Brad de Long is a Free-Trade advocating Neo-Liberal (and Summers' crony) [View All]

[amborin]

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Bradford_DeLong>

he worked under Summers in Clinton's admin

a "neo-liberal" is someone who believes in unfettered "free" markets....and he likes trade liberalization.....

Brad said:

......."The outcome is a new and potentially lasting bias toward jobless recoveries in the high-wage developed world. That brings the second major force into play -- a political backlash against the trade liberalization that allows such cross-border job shifts to occur. It is the politics of this trend that disturb me the most as I peer into the future.

Insecure and scared workers tend take out their fears and frustrations on incumbent politicians. To the extent that the IT-enabled global labor arbitrage represents a new and lasting threat to job security in the developed world, this political backlash is understandable -- albeit deplorable....."

<http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002792.html>


here is his article, called "Free Trade is Win-Win"

<http://braddelong.posterous.com/free-trade-win-win-updated>

he worked on GATT for Clinton

Brad says, " the problem is not too much globalization, but too little....."

<http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/002027.html>

and this:

<http://www.countercurrents.org/riggins020509.htm>



Brad criticized another economist who was concerned about transfer of high value US manufacturing to China.

Brad said, "Let me respond with a question: Is there a way to interpret Jeff other than as a call to keep China a society of poor subsistence rice farmers as long as possible--keep them poor, barefoot, uneducated, and by no means allow them to work at any of the high-value manufacturing occupations we want to keep in the United States?"

<http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/02/26/a_question_for_jeff_faux/>


Brad denies that government policies have contributed to the rising tide of income inequality in hte US. (that means Brad denies the role of the union-busting policies of the NLRB; ignores all manner of additional government economic and political policies and legislation that have driven the economic inequality we now see).

<http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=08&year=2006&base_name=whos_to_blame_for_inequality>


lastly...

Brad argues, in contradiction to views of numerous other interpretations, that the US Marshall Plan worked largely b/c it carried the condition that Europe accept the workings of market forces.....

Brad wrote, "Marshall Planners sought a
labor movement interested in raising productivity rather than in
redistributing income from rich to poor. With labor peace a potential
precondition for substantial Marshall Plan aid, labor organizations
agreed to push for productivity improvements first and defer
redistributions to later....."

<http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/pdf_files/Marshall_Large.pdf>