Director of MIT Sloan’s Office of International Programs Stuart Krusell
What do the economies of Latin America and China have in common? They are both extremely interdependent on the other for growth.
China purchases a significant percentage of raw materials from Latin America, which are used in the manufacturing of goods. Many of those goods are then sold back to Latin America. This cycle has increased over the last decade, as China’s trade with the region has surged more than 20-fold since 2000. So while they are competitors, they also are trade partners. It’s a slice of globalization that is representative of the larger world.
China and Latin America’s relationship becomes even more intriguing when you consider the geo-political environments of both regions. What is the impact of Brazil’s elections on its trade partnership? Populist rhetoric to keep jobs local and not to be so dependent on China is appealing to many, but what happens to the region’s economy if trade with China decreases? Further, how do the corruption investigations in China impact trade? If China’s GDP is affected, it could mean the country is buying fewer natural resources from Latin America.
In an exclusive interview with CNBC-TV18’s Malvika Jain on July 02, 2014, SP Kothari, Deputy Dean, MIT Sloan School of Management gave his take on the expectations from Arun Jaitely’s maiden Union Budget and his outlook on the road ahead for the Indian economy.
Below is the verbatim transcript of the interview:
Q: Government is in the process of preparing its first Budget since it took charge. What should be the priority areas where the government should focus?
A: Mr. Jaitley has to recognize and Mr. Modi also has to recognize that changing the furniture around the house is not going to make the house look that much different. It might make it look somewhat different but that is not a game changer and they have to think in terms of policies that dramatically alter if the goal is to increase the per capita income from where it is currently at about 1500 to say about USD 5000 in 10 years. Those game changing policies will have to focus on population growth, they will have to focus on FDI, they’ll have to focus on how our governance is and how our law enforcement is. Just to name a few set of policies that Mr. Jaitley should pay attention to in the maiden budget that he would be presenting on the 10th of July.
Q: Arun Jaitley has indicated that sector specific FDI is something that the government is going to be looking at. Do you think that that is going to be sufficient to spur investment flow into the country?
A: People’s decision to spur investment only partially hinges on what sectors are open for an investment. People’s decision to invest is influenced to a large extent by what kind of climate there is; climate includes what kind of law enforcement there is, what kind of labour supply there is, what kind of tax regime there is, what kind of regulation exists in general and is it easy to do business or not – open new businesses as well as close new businesses. So, the look has to be much more holistic in attracting foreign investment rather than a piecemeal approach by saying that we will open certain sectors for investment and wait for foreign investment to flow. I don’t think that is going to change or make a dramatic improvement in the investment climate.
As the release of January’s jobs report will likely remind us on Friday, unemployment is a double whammy for white-collar American workers. In addition to experiencing financial stress, many unemployed workers end up fearing that something is deeply wrong with them.
I interviewed more than 170 white-collar job seekers in the U.S. and Israel between 2004-2006 and between 2011-2012 for my new book, Flawed System/Flawed Self: Job Searching and Unemployment Experiences, and I was surprised by how many of the unemployed Americans confided that, in the course of their job searches, they had come to feel “flawed.” Israelis who had gone just as long without finding a job didn’t tend to blame themselves that way; they were convinced it was a flawed system that kept them unemployed. It didn’t seem likely to me that Americans were inherently more self-blaming than Israelis. Instead, my research revealed how the particular and peculiar process of American white-collar job searching — a process I call the “chemistry game” — renders the players vulnerable to a debilitating self-blame.
We’ve all heard the message from our parents: If you work hard, get a good education, and play by the rules, you will do well in life. Baby boomers like me were able to turn that formula into the American Dream.
But while we were able to graduate from high school, vocational school programs, or college into an economy that was growing and providing us with great opportunities, we cannot make the same promise to our children and grandchildren today. Instead of hope, the nation faces a widening economic divide; according to Gallup and other surveys, a majority of Americans agree that the U.S. has been going in the wrong direction for at least a decade, and they expect thenext generation will have a lower standard of living than ours.
Is this gloomy outlook inevitable? Have the global economy, ever-advancing technology, and other forces left us with no control over the destiny of future generations? Only if we choose to do nothing. Reversing course is possible, but it will take a cross-generational effort by baby boomers and next-generation leaders to negotiate what I call a New Social Contract that fits and works with the features of the future economy and workforce.
Thomas Kochan is the George Maverick Bunker Professor of Management, a Professor of Work and Employment Research and Engineering Systems, and the Co-Director of the MIT Sloan Institute for Work and Employment Research at the MIT Sloan School of Management.
The International Monetary Fund is an immensely useful organization, able to deliver substantial amounts of financial and technical assistance at short notice to almost any place in the world. It also has the great advantage of almost always being perceived as incredibly boring.
Unfortunately for the IMF, it now needs a slightly higher public profile to convince the US Congress to agree to some important reforms. The Ukrainian crisis may prove helpful, though that appears less likely now – which may be a good thing to the extent that one unintended consequence could be a loan to Ukraine that is larger than it really needs.