Tom Bernes

Distinguished Fellow, CIGI, @cigionline

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

The G7 must accept that it cannot run the world via @FT
https://t.co/0b2OqZa2iq

[Mark Sobel @sobel_mark]

Politicizing decisions re merit in the civil service undermines the strength of our institutions & will harm America. The EO reinforces a grossly mistaken view that bureaucrats across the board are inefficient/unproductive & unaccountable.

One shouldn't buy into that!

[Rick Anderson 🇨🇦🇪🇺🇺🇦🇮🇱🇩🇰 @RickAnderson]

He's 100% right, he absolutely does not get why Canadians are angry at the mistreatment of our country.

We should ask him to leave, politely of course. But soon.

[Arnaud Bertrand @RnaudBertrand]

This is absolutely fascinating: Jason Furman, one of the foremost economists in the U.S. and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, explains why the so-called "China shock" is a myth.

According to him, "85 to 95% of Americans benefited" from trade with China, and "China has been part of helping [the US economy] work, not hurting it work."

In other words, the narrative that China "stole" American jobs and wages is the exact opposite of reality.

Furman's logic is pretty ironclad:

1) He points out, which is factual, that "the slowdown of wage growth and the rise of inequality began in the 1970s, when there basically was no trade with China." It then accelerated in the 1980s-90s when China trade was small, and **slowed down** after 2000. And "since about 2013," when trade with China was at its highest, "we've had pretty fast real wage growth," with "the fastest real wage growth for moderate income households."

In other words, the timing doesn't fit: if China was the cause, the problem should have gotten worse as trade with China increased. Instead, it got better.

2) A common narrative one hears about China is "who cares about affordable goods, we need well-paying jobs." But Furman points out it's actually one and the same thing: "the way we measure jobs is how much your wages can buy. If you improve purchasing power, you are making every single job in the economy better."

In very concrete terms, if salaries stay flat but Chinese imports make goods 10% cheaper, your purchasing power just went up 10%, as if you got a 10% wage hike. This makes every single job in the economy better.

In effect "jobs vs. cheap goods" is a false dichotomy: cheap goods ARE better jobs.

3) Furman also points out, rightly, that the majority of what U.S. imports from China isn't consumer goods: "more than half of what we import is actually inputs into the manufacturing process itself."

In other words, Chinese imports make U.S. manufacturing MORE competitive as it decreases their input costs. If you were to cut all Chinese imports, you'd cripple U.S. manufacturing as it would no longer be able to compete on price with anyone. And, as per point 2 above, you'd also destroy Americans' purchasing power, making every single U.S. worker worse off.

4) Last but not least, Furman says that the "China shock" literature is fundamentally flawed, as it "doesn't answer the most important question, which is what the net effect was." It "doesn't consider other causes for the job losses, doesn't look at all the places that gained jobs and wages, and doesn't integrate the consumer side."

All in all, he believes that if one were to actually calculate the net effect of trade with China on the U.S. economy, it'd show that "85 to 95% of Americans benefited." And even for the 5-15% who lost out, Furman says these people were failed by "our labor policies, our social safety net" - not by China.

What Furman is saying is more relevant than ever because, both in the U.S. and in Europe, this notion that China is somehow "stealing" Western jobs and prosperity has become the unquestioned premise of so many of today's policies.

Nobody even debates it anymore, it's almost universally assumed correct.

In my own country France, Macron keeps repeating it all the time, leading the charge in Europe to slap tariffs on Chinese imports, warning that China is "killing its own customers" and that it's a question of life or death for European industry (https://t.co/Auq9rvyEwk). He literally called last week for the EU to build its own version of America's Section 301 - the same protectionist tool Trump uses (https://t.co/yHJ6M43suw).

BUT, if Furman is right, and the data strongly suggests he is, France and Europe are about to inflict economic self-harm in the name of a problem that doesn't exist.

Much more affordable cars, for instance, would literally give every single European a big wage hike. It's Furman's argument on "85 to 95% benefiting" vs 5% to 15% losing out: the vast majority of Europeans would see their money go further, while a small number of jobs in legacy automakers would be disrupted. Instead of helping those workers transition, Europe wants to prevent making everyone better off.

Anyhow, please do watch the whole podcast, which has many other fascinating insights because Furman also debates with Justin Yifu Lin, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and State Council Counsellor of China.

They're both interviewed by my friend @Hansong_Li - also a professor and an immensely smart man - in his excellent new podcast "worldviews" (imho one of the best new podcasts our there). The video is here: https://t.co/M7sVgk9v3a

[Edward Luce @EdwardGLuce]

"Decades before Epic Fury, America picked up the habit of confusing its military superiority with an ability to impose its will on faraway lands. The only novel thing about Trump’s Iran war is the immediate obviousness of its bankruptcy." Free link https://t.co/qmIThwY6Hu

[The Atlantic @TheAtlantic]

The U.S. is effectively checkmated in Iran—and this defeat will carry lasting consequences unlike any America has endured before, Robert Kagan argues. https://t.co/XIvZxuee3F

🎨: The Atlantic. Sources: Amirhossein Khorgooe / AFP / Getty; Maximillian Mann / The New York Times / Redux; Saul Loeb / AFP / Getty.

[QE Infinity @StealthQE4]

Let’s keep it real:

This trade summit was a disaster.

China basically ignored us and gave us a few crumbs.

We got no offering of help with Iran. Just a few statements. Those are just words not actions.

Then they threatened us about Taiwan and called us a declining superpower.

The most interesting part about all of this is Trump just sat there and took it.

America isn’t what it used to be.

This meeting was a failure imo.

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

@thehill Pathetic. China is playing global power and Trump is playing soybeans. Again! The US delegation looked like the infants they are.

[Rick Anderson 🇨🇦🇪🇺🇺🇦🇮🇱🇩🇰 @RickAnderson]

The Age of Disruption.

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

@AGMacDougall @acoyne @TorontoStar Just another myopic Tory who can’t get his head out of wherever it is stuck. Reduce taxes is not the answer. Get serious or be quiet.

[Adam Posen @AdamPosen]

My friend and colleague @pisaniferry is speaking truth - we are both deeply saddened by this post-American world (and post-American world economy). He is right to call Europe to recognize reality and to take action. We are not alone in saying this, but Jean's clarity and bravery will I hope move things forward in Paris, Brussels and beyond. @lemondefr @PIIE
https://t.co/iSFcGI6dPA

[Jim Stanford @JimboStanford]

More proof those countries (like the EU) that rushed into so-called 'deals' with Trump, got well and truly suckered. They mean nothing. Canada has done much better to stand back as his credibility and political base erode. Ignore those still braying "Where is the deal??" #cdnecon

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

@acoyne And your bylines continue to look stale.

[Edward Luce @EdwardGLuce]

Reminder to those who can't seem to grasp distinction between median and average. US average income in 2024 was $76,000. US median income was $44,000. The difference is vast inequality. But $44,000 is not a good living.

[David Frum @davidfrum]

Sassy social media commentary aside, Canada has fought harder and more successfully - often at higher cost - to defend its national sovereignty from invasive Trump demands than has Mexico under President Claudia Sheinbaum. https://t.co/wgZGT9IYlm

[Bruce Anderson @bruceanderson]

Canada has a more comprehensive agreement than any of those countries, a mechanism to negotiate, and some pressure starting to build up in our favour in the U S. A desperation push would be the worst move and 75% of Canadians see that.

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

@RMC19861987 @susandelacourt @SenatorShaheen @TorontoStar I think you fail to understand. It is Trump who is not listening to business or anyone else. It is useless to say we need a deal - the question is what deal and you apparently have no views on that. Surrender is not a policy.

[Global Governance Media @GloGovMedia]

🌍 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐃𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐚𝐥, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚 𝐬𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐚𝐧
In June, leaders will gather at the @G7 in France. They’ll talk climate, responsibility, and resilience. But the planet is talking now:

🚨 Crops failing.
🚨 Droughts deepening.
🚨 Heat becoming deadly.
🚨 Seas rising.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 - 𝐢𝐭’𝐬 𝐮𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲.

We must:
• End fossil fuel reliance
• Restore nature at scale
• Deliver climate justice for the most vulnerable

What’s the one commitment you think they can’t afford to miss this June? Let’s hear your thoughts!

#EarthDay, #ClimateAction, #ClimateJustice, #ActNow. @g7_rg @jjkirton
https://t.co/bVRY2Ya90q

[Adam Posen @AdamPosen]

Donald Trump a transformé les États-Unis d’assureur du monde en racketteur https://t.co/ygyEtYRJIG

[Tom Bernes @TomBernes]

The scumbag continues with his unconscionable (to most people) activities.

[Marc Short @marctshort]

President Trump will not enjoy media coverage of Lutnick’s sons earning $100 MM in tariff refunds while Sec Lutnick was pushing for more tariffs …

[. @GregTSargent]

Trump has basically turned the presidency into a giant Bribe Delivery System.

https://t.co/P2UR8wRAi6