« Schoolhouse rock, Venezuelan-campaign style | Main | International institutions 101 »

February 02, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The logic doesn't seem that dissimilar from that which led to the formation of the currency blocs in the 30s, no? I get the point about the multiplier for domestic spending being higher, but it's still going to look like beggar-thy-neighbor to whomever is outside the bloc.

The currency bloc question gets complicated. There's some debate over the effect of floating exchange rates on the ability of fiscal policy to get you out of a liquidity trap.

If you assume that capital flows respond only to changes in interest rates and that currency traders have fixed expectations about future exchange movements, then it isn't clear that a buy-USA policy will give you more bang for your buck.


If you don't believe those two things, though, then you're back in the world where protectionism can be good under extreme circumstance, like the ones we're in now:


Krugman is worried about the political consequences of protectionism.


I take his point, but I'm less worried, because I believe that the international institutions we've put together provide a firebreak against destructive trade wars:


Of course, I could be wrong.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)