A new book edited by Prof. Gary Gensler and Prof. Simon Johnson examines the current administration’s impact on the global economy and how new policies could lead to “a profound weakening of both US economic dynamism and the global system it once led,” reports Sam Sutton for Politico.
Prof. Daron Acemoglu, Prof. Peter Diamond and Prof. Simon Johnson are among the six Nobel laureate economists that warn the “massive budget bill passed by Housemakers last month… would weaken key safety-net programs while greatly lifting the federal debt,” reports Alain Sherter for CBS News. The economists also said that “large tax cuts under the legislation, combined with the hits to Medicaid and food stamps, would increase inequality,” writes Sherter.
Prof. Daron Acemoglu speaks with WBUR On Point host Meghna Chakrabarti about the role of trust in institutions. “Institutions crucially depend on the trust that people place in them,” says Acemoglu. “Corruption is the tip of the spear, because once you start suspecting that people in high office are using their position for corrupt ends, it tarnishes the entire set of institutions. And I think that's the situation we're in, and we're getting deeper and deeper.”
Prof. David Autor speaks with Rogé Karma from The Atlantic about the role of tariffs in the American manufacturing industry. “Letting free trade rip is an easy policy,” says Autor. “Putting up giant tariffs is an easy policy. Figuring out some middle path is hard. Deciding what sectors to invest in and protect is hard. Doing the work to build new industries is hard. But this is how great nations lead.”
Writing for The New York Times, MIT Innovation Fellow Brian Deese explains the impact of tariffs and domestic policy on the American auto industry. Deese notes that current policies “risk leaving U.S. automakers isolated and incapable of competing on their own merits as foreign companies bolt ahead. The damage to our economy and national security could be profound.”
Prof. Simon Johnson joins CNBC’s Squawk Box to discuss the potential impact of U.S. tariffs on the global economy.
Writing for Science, Prof. Fiona Murray and Research Affiliate Stefan Raff-Heinen underscore the necessity of federal investment in university research, noting that “without sustained federal support, the country risks losing its technological edge, threatening economic competitiveness and national security.” Murray and Raff-Heinen write: “Translational research funding is crucial for moving discoveries and early-stage technologies from labs to real-world applications. Government support gives scientists the time to refine nascent technologies, which can be a long and uncertain process. But this approach has had substantial payoffs.”
Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Sloan Senior Lecturer Robert Pozen highlights the impact of U.S. tariffs on foreign investment in U.S. Treasury securities and U.S. corporate bonds. “Nevertheless, since target countries will want to respond to reciprocal tariffs, they may stop buying or even sell U.S. debt securities,” explains Pozen. “Either response would increase U.S. interest rates and decrease economic growth. International trade flows and international investing are two sides of the same street.”
Writing for The New York Times, Prof. Catherine Wolfram and Columbia Prof. Glenn Hubbard make the case that to help end the war between Russia and Ukraine, the U.S. should “impose sanctions on any company or individual – in any country – involved in a Russian oil and gas sale.” They write: “Ideally, the policy would pressure Russia into negotiations, where its removal could be part of a deal. If not, the United States would still collect billions annually, which could help fund Mr. Trump’s proposed tax cuts.”
Prof. Jonathan Gruber speaks with GBH All Things Considered news anchor Judie Yuill to address recession concerns. “I think the important takeaway I have is that the real risks for our nation are not really short term, they’re long term,” explains Gruber. “We are a knowledge, investment and innovation-based economy. That’s what made America great for 80 years. The base of that innovation — the base of this knowledge economy — is our world-leading universities. If we start cutting them, we’re going to pay a long-run price in terms of our ability to grow as a nation.”
A study by researchers from MIT and elsewhere has concluded that tariffs have “failed to restore jobs to the American heartland,” reports Paul Wiseman for the Associated Press. The study found that “tariffs ‘neither raised nor lowered U.S. employment’ where they were supposed to protect jobs,” writes Wiseman.
During a town hall-style discussion at the Museum of Science, Prof. David Kaiser explored the importance of scientific exploration in a democracy and its role in spurring on national progress, reports Brian Bergstein for The Boston Globe. “Science, which needs a lot of resources, has to be political,” says Kaiser. “We have to make the case in a persuasive way about why this kind of activity is worthy of support.”
Researchers from MIT and elsewhere have found that tariffs “failed to restore jobs to the American heartland,” reports Paul Wiseman for the Associated Press. The study found that “the tariffs ‘neither raised nor lowered U.S. employment’ where they were supposed to protect jobs,” writes Wiseman.
Writing for The New York Times, Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu makes the case for “a new liberalism that is more faithful to its original values but adapted to our times.” Acemoglu emphasizes that “a renewed liberalism must rediscover its most inspiring roots: an energy coming from opposition to the unfair and unrestrained use of power; a commitment to freedom of thought and celebration of different approaches to our common problems; and a concern for the community as well as the individual as the basis of efforts to improve the opportunities of the disadvantaged.”
Writing for The Hill, Prof. Emeritus Henry Jacoby and his colleagues highlight implications of climate change denial on a global scale. “Denying there is a problem stimies efforts to correct the damaged insurance system, organize disaster relief appropriate for changing threats, and properly inform decisions about protective investment,” they write. “Besides the urgent need to protect programs to limit U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and to bring the nation back into the global effort, the federal administration and recalcitrant state leaders must be convinced to pull their heads out of the dirt and face the change that is coming — whether they want to acknowledge it or not.”