The Green President

If you wonder whether the Obama Administration has a green agenda, the answer was obvious at the G20 summit in Seoul, South Korea. Headlines spoke of how other countries view the Administration's economic policies as out of line. Take a look below the headlines. The trade agreement between the U.S. and South Korea remains stalled. The reason is South Korea refuses to relax its emission and mileage standards so U.S. automakers can more easily adapt their cars for the Korean market. Yes, the U.S. asked the Koreans to lower their environmental standards. One could argue the President is willing to compromise on his principles, to account for what the American people conveyed at the polls earlier this month. Without solid economic growth, electoral support for "change" is unlikely, so he had to compromise to be able to sell more American-made cars in Korea. Does anyone believe in the short-term South Korea is going to be a major market for American-made cars and save American jobs? More realistically by keeping the barriers to trade higher than would be the case with a trade agreement, the Administration is hoping to keep more Korean cars from selling in the U.S. and save UAW jobs. Even this is flawed logic because the way around the barriers is to produce the cars in the U.S. at sites likely not to support the UAW.

The Administration's actions appear simply to be political payback for the support from the UAW. Yes, the Obama Administration has a green agenda - keep the green dollars flowing into the political campaign war chests.


References:

Richardson, Alex. "Factbox: Outcome of the Seoul G20 Summit | Reuters." Business; Financial News, Breaking US; International News | Reuters.com. Ed. John Chalmers. Reuters, 12 Nov. 2010. Web. 14 Nov. 2010. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AB1G920101112.

Griswold, Daniel. "President Obama Represents UAW Rather Than U.S. in Korea Trade Talks | Mad About Trade." Mad About Trade | Observations on Trade, Globalization and Immigration. N.p., 12 Nov. 2010. Web. 14 Nov. 2010. http://madabouttrade.wordpress.com/2010/11/12/president-obama-represents-uaw-rather-than-u-s-in-korea-trade-talks/.

Economic education and politics

Given the excessive partisanship in the United States today, I look for the opportunity to focus on points of agreement - there are many - instead of the constant barrage from all sides on points of disagreement. It seems as though The New York Times is a channel of the "progressive" political perspective. I hoped the 07 June 2010 article by Patrick McGeehan, Does Studying Economics Make You More Republican?, based on the Federal Reserve Bank of New York study Is Economics Coursework, or Majoring in Economics, Associated with Different Civic Behaviors?, would raise another point of agreement. Unfortunately as the Fed's study is being popularized by commentators, beginning with Mr.McGeehan, with characterizations of Republicans and Democrats leading to more divisiveness. Our political discourse seems to be based on the model that one defines a caricature of the opposing perspective and then attacks the caricature in hopes of discrediting those who do not hold your position. This approach seems prevalent regardless of political perspective. This is particularly frustrating given the fiscal irresponsibility of both major political parties. While there is a difference in velocity, both political parties have been directing the country toward financial disaster through recklessly wasteful spending. I am fortunate not to know any political ideologues personally (albeit some occasionally display such characteristics from time to time) which perhaps explains why I know no one who is presently satisfied with any political party. If my experience is representative, then why is our political environment so partisan?

My area of emphasis in my undergraduate studies was in macroeconomics. The Economics faculty tended to be monetarists, whereas most universities at the time tended to tilt towards forms of Keynesianism. I no longer have the familiarity to assess whether the schools (Florida Atlantic, Nebraska-Lincoln, North Carolina, and Purdue) from which the Fed's study was based were from a particular school of thought. I suspect there is a positive correlation, influencing the outcomes.

References:

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/07/does-studying-economics-make-you-more-republican/
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr450.pdf