Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 9 of 66 Results in International Trade
TOTM FTC Chairman William Kovacic, easily one of the most insightful thinkers and writers on issues of global competition policy, has posted a new paper offering . . .
FTC Chairman William Kovacic, easily one of the most insightful thinkers and writers on issues of global competition policy, has posted a new paper offering a thoughtful analysis of where the EU and US competition policy systems have been, where they are going, what institutional differences might cause the systems to converge or diverge further, and what to do about it. Kovacic notes that while “the apparent agreement on overall objectives would seem to be, and is, an important step toward achieving convergence between the two systems” it is important not to avoid frank discussions of what both US and EU officials mean when they invoke the concept of “consumer welfare” or “protecting competition, not competitors” precisely because these phrases can “are so open-ended that their true meaning in practice depends on how they are applied.” Kovacic goes on to discuss various institutional forces favoring both convergence and divergence and offering some suggestions for facilitating the adoption of superior norms. The paper is a must-read for anybody interested in global competition issues.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM My former co-clerk (now Hofstra Law prof) Ron Colombo asked that I pass along information on an upcoming symposium at Hofstra Law School. The symposium, . . .
My former co-clerk (now Hofstra Law prof) Ron Colombo asked that I pass along information on an upcoming symposium at Hofstra Law School. The symposium, Regulation of Currency Exchange and Its Impact on International Business, will be held at Hofstra on February 8. The keynote speaker will be Walter Lukken, Acting Chairman of the CFTC.
TOTM From the Economic Times: The European Union’s antitrust agency is becoming more influential just as its US counterparts have grown more cautious and inactive, experts . . .
From the Economic Times:
The European Union’s antitrust agency is becoming more influential just as its US counterparts have grown more cautious and inactive, experts say. The European Commission’s recent success in forcing Microsoft to carry out antitrust sanctions underscores the differences, and academic researchers say the US is also hanging back in merger challenges. That makes Brussels, more than Washington, the place where companies must go to get their deal through and where companies must ready themselves against possible antitrust action. It also means competition agencies around the world look to Brussels.
“Influential” v. “cautious” and “inactive.” I get it. The implication is that EU antitrust enforcement is good and US enforcement is bad. The proof? One is allegedly more interventionist than the other. As a general matter, I do not find “more is better” arguments (see, e.g., here) causally linking agency activity to the quality of antitrust policy to be very persuasive.
Scholarship Abstract Economists generally agree that free trade leads to economic growth. This proposition is supported both by theoretical models and empirical data. Further, while the . . .
Economists generally agree that free trade leads to economic growth. This proposition is supported both by theoretical models and empirical data. Further, while the empirical evidence is more limited on this question, the general consensus among economists holds that trade restrictions are likely to hurt the poor. Even if the latter consensus turns out to be wrong, if free trade leads to superior growth, governments would have more resources to redistribute to the poor. It is surprising then that philosophers and human rights scholars do not advocate liberalizing trade as a way to improve the welfare of the poor as a class. While many scholars in these fields are silent with respect to the effect of free trade on the poor, some actually argue that liberalized trade is harmful for the poor, contrary to the claims of economists. In this article, we argue that any serious scholar concerned with the plight of the poor needs to address the theory and evidence regarding the effects of trade liberalization on economic growth, suggesting that the standard policy prescriptions of the philosophers and human rights scholars are, at best, of second order concern and, at worst, likely to be counterproductive in terms of improving the welfare of the poor.
TOTM Here is Senator Obama’s economic advisor Austan Goolsbee on globalization and free trade (as described by George Will in his recent column)… Read the full . . .
Here is Senator Obama’s economic advisor Austan Goolsbee on globalization and free trade (as described by George Will in his recent column)…
TOTM In case you haven’t already, I recommend taking a gander at today’s New York Time Book Review. In it, there is a review of Naomi . . .
In case you haven’t already, I recommend taking a gander at today’s New York Time Book Review. In it, there is a review of Naomi Klein’s new book, The Shock Doctrine, by Nobel-winning economist, Joe Stiglitz. It’s an abomination (I’m sure the book is an abomination, too, but I’m referring to the book review).
TOTM EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes responds to the USDOJ Antitrust AG’s criticism of the recent Microsoft decision… Read the full piece here.
EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes responds to the USDOJ Antitrust AG’s criticism of the recent Microsoft decision…
TOTM Those of us who defend the right to outsource are frequently criticized for lacking compassion and for being concerned only with the bottom line. I’ll . . .
Those of us who defend the right to outsource are frequently criticized for lacking compassion and for being concerned only with the bottom line. I’ll admit that profitability concerns generally motivate decisions to outsource (and most other business decisions), but I won’t concede that outsourcing imposes a net harm on the economically disadvantaged. If we’re really concerned with alleviating the worst instances of poverty and are not focused only on protecting our own kind, we should support the right to outsource.
TOTM It’s a strange day when the New York Times advocates corporate tax breaks. It’s an even stranger day when I dissent from that recommendation. Well, . . .
It’s a strange day when the New York Times advocates corporate tax breaks. It’s an even stranger day when I dissent from that recommendation. Well, today must be a strange day indeed, for they did, and I must.
