a story as any hip-hop Broadway musical And is far more accurate to boot.’—RICK PERLSTEIN…. ‘Alexander Hamilton’s plans to consolidate wealth in an investor cass were once as hotly debated as anything in American history: It took a lot of forgetting to make him a hero cf the people. We’re in William Hogeland’s debt for getting the story straighr and for relaying it so engagingly, as it needs to be told, from the top down and from the bottom up.’—DAVID WALDSTREICHER…. ‘A bold and creative new narrative of Alexander Hamilton’s role in the American founding
that brings lesser-known but vital players into view’—ANNETTE GORDON-REED”… <https://twitter.com/WilliamHogeland/status/1790828359213068461>
Moral Philosophy: ‘Alan Kahan… [sees] liberalism find[ing] its roots in… various kinds of fears…. Liberalism first emerged as a reaction to despotism and religious fanaticism… consolidated further when the fear of revolution and reaction started to grow…. Jurisdictional rights have come to be viewed at the time as a necessary part of a constitutional order that harnesses political power, and in particular, the state, to offer guarantees that individuals will remain free from tyranny, either of a despot or the conformism of the majority…. At the end of the “short 19th century”… the “fear of poverty” made its appearance, and liberals reacted in different ways to it…. “Classical liberalism” started to become a liberal strand distinct from… “progressive liberalism”… Previous fears and the way they are tackled don’t disappear from the picture when a new fear emerges. Liberalism, whether progressive or classical, remains a political doctrine that is motivated by the fear of despotism and revolution…. The key difference between libertarianism and liberalism… [is that] assume that jurisdictional rights, especially property rights, can be a substitute for politics. The underlying postulate is that political power can be reduced to consent-based and contractual relations…. It could be debated whether such a society is desirable or even possible at all (I don’t think it is). My point here is… there is… a difference in nature between libertarianism and liberalism. The former pretends to escape politics, the latter is devising principles and mechanisms to harness it. <https://cyrilhedoin.substack.com/p/liberalism-is-more-than-libertarianism>
Central Country: Takeshi Niinami: China must learn from Japan’s ‘lost decades’: ‘What does China need to do today?… Instead of suppressing it through surveillance, China should create mechanisms to reward risk-taking by companies and individuals with the aim of creating an economy led by private enterprises…. China’s willingness to produce business leaders and companies to emulate Jack Ma and rival the so-called Magnificent Seven will be put to the test. But… regulatory relaxation to stimulate domestic demand and innovation, especially in the social security sector, is essential…. China must not slow private investment in talent, especially now that the economy is stagnating…. If China’s inability to rely on exports despite its excess production capacity continues, it may be forced to support its domestic economy — even at the cost of worsening government finances…. Continuing to open its doors both domestically and internationally is critical… <https://www.ft.com/content/3536aa29-30cd-417b-aefb-8956efe0284f>
Neofascism: Martin Wolf: Fascism has changed, but it is not dead: ‘The 1920s and 1930s were different times but a core of traditional attitudes persists…. We must start with two distinctions. The first is between Nazism and fascism…. In power, Nazism was, like Stalinism, “totalitarian”: it controlled everything. Mussolini’s fascism was different. In Eco’s words, “Mussolini did not have any philosophy: he had only rhetoric . . . Fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different philosophical and political ideas, a beehive of contradictions.” Trump is similarly “fuzzy”. The second distinction is between then and now. The fascisms of the 1920s and 1930s emerged from the first world war… were naturally militaristic in… in that age, centralised organisation was necessary if orders were to be spread. Nowadays, social media will do much of this work…. Today’s fascism is different from that of the past. But this does not mean the notion is meaningless. In his essay, Eco describes a number of characteristics of “Ur-Fascism — or Eternal Fascism”…. Tradition… worship the past… reject the modern…. Action for action’s sake…. Hostility to analytical criticism…. “Exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference . . . Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”… “Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration…. Finally, “Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak” — it lies systematically…. Conservatism is not what it was a century ago, as is true of liberalism and socialism…. But these traditions still have a common core of attitudes… <https://www.ft.com/content/c18f4306-3c37-4a10-b728-74646e0ea525>
SubStack NOTES:
Journamalism: It is not a new bipartisan majority, but rather a collapse of Republican obstructionist Senate party discipline.
Dan Drezner is unhappy, somewhat, with David Leonhardt <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/19/briefing/centrism-washington-neopopulism.html>. I endorse what Drezner says—the argument is wrong in its claims about increasing social conservatism, obtusely inattentive in its neglect of the Republican rejection of democracy, and fails to note that on balance economic growth is best served by effective “centrist” industrial policies plus expansive neoliberal immigration policies. But there is more that is wrong. And more serious that is wrong. The vote counts I see are, with yeas and nays for Democrats and Republicans:
2021 Covid Relief: 50-0, 0-49
2021 Infrastructure & Jobs: 50-0, 19-30
2022 CHIPS & Science: 49-0, 17-33
2022 Veterans’ Health: 47-0, 41-11
2022 Gun Violence: 49-0, 18-33
2022 Postal Service: 48-0, 31-19
2022 Same-Sex Marriage: 49-0, 12-36
2022 Electoral Count Reform: 49-0, 19-29
2023 Debt Limit: 46-4, 17-32
2023 Marijuana: 48-0, 6-44
2023 Russian Uranium Imports: 47-0, 20-29
2024 Aid to Ukraine: 48-0, 22-29
2024 TikTok Divestiture: 48-0, 32-19
Notice anything interesting about these “bipartisan” majorities? They are made up of 15 less-crazy Republicans and all of the Democrats. What this reflects is two things. First, on a partisan level, it reflects the collapse as counterproductive and self-destructive of the High Mitch McConnell legislative strategy of blocking everything to make the Democratic president appear a big failure—the fact that fifteen plus Republican senators are no longer willing to hold the High Mitch line they were willing and eager to hold when a Black man was president. Second, on a policy level, there has been a substantial shift away from High Neoliberalism as well—a shift that I think is more pronounced among Democrats than Republicans:
Dan Drezner: ‘I have serious doubts… about two… elements…. The first is his claim that the median voter has become more socially conservative over time. That is, how to put this, crazy talk…. The two concrete examples of bipartisan social legislation that Leonhardt cites in his story are gun safety and same-sex marriage — and both of those bills moved policy in a liberal direction. The only area where voters shifted in a more conservative direction is on immigration…. Focus on the past few years for now. The U.S. economy has easily outperformed…. The key reason? All that darn immigration! Leonhardt has captured a decided shift in American politics… towards something resembling economic populism. But I do not see… more socially conservative views…. [And] the economic growth folks want to ascribe to neopopulist policies is emanating from the vestiges of neoliberalism…. And to repeat… the GOP slide towards not caring about actual votes is more important than anything anyone writes about neopopulism…
Crypto & Other Grifts: Certainly the “pausing” of the Sky voice smells 100% like guilt—like we need to minimize damages because we have no defense against a name-and-likeness suit given the precedent of Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics. Yet another point for the Board that tried to fire Sam Altman. Yet another reason for Microsoft to quickly figure out how not to find itself held hostage by chaos monkeys:
John Gruber: OpenAI & Sam Altman Ripped Off Scarlett Johansson’s Voice, Supposedly Using an Unnamed Soundalike Voice Actress: ‘If they had never contacted Johansson… that’d be one thing. But to negotiate with her to provide her voice officially, and go ahead with a soundalike after she turned down the offer? Some choice: work with them or get ripped off. How in the world did Sam Altman expect to get away with this?… Given the mix of arrogance and the tidbit in Johansson’s statement about Altman reaching out again just two days before OpenAI’s demo, does anyone actually believe this “Sky” voice was not trained on recordings of Johansson herself?… Strong… “girlfriend… in Canada” vibes… <https://daringfireball.net/linked/2024/05/20/openai-johansson-voice-ripoff>
Journamalism: Nicely encapsulated:
Scary Lawyerguy: ‘Of the many double standards employed by the media, Biden needing every speech to be some combination of Lincoln and Cicero while Trump’s public appearances are 90 minutes of word salad, non sequiturs, and dictatorial musings that get no push back, is among the worst… <https://x.com/scarylawyerguy/status/1792301844741427239?s=51&t=fzvtammep23oCxG1ongLxA>
Agreed. If Biden were ever to give one single speech as incoherent and lie-filled as Trumps’s standard speeches are as a matter of course, I think there would be a banner headline atop the New York Times.
Ens***ification: Google searches with and without the “&udm=14” switch:
What I get from this: the advertising-supported web that led to the truly evil panel on the right—even though it is not trying to sell me ads on this particular page!—needs to join the Choir Invisible as soon as humanly possible…