Reddit reviews Why Globalization Works (Yale Nota Bene)

Undercover economist by Tim Harford is a really good intro to the issues we've been talking about

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Undercover-Economist-Tim-Harford/dp/0349119856

Why globalization works by martin wolff is a more in depth look

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Globalization-Works-Yale-Nota-Bene/dp/0300107773/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1374514554&sr=1-1&keywords=why+globalization+works

Autogenerated.

I’m Martin Wolf and I have been the Financial Times chief economics commentator for over 20 years. I write about many aspects of the global economy - finance, trade, economic development, the rise of China and a great deal else. AMA!

I have been the FT's chief economics commentator for over 20 years. I write about many aspects of the global economy - finance, trade, economic development, the rise of China and a great deal else.

I view the policies of Donald Trump - his huge tax cuts, his criticism of the Federal Reserve, his protectionism and his trade war with China - as very dangerous to global economic and political stability. I think the UK's decision to leave the EU was a big mistake.

My books include The Shifts and The Shocks: What we’ve learned – and have still to learn – from the financial crisis, Fixing Global Finance, and Why Globalization Works.

I'm happy to try to answer questions on the current state of the global economy, China-US relations and anything else in the broad sphere of economics that interests you.

Proof: https://i.redd.it/da3w8411fzt11.jpg


-----------------------------------------------------------

IamAbot_v01. Alpha version. Under care of /u/oppon.
Comment 1 of 1
Updated at 2018-10-25 17:59:02.408642

Next update in approximately 20 mins at 2018-10-25 18:19:02.408678

I've got to be honest, though I agree entirely with the theory presented in my previous post, I wasn't actually stating my own speculative opinion, I was (accurately) parroting the empirically based works of Chang. I think that if you read his book [Kicking Away The Ladder] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kicking-Away-Ladder-Institutions-Globalization/dp/1843310279), or for a more accessible work [Bad Samaritans] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Bad-Samaritans-Secrets-Nations-Prosperity/dp/1905211376) you would be hard pressed to disagree with his account of economic history.

Indeed, almost all predominant advocates of free trade begrudgingly accept Chang's view, but counter that such policies are no longer possible nowadays, given how globalized and intertwined the various national economies are. For an example of this kind of argument see Martin Wolf's [Why Globalization Works] (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Globalization-Works-Yale-Nota-Bene/dp/0300107773).

I didn't really want to challenge your various retorts of my previous comment, because as I stated it's not my argument. But I would like to say that I think it is fair to describe your depiction of South Korea as inaccurate. Whilst true that Korea produce goods that are exported to other developed countries, this is no bad thing - all developed countries trade between each other, as it has been shown to be the most efficient way to produce things. Also, you imply that Korea has a particularly unequal society, but a cursory look at the national [gini-coefficient rankings] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality), which ranks countries by income equality, shows that Korea has a more equal society than Canada, France, Belgium, the UK, Ireland, Spain, Italy, New Zealand, and a significantly greater level of equality than the United States.