More of a Competitor Than a Trade Partner?

As well as considering the rationale for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the reason for the withdrawal of the United States, this chapter seeks to consolidate on the wage and unemployment argument that the problem is a shortfall in demand. Further, the chapter seeks to address questions such as whether downward wage rigidity constitutes a problem.

2008 ◽  
Vol 228 (5-6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick A. Puhani

SummaryI extend a two-skill group model by Katz and Murphy (1992) to estimate relative demand and supply for skills as well as wage rigidity in Germany. Using three data sets for Germany, two for Britain and one for the United States, I simulate the change in relative wage rigidity (wage compression) in all three countries during the early and mid 1990s, this being the period when unemployment increased in Germany but fell in Britain and the US. I show that in this period, Germany experienced wage compression (relative wage rigidity), whereas Britain and the US experienced wage decompression. This evidence is consistent with the Krugman (1994) hypothesis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 428-471
Author(s):  
John Grigsby ◽  
Erik Hurst ◽  
Ahu Yildirmaz

Using administrative payroll data from the largest US payroll processing company, we measure the extent of nominal wage rigidity in the United States. The data allow us to define a worker’s per-period base contract wage separately from other forms of compensation such as overtime premiums and bonuses. We provide evidence that firms use base wages to cyclically adjust the marginal cost of their workers. Nominal base wage declines are much rarer than previously thought with only 2 percent of job-stayers receiving a nominal base wage cut during a given year. Approximately 35 percent of workers receive no base wage change year over year. We document strong evidence of both time and state dependence in nominal base wage adjustments. In addition, we provide evidence that the flexibility of new hire base wages is similar to that of existing workers. Collectively, our results can be used to discipline models of nominal wage rigidity. (JEL E24, E32, J31, J41)


Subject Chinese opportunities in Latin America. Significance US retrenchment from global economic institutions would create a vacuum that China is well-positioned to fill. In Latin America, this would accelerate trends underway since the turn of the century that have seen China eclipse the United States as the main trade partner and source of financing for several countries. The potential realignment would be greatest in the region’s traditional US allies and enthusiastic participants in US-led institutions: Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. Impacts A less globally engaged United States creates an opportunity for China to promote its financial institutions and trade integration projects. China stands to gain the most in strategic terms in countries hitherto aligned with the United States. This appears propitious for a Chinese strategy of diversification of its ties away from high-risk settings such as Ecuador and Venezuela.


Geosul ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (77) ◽  
pp. 258-269
Author(s):  
Maurício Santoro

Since 2009 China has been Brazil´s biggest trade partner, and its important ally. However, the nationalist right that won the 2018 elections has a critical perspective of the country. This paper maps the views on China held by the new Brazilian government, both in terms of the economic arguments (protectionism of industry, fear of Chinese control of infrastructure and natural resources) and political concerns (the desire for a diplomatic rapprochement with the United States and anti-communism hostility towards Beijing). The paper claims that these positions are important for foreign policy decision-making and that they complicate relations with China, but that is also necessary to take into account more moderate views from other groups in the administration.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 522-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Domike Blackman

AbstractForeign aid allocations represent one of several important economic policy tools used by governments to realize their foreign policy objectives. Using a conjoint survey of respondents in the United States, this paper shows that recipient country religion is a significant determinant of individual-level foreign aid preferences. In particular, respondents express a preference for giving to Christian-majority countries in contrast to Muslim- or Buddhist-majority countries. This effect is comparable with that of other important determinants of support for foreign aid, such as a country's status as a U.S. ally or trade partner. Importantly, the preference for Christian recipient countries is especially pronounced among Christian, and most notably Evangelical Christian, respondents. This paper explores two potential mechanisms for the effect of religion: country religion as a heuristic and an individual-level preference for giving to co-religionists.


1990 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1019-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. E. Hebbink ◽  
O. H. Swank

Author(s):  
Aymara Gerdel

The United States and China currently constitute the world's two biggest hegemonic and emerging economic powers. Venezuela maintains commercial relations with both powers in the oil trade. Since the latter 20th century, the United States has been its main trade partner, followed by China, who in the 21st century became the second largest buyer of Venezuelan oil in the world. Venezuela is also the third largest supplier of oil for the United States and the seventh for China. In spite of this close, prolonged, and strategic commercial relationship, Venezuela has recently been designated an “Unusual and Extraordinary Threat to US National Security and Foreign Policy.” In contrast, an alliance with China exists, called the Strategic Partnership Integral. President Donald Trump has already expressed special interest in the situation of Venezuela, just within his first 100 days. This is a country that represents, as said before, an Unusual and Extraordinary Threat to National Security according to an Executive Order dated March 9, 2015.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document