The Brexit referendum, and some of the political discourse in the US presidential election, shows clearly that there is pushback on globalization. Globalization is a term that I think of as referring to integration across countries in essentially three types of markets: for capital, for goods and services, and for labor. It's easy to take for granted that the world will always become more and more globalized over time. But it's not a technological law that globalization must march forward.
In my own lifetime and in my students’ lifetimes, there have been no sustained reversals in the progress of globalization. We've seen more and more trade in goods relative to GDP; more trade in assets relative to GDP; more workers crossing international borders. You might assume that things have to trend this way. But if you go back to the late 19th or early 20th century, when the world was also globalizing quite rapidly, people may very well have also taken for granted then that the world would continue to get more and more integrated. Yet, it did not. From about 1914 to about 1945, globalization actually reversed. International capital flows collapsed, as did goods traded relative to GDP in some periods.
For those of us who think enhanced cooperation and cross border flows in goods, services, capital, and labor are important things for productivity, poverty alleviation, and welfare around the globe, it's important to remind ourselves of these benefits and that we shouldn't take them for granted.
And further, while globalization might make us better off on average, it certainly doesn't have to help everyone. Some people gain, and others may lose. For those of us who want globalization to continue moving forward, it's obviously become more and more important to think harder about ways to make sure the benefits are shared by a broader set of people than perhaps has been the case in some places.
For more from the Chicago Booth faculty on the fallout of the Brexit vote, visit our collection here.
Harvard’s Daniel Ziblatt discusses how to realign government away from moneyed interests.
Capitalisn’t: How Big Money Changed the Democratic Game
Cleaner home energy can save households money and cut carbon emissions—but is only part of the way air pollution affects human health.
Will High-Efficiency Cookstoves Save Lives?
Journalist and Semafor cofounder Ben Smith discusses the path forward for the news industry.
Capitalisn’t: Yes, Journalism Does Have a Future
Corporations, their lobbyists, and many economists have argued that corporate tax cuts will stimulate economic growth. They’ll also stimulate tax-motivated loss-shifting activity.
Example Article Swiss
In a speech last Tuesday to workers at an Amazon facility in Tennessee, President Obama gave Congress some new ideas about proposed tax reform while repeating his earlier support for cutting the corporate tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent.
Example Article Swiss
Throwing away cash to report false earnings.
Example Article Swiss
“Conduit” or “pass-through” entities include S corporations, partnerships, and limited liability companies (LLCs). With conduit entities, there is no tax at the entity level. Instead, all income or loss flows through to shareholders, who report these earnings on their own income tax returns.
Example Article Swiss
Acquirers are willing to pay a premium acquisition price to obtain the tax benefits derived from the election.
Example Article SwissYour Privacy
We want to demonstrate our commitment to your privacy. Please review Chicago Booth's privacy notice, which provides information explaining how and why we collect particular information when you visit our website.