DisneylandForward for the Entire Economy

 by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – March 26, 2021

 

Whenever a large company pitches government on a proposal that’s supposed to help that firm and the economy in general, this economist’s free-market radar goes up. After all, most of the time, such proposals involve a business looking for taxpayer handouts, but trying to dress up such welfare as being great for everybody, including the taxpayers footing the bill.

That’s why the Walt Disney Company’s new pitch to the City of Anaheim – called DisneylandForward – to expand, well, Disneyland is so refreshing. It also should serve as a template for policymaking related to entrepreneurs, businesses, their employees, and investors, as we all work to climb out of this pandemic mess.

 

Disney is not looking for any kind of government aid, subsidies, or handouts in this proposal. In fact, in its various materials on the undertaking, the company explicitly declared: “To be clear, Disney is not seeking any public funding for DisneylandForward, nor are we seeking additional square footage or hotel rooms beyond what is currently approved and allowed.”

 

This is music to the ears of this economist. Please, tell me more!

 

Instead of seeking handouts, Disney is looking for Anaheim to be more flexible in terms of how it regulates the company. Specifically, Disney is looking for flexibility in terms of zoning regulations so that the company can move ahead and make investments in expansion that will serve new and current customers, boost the region’s economy, and create jobs. Disney is beginning a process of explaining and illustrating to Anaheim that a shift in its zoning from traditional, specific-use approval to zoning that allows for increased flexibility and integration in terms of uses – such as allowing a hotel, restaurants, attractions and entertainment in one area or facility, as opposed to just one of those options – not only makes sense for Disney and its business, but how the House of Mouse ties in with the rest of the regional economy and beyond.

 

Disney pointed out, “While Disney has the development rights and the desire to continue investing in Anaheim, the space to develop integrated offerings is severely limited. Without broadening the uses allowed within each district or demolishing and replacing many beloved theme park attractions, further integrated development and theme park investment are not possible.”

 

I’m always frustrated when government stakes out overtly hostile stances against entrepreneurs, businesses and investors. Such misguided actions spring from failures to grasp how the economy and business work; and how growth, wealth and jobs are created; as well as political philosophies rooted in fantasy, and/or politics built on cynicism and special-interest favors. And then there are businesses that seek government handouts, which only serves to gin up further hostility toward business. So, I wonder if the vast costs of the pandemic might change things, at least somewhat. 

 

Disney put its DisneylandForward effort in the proper context of what we have been suffering through for the past year-plus:

 

“While no one could have predicted just how far-reaching the job loss and economic impacts would be as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we know this past year has been incredibly difficult. It has taken a major toll on our cast, The Anaheim Resort, Anaheim residents and families, Orange County, and California. But, with time, we will recover, and we’ll do it together. We believe in the future of this great city, and we are ready to join hands as even stronger partners. With continued investment, we can make an even larger impact on short-term recovery, enhance long-term growth, and help address some of Anaheim’s more difficult problems in the future.”

 

Again, how will we recover and grow? Not via government subsidies. Not by some big governmental undertakings with commensurate tax and regulatory costs. Not thanks to the us-vs.-them mentality that dominates too much of our public discourse and manifests itself in public policies. Instead, it will be accomplished by government thinking clearly and providing flexibility – dare I say: providing relief? – from burdens that make no sense, and only serve to raise the costs of or block productive, private-sector investment. In turn, entrepreneurs and businesses, including Disney, will be better able to make growth-generating investments.

 

Let’s call it the DisneylandForward agenda for Anaheim, for California, for other states and for the nation: No subsidies. Provide flexibility and relief from government regulations and other actions that make no sense. And thereby, free up the private sector to invest, innovate and drive economic, income and job growth.

 

_________

 

Ray Keating is a columnist, novelist, economist, podcaster and entrepreneur.  Keating has two new books out. Vatican Shadows: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel is the 13ththriller/mystery in the Pastor Stephen Grant series. Get the paperback or Kindle edition at Amazon, or signed books at www.raykeatingonline.com. Past Lives: A Pastor Stephen Grant Short Story is the 14th book in the series. Get the paperback or Kindle edition at Amazon, or signed book at www.raykeatingonline.com.

 

The views expressed here are his own – after all, no one else should be held responsible for this stuff, right?

 

You also can order his book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York  from Amazon or signed books  at RayKeatingOnline.com. His other recent nonfiction book is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know. 

 

One of the best ways to enjoy Ray Keating’s Pastor Stephen Grant thrillers and mysteries is to join the Pastor Stephen Grant Fellowship! For the BEST VALUE, consider the Book of the Month Club.  Check it all out at https://www.patreon.com/pastorstephengrantfellowship

 

Also, tune in to Ray Keating’s podcasts – the PRESS CLUB C Podcast  and the Free Enterprise in Three Minutes Podcast  

 

Check out Ray Keating’s Disney news and entertainment site at www.DisneyBizJournal.com.

Guest Column: No, The Government Should Not Tell Apple How To Make iPhones

by Bryan Riley

The Keating Files – July 25, 2020

A recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, “Bringing the Factories Home: Any new industrial policy has to make the U.S. less vulnerable to Chinese suppliers,” by Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Arthur Herman, adds little to the debate over what to do about China.

Plans to “bring the factories home” come with great risks. One that is rarely mentioned is the likelihood that other countries may decide to copy this policy and “take the factories home.” For the 2.6 million American manufacturing workers employed by foreign-owned companies that have built U.S. factories, this would be a devastating result.

Perhaps the key takeaway from the piece is embodied in the suggestion that the federal government should tell Apple, one of the most innovative and successful companies in American history, how to produce iPhones.

Mr. Herman further suggests that China has a stranglehold on American’s access to important health-care goods like ventilators, and therefore the government should reduce American “dependence” on China-sourced pharmaceuticals and health-care products.

Last year, China accounted for 17 percent of all U.S. ventilator imports. That’s hardly a stranglehold.

Overall, more than half of medical goods and pharmaceuticals used in the USA are made in the USA. China accounts for about 2 percent of the combined U.S. market for medical goods and pharmaceuticals.

According to Mr. Herman, 97 percent of antibiotics used in America are sourced from China. It’s not clear where that statistic comes from. According to data from the U.S. International Trade Commission, about 2.4 percent of U.S. antibiotic imports came from China in 2019.

Perhaps he is referring to “Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients” (APIs) imported from China.

According to March 2019 testimony from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), “we cannot determine with any precision the volume of API that China is actually producing, or the volume of APIs manufactured in China that is entering the U.S. market.” In June 2020, an FDA spokesman reiterated this: “Data available to FDA do not enable us to calculate the volume of API being used for U.S.-marketed drugs from China or India, and what percentage of U.S. drug consumption this represents.”

This lack of data is certainly problematic. It was addressed by Congress in a CARES Act provision authorizing research to get to the bottom of this. In the meantime, there is no reason to believe that 97 percent of U.S. antibiotics are sourced from China.

Mr. Herman adds: “Asia produces 90 percent of the world’s circuit boards—more than half of them in China.”

This statement is reminiscent of the time Scott Williams (2 points) and Michael Jordan (55 points) combined for 57 points in game 4 of the 1993 NBA finals. Why commingle production by China with that of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and other U.S. allies? More fundamentally, if U.S. manufacturers can procure affordable circuit boards for garage door openers and refrigerators from abroad, how exactly does that threaten American security?

He repeats this tactic with respect to STEM education: “A 2019 Congressional Research Service report found that India and China together made up nearly 70 percent of foreign students enrolled in STEM courses in the U.S.” It makes even less sense to lump together India and China than it does to combine the scores of Michael Jordan and Scott Williams, unless the goal is to concoct a big, scary number.

Mr. Herman is concerned that manufacturing now makes up 11 percent of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP), compared to 25 percent in the 1960s, and that more than five million American manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2000.

It seems that critics of American manufacturing capacity will look at any measure except for how much we manufacture to justify their policy prescriptions.

Manufacturing output has steadily increased over the years. There is no reason Americans should be concerned that other areas of the economy have grown even more, reducing manufacturing’s share of total GDP.

Nor should Americans be concerned that technological advancements made U.S. workers more productive than ever, reducing the number of manufacturing jobs. The economy added new jobs elsewhere, and overall employment grew.

If there’s a problem with that, the easiest fix would be to fire all the country’s doctors, accountants, teachers, and plumbers and ban all imports of affordable clothing. Manufacturing’s share of GDP would increase, and more Americans could return to factories to run sewing machines 40 hours a week.

As is always the case with industrial policy advocates, the proposed solution to the misdiagnosed problem involves the federal government picking winners and losers -- specifically, “Washington should identify commercial-sector technologies that may be crucial to national security. Artificial intelligence, robotics, quantum technologies and nanotechnology all need a strong domestic manufacturing base.”

Perhaps there are those who sincerely believe in the existence of some wizard or super-computer or fortune-teller or bureaucrat who knows the future, and who can use that knowledge to decide how much money to take from farmer A to throw at robotics company B instead of robotics company C or nanotechnology company D. But history suggests that limiting federal involvement to specific, targeted national security needs is an approach that’s much more likely to work.

Telling pharmaceutical companies how to make drugs and Apple how to make iPhones would make us weaker and worse-off.

____________

Data Notes:

Ventilator imports based on HTS number 9019.20.0000, “ozone therapy, oxygen therapy, aerosol therapy, artificial respiration or other therapeutic respiration apparatus; parts and accessories.”

Medical goods calculations based on NAICS number 3254, "Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing," and NAICS number 3391, "Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing." 

Antibiotic imports based on HTS number 3004.10, “medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing penicillins or derivatives thereof, or streptomycins or their derivatives,” and HTS number 3004.20, “medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing antibiotics, nesoi.”

_________

Bryan Riley is Director of the NTU’s Free Trade Initiative. This column was originally published here.

The COVID-19 Crisis: Our Crushed Economy

Part I of a Projected Three-Part Series

by Ray Keating

The Keating Files – May 15, 2020

Make no mistake, the coronavirus pandemic and resulting government shutdowns of large parts of economy have had devastating effects across our economy, and the impact will not be quickly reversed. In fact, with misguided policymaking after COVID-19 has come under control (hopefully via vaccines and/or therapeutics), our economic ills could be further extended.

It pays to keep in mind that whenever the economy goes seriously off the rails, some kind of government action usually can be identified that either caused the mess or made it worse. In our current situation, the rapid spread of this virus, the threat to the lives of individuals, and the actual resulting deaths had their own negative consequences for the economy, and then governmental efforts – largely necessary though far from perfect (anyone who expects something even close to efficiency from government in anything doesn’t understand government) – have resulted in harsh economic consequences.

This column is not meant as an argument against what the government has done, nor as some kind of support for all that government has implemented. It’s also not meant to align with those arguing irresponsibly for an immediate, mask-less reopening of the economy with little concern, it seems, for ongoing efforts against spreading this virus. What follows is a look at key indicators describing our grim state of economic affairs.

First, real GDP (i.e., inflation-adjusted gross domestic product) in the first quarter plunged by 4.8 percent, with all major categories of economic activity declining dramatically, including consumer spending, business investment and trade. During the post-World-War-II era, there were only seven quarters when the economy declined by larger percentages.

Second, information coming in about the start of the second quarter points to an even larger drop in GDP. For example, retail sales plunged by 16.4 percent in April. That was the biggest monthly decline in a dataset going back to 1992. Industrial production – that is, the real output of the manufacturing, mining, and electric and gas utilities – tumbled by 11.2 percent in April. That was the largest monthly decline on record in an index that dates back 101 years. The drop in manufacturing production was even larger at 13.7 percent – again, biggest decline on record.

Third, jobs are disappearing at a frightening pace. Initial weekly unemployment claims over the first eight weeks of the COVID-19 crisis tallied up to 36.5 million. The story from the April employment report arguably was even worse. Perhaps most distressing was the fact that the employment-population ratio in April fell to the lowest level ever recorded in a dataset going back to 1948, plummeting from 61.1 percent in February to 60 percent in March, and then to 51.3 percent in April. 

Fourth, entrepreneurship is suffering as well. For example, the number of unincorporated self-employed individuals – an important measure of small business and startup activity – declined in April to its lowest level since January 1980. 

For good measure, the Census Bureau recently reported that business applications for tax IDs – one measure of business formation (though far from complete) – took a dive of 4.5 percent in the first quarter of this year. In addition, high-propensity business applications – which are businesses with a high likelihood to turn into businesses with payrolls – fell by 5.4 percent in April. These measures of entrepreneurial activity promise to fall further in the second quarter of this year.

Indeed, there’s nothing positive going on in the U.S. economy currently. We’re likely to see the steepest decline in economic activity during the second quarter of this year (that is, the current quarter) since the Great Depression.

After reviewing these grim numbers and trends, it’s critical to understand that these aren’t just some cold statistics detached from reality. Instead, they quantify reality. These numbers reflect or communicate real economic hardship for tens of millions of Americans across the nation. At the same time, these numbers do not negate the realities of mounting coronavirus deaths, and the understanding that the number of deaths could have been much worse, and still threaten to get worse. More on that in Part II in this series.

__________

Ray Keating is a columnist, economist, podcaster and entrepreneur.  You can order his new book Behind Enemy Lines: Conservative Communiques from Left-Wing New York  from Amazon or signed books at RayKeatingOnline.com. His other recent nonfiction book is Free Trade Rocks! 10 Points on International Trade Everyone Should Know. Keating also is a novelist. His latest novels are  The Traitor: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel, which is the 12^th book in the series, and the second edition of Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel with a new Author Introduction. The views expressed here are his own – after all, no one else should be held responsible for this stuff, right?

Also, tune in to Ray Keating’s podcasts – the PRESS CLUB C Podcastand the Free Enterprise in Three Minutes Podcast 

Trump’s Huge Recession

by Ray Keating

Way back in 1970, the late Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman wrote, “I have been impressed time and again by the schizophrenic character of many businessmen. They are capable of being extremely farsighted and clearheaded in matters that are internal to their businesses. They are incredibly shortsighted and muddleheaded in matters that are outside their business but affect the possible survival of business in general.”

This phenomenon has only spread over the past 45-plus years. We now are constantly berated by corporate executives and high-profile investors saying things about the economy and public policy that make absolutely no economic sense. These leaders in business turn out to be economic illiterates.

Unfortunately, one of these economic illiterate businessmen just happens to be leading the race for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016. Of course, I speak of businessman and reality TV star Donald Trump.

It’s not easy figuring out how Trump came to rise and stay atop the GOP field. But to a significant degree, the Trump train keeps chugging along due to the fuel of populism. Specifically, Trump has played on or ginned up people’s fears, in particular, irrational fears of foreigners. After all, Trump is the guy who is going to fix “bad trade deals,” apparently by imposing massive tariffs on products from nations with which we run trade deficits, like Mexico, China and Japan. Trump also plans to create a “deportation force” to move 11-12 million illegal immigrants out of the nation.

While this might be classic populist politics, it’s also classically wrongheaded populist economics. Trump misses simple economic facts.

For example, in the U.S., periods of higher economic growth usually coincide with shrinking trade surpluses or mounting trade deficits, while economic slowdowns and recessions coincide with declines in trade deficits. The U.S. trade deficit shrank dramatically during the 2007-2009 recession, declined during the slowdown and recession in 1990-91, and during the economic woes of 1979 to 1982, the trade deficit not only declined, but shifted to a surplus during two of those years. Indeed, the surest way to “cure” a trade deficit is with a recession.

For good measure, the last time the U.S. went down the path of protectionism, it did not turn out well, to say the least. As a result of protectionist tariff measures passed in 1921 and 1922, and, most egregiously, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, trade declined. Most egregious, the Smoot-Hawley measure triggered the Great Depression. It took decades for trade to regain previous levels.

Make no mistake, free trade – that is, reducing governmental barriers and costs to trade – is a positive for economic growth; for increased opportunity for U.S. entrepreneurs, small businesses and workers; as well as for expanding choices and reducing costs for U.S. consumers.

And trade is increasingly important to the U.S. economy. From 2000 to 2015, for example, the growth in real U.S. exports equaled 22.5 percent of the growth in real GDP, and the expansion in real total trade (i.e., exports plus imports) came in at 41.6 percent of real GDP growth. Also, consider that in 1950, U.S. exports equaled 4.2 percent of GDP, and imports registered 4 percent, while in 2015, exports had jumped to 12.6 percent of GDP, and imports to 15.5 percent of the U.S. economy.

Donald Trump misses all of this, apparently.

As for immigration, few disagree that the current system, which allowed for 11-12 million people to be in the nation illegally, needs to be fixed. Indeed, respect for the rule of law demands immigration reform. At the same time, it must be recognized that most immigrants – both legal and illegal – come to this nation seeking a better life, and they contribute as workers, business owners and consumers. For good measure, immigrants also benefit the economy by overwhelmingly doing work that is complementary to the native born.

Given these economic realities, the Trump agenda of tariffs and deportation would inflict serious harm on the U.S. economy.

On trade, American Action Forum, a free enterprise group, has estimated that Trump’s plan for imposing significant tariffs on imports from China and Mexico would hit U.S. consumers with $250 billion in annual costs.

For good measure, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has projected that the Trump tariffs on China and Mexico would bring about a significant recession: “The U.S. recession would set in within the first year under Trump’s proposed trade policies, which include a 35 percent tariff on imports from Mexico and a 45 percent tax on goods coming in from China. Over the next three years, the U.S. economy would shrink by 4.6 percent and the unemployment rate would nearly double to 9.5 percent.”

As for the Trump – as well as Senator Ted Cruz – deportation agenda, the story for the economy gets even worse. The American Action Forum offers the following points and estimates:

• To deport all illegal immigrants in the nation in two years, as Trump proposes, the federal taxpayer costs would be massive. These would include federal immigration apprehension personnel increasing from 4,844 positions to 90,582 positions; the number of immigration detention beds jumping from 34,000 to 348,831; immigration courts rising from 58 to 1,316; and the number of federal attorneys legally processing undocumented immigrants increasing from 1,430 to 32,445.

• As for the economic costs, they are even more frightening. AAF reports: “The result is a sudden and deep recession similar to what the United States recently experienced during the Great Recession. Let’s say that full immigration enforcement starts at the beginning of 2017 and the U.S. government successfully removes all undocumented immigrants by the end of 2018. At the end of 2018, the labor force would be 6.4 percent smaller than if the government had not removed those immigrants. Relative to CBO baseline projections, the labor force would decrease by 10.3 million workers. As a result, the labor force would fall to its lowest level since 2006. In addition, the labor force participation rate would fall from about 62.3 percent to 60.7 percent, the lowest level since the 1970s. The steep decline in the labor force would cause the economy to decline sharply. At the end of 2018, the economy would be 5.7 percent smaller than it would be if the government did not remove all undocumented immigrants. For purposes of comparison, note that the decline in real GDP during the Great Recession was quite similar – 6.3 percent. This suggests that real GDP would be about $1 trillion lower in 2018 than CBO’s baseline estimate, wiping out all economic growth that would have occurred during the previous three years.”

The most likely outcome of the Trump tariff and deportation agenda? A huge recession.

None of this should be surprising to anyone who understands the economics and history of both trade and immigration.

But maybe Trump has an excuse. After all, his business career seems to be best known for four high-profile business bankruptcies in a span of 18 years. Milton Friedman was bewildered by businessmen being “farsighted and clearheaded” in their own businesses but “shortsighted and muddleheaded” on matters outside their business. It can be argued that Trump is shortsighted and muddleheaded on matters both inside and outside his businesses.

______________

Mr. Keating is an economist and novelist who writes on a wide range of topics. His Pastor Stephen Grant novels have received considerable acclaim, including The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel being a finalist for KFUO radio’s Book of the Year 2014, and Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel winning Book of the Year 2015.

The Pastor Stephen Grant Novels are available at Amazon…

Murderer’s Row: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

The River: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

An Advent for Religious Liberty: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Root of All Evil? A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel

Warrior Monk: A Pastor Stephen Grant Novel