US, China, Milky Way, Andromeda

This so-called US-China trade war I compare to the future projected collision between the Milky Way and the Andromeda galaxies. This clash is political. At some level, it was inevitable. It had to happen. And there is no going back. We will end up at some new equilibrium. Both powers will change in the process. The world itself will change. I think the primary casualty will be the nation-state itself. There will be no Milky Way left. There will be no Andromeda left. Something new will form.

The WTO is only as strong as its two largest trading partners will let it be. And there the train has already left the station. This tussle necessarily asks for fundamental reform of the WTO. But the US will not be the sole power shaping that new form. This tussle creates an opportunity for many powers who are represented in the G20 grouping to flex their muscle and wake up to the fact that they do have a seat at the table.

The elephant in the room, though, is technology. The US demands Huawei deliver on issues where the US technology giants themselves have a poor record. Privacy and security issues plague the tech sector like plastic waste in the Pacific. Here I propose the creation of a T100, a grouping of the top 100 technology firms of the world measured by market cap that meet on the sidelines of G20 and take the lead on issues of privacy and security. Trump asking Huawei to offer ironclad guarantees on security is like that emperor who demanded a flooded river to stop, just stop. Huawei alone can't do it any more than Google and Facebook have been able to. The CIA has got to be the top stealth organization when it comes to cyber snooping. I would not be surprised if the Chinese are a close second. They both take advantage of the security flaws in hardware and software that are extremely hard to patch.

5G is way more monumental than any road, or bridge, or port, or rail China can build with its Belt And Road Initiative. 5G is that infrastructure that will finally level the playing field for the Global South. Trump cannot be allowed to stand in the way of 5G deployment. On the other hand, take stock of all the privacy and security issues the world has had to encounter over the past 25 years and multiply that by 100. Much faster internet, much more ubiquitous internet will mean greater challenges for privacy and security. Here the T100 needs to take the lead. There are technological solutions. There are common standards to agree on. There is also room for law enforcement. But no nation state is at the center of this debate.

There is no way out for China from this trade war than through some major structural reforms which, by the way, would be good for the Chinese economy. Some of the structural reforms that are being demanded will make sure state funds do not go to state-owned enterprises that are losing money on massive scales. Such moves will make China more efficient and more competitive.

The US will also see structural changes. The 2020 election will see the rise of the Social Democrat. The US will likely go for Medicare For All. The US will become more like China on education and health.

And there's the all-important Clean Energy. On that, the two powers must fully cooperate. The problem is too big for any one of them to go solo.

In the clash of the two powers, that at some level was inevitable, both will fundamentally change and will become more like each other. But when the dust settles both will have become unrecognizable from their current vantage points.

US, China, Milky Way, Andromeda https://t.co/nNaXXAey6u @SenWarren @KamalaHarris @aoc @BernieSanders @narendramodi @justicedems @sunrisemvmt

— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) June 28, 2019

$78 Trillion Richer

If borders were open: A world of free movement would be $78 trillion richer https://t.co/CAGUFKOTFz via @TheEconomist

— Paramendra Bhagat (@paramendra) July 18, 2017

there are “trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk”. One seemingly simple policy could make the world twice as rich as it is: open borders. ....... Workers become far more productive when they move from a poor country to a rich one. Suddenly, they can join a labour market with ample capital, efficient firms and a predictable legal system. ....... “Labour is the world’s most valuable commodity—yet thanks to strict immigration regulation, most of it goes to waste” ....... “Making Nigerians stay in Nigeria is as economically senseless as making farmers plant in Antarctica” ....... And the non-economic benefits are hardly trivial, either. A Nigerian in the United States cannot be enslaved by the Islamists of Boko Haram. ...... The potential gains from open borders dwarf those of, say, completely free trade, let alone foreign aid ......... “open borders” means that people are free to move to find work. It does not mean “no borders” or “the abolition of the nation-state”. ....... It is very hard to transfer Canadian institutions to Cambodia, but quite straightforward for a Cambodian family to fly to Canada. ....... The quickest way to eliminate absolute poverty would be to allow people to leave the places where it persists. ...... 630m people—about 13% of the world’s population—would migrate permanently if they could, and even more would move temporarily. Some 138m would settle in the United States, 42m in Britain and 29m in Saudi Arabia. ..... Leaving one’s homeland requires courage and resilience. Migrants must wave goodbye to familiar people, familiar customs and grandma’s cooking. Many people would rather not make that sacrifice, even for the prospect of large material rewards. ....... Wages are twice as high in Germany as in Greece, and under European Union rules Greeks are free to move to Germany, but only 150,000 have done so since the beginning of the economic crisis in 2010, out of a population of 11m. The weather is awful in Frankfurt, and hardly anyone speaks Greek. ......... Even very large disparities combined with open borders do not necessarily lead to a mass exodus. Since 1986 the citizens of Micronesia have been allowed to live and work without a visa in the United States, where income per person is roughly 20 times higher. Yet two-thirds remain in Micronesia. ....... Today there are 1.4bn people in rich countries and 6bn in not-so-rich ones. It is hardly far-fetched to imagine that, over a few decades, a billion or more of those people might emigrate if there were no legal obstacle to doing so. Clearly, this would transform rich countries in unpredictable ways. ....... Mass migration, they worry, would bring more crime and terrorism, lower wages for locals, an impossible strain on welfare states, horrific overcrowding and traumatic cultural disruption. ........ If lots of people migrated from war-torn Syria, gangster-plagued Guatemala or chaotic Congo, would they bring mayhem with them? ...... Granted, some immigrants commit crimes, or even headline-grabbing acts of terrorism. But in America the foreign-born are only a fifth as likely to be incarcerated as the native-born. ....... A study of migration flows among 145 countries between 1970 and 2000 by researchers at the University of Warwick found that migration was more likely to reduce terrorism than increase it, largely because migration fosters economic growth. ....... Immigrants are more likely than the native-born to bring new ideas and start their own businesses, many of which hire locals. Overall, migrants are less likely than the native-born to be a drain on public finances, unless local laws make it impossible for them to work, as is the case for asylum-seekers in Britain. ....... Foreign doctors and engineers ease skills shortages. Unskilled migrants care for babies or the elderly, thus freeing the native-born to do more lucrative work. ....... most Western cities could build much higher than they do, creating more space. ...... Would mass immigration change the culture and politics of rich countries? Undoubtedly. Look at the way America has changed, mostly for the better, as its population soared from 5m mainly white folks in 1800 to 320m many-hued ones today. ....... nearly all these risks could be mitigated, and many of the most common objections overcome, with a bit of creative thinking. ...... one solution would be not to let immigrants vote—for five years, ten years or even a lifetime. This may seem harsh, but it is far kinder than not letting them in. ....... why not charge them more for visas, or make them pay extra taxes, or restrict their access to welfare benefits? ...... it is better for the migrants than the status quo, in which they are excluded from rich-world labour markets unless they pay tens of thousands of dollars to people-smugglers—and even then they must work in the shadows and are subject to sudden deportation. Today, millions of migrants work in the Gulf, where they have no political rights at all. Despite this, they keep coming. No one is forcing them to. ...... If a world of free movement would be $78trn richer, should not liberals be prepared to make big political compromises to bring it about?

There is a political solution: the creation of a world government. And there is a technical solution: a biometric ID for every person on earth.

Hillary Clinton: Nothing To Do With The Panama Papers

The Liberals of the Bernie brand have plenty of good things to talk about, plenty of legitimate points to make. Excuse me if English is not my first language, but is this the left wing pulling a right wing? Blaming Hillary for Panama, of all things? I am calling this facts-free sexism, completely unhinged from facts and logic.

Liberals and the New Democrats should compete, as they are, but they should do so cleanly, and with the ultimate goals of working together for the greater cause. Liberals should make an effort to remember why they used to lose elections all the time, and the New Dems should face the fact that the ground reality is not as desperate as it was in 1991, and bolder moves are now possible.

And, by the way, I am for free trade, I always have been. Blaming free trade for the loss of American jobs is like blaming China's strong economy for the fact that America is not doing better, when the fact is China saved America big time in 2008. Free trade can be better architected, but don't blame the poor in poor countries because you can't get organized better and get your government to invest more in your education and health.

The Sanders campaign should focus on getting deeper into the policies, and crunching the numbers, and better organizing the supporters. There are obscure, underpaid academics who have already written detailed policy papers of the journal article quality for everything Sanders has proposed, I am sure. The Sanders campaign just needs to go find them. Talk numbers but also talk slogans. Present the investments in education and health in the context of the larger budget. How you would tweak it, things like that.

Linking Hillary to Panama is a mirror image of the right wing blaming Hillary for Benghazi. It is like there is this small patch of land somewhere in Latin America where Islamist terrorists and American far right militia gather and train each other on warfare.

The Bernie campaign does not need that if it wants to actually make change happen. This path burns bridges.

I actually happen to think much of what Bernie wants can happen. But you do have to do the work. You do have the get into the nitty gritty, you do have to crunch the numbers, you do have to tweak the budget, you do have to build coalitions. Mostly you do have to better organize. Build a grasseroots structure to survive.

Hillary In The News
A Strong Critique Of Sanders From A Very Smart Liberal
The New Democrat Philosophy Vs The Liberal Philosophy
Hillary's Narrow Lead
A Close Race
This Might Not Go Well
Bernie: The Progressive Ronald Reagan?
Bernie II?
One Person, One Vote, One Voice Democracy And America And The Democratic Party
White House, Senate, House, 2016

She's Not With Us
She's not with us!!!!
Posted by Liberal Rhetoric Click on Friday, April 8, 2016