WEBVTT - Jeffrey Sachs On Making Foreign Policy Reflect Economics

0:00:02.240 --> 0:00:06.080
<v Speaker 1>Jeffrey Sachs has been studying the intersection of policy, finance,

0:00:06.160 --> 0:00:10.760
<v Speaker 1>and development for decades. Now, more than ever, he says,

0:00:10.840 --> 0:00:14.440
<v Speaker 1>the US needs a foreign policy that reflects the big

0:00:14.520 --> 0:00:19.400
<v Speaker 1>shifts in economic power, a state craft that reflects America's

0:00:19.520 --> 0:00:23.880
<v Speaker 1>role as a superpower, but a chastened one, an economy

0:00:23.960 --> 0:00:27.720
<v Speaker 1>that no longer has the capacity to bend the rest

0:00:27.920 --> 0:00:32.400
<v Speaker 1>to its will. Donald Trump didn't create that need, he

0:00:32.479 --> 0:00:44.800
<v Speaker 1>does make it more urgent. Welcome to Benchmark, a show

0:00:44.840 --> 0:00:49.160
<v Speaker 1>about the global ecod I'm Daniel Moss, columnist at Bloomberg

0:00:49.280 --> 0:00:53.479
<v Speaker 1>Opinion in New York. Name scot Landman, Economics editor with

0:00:53.600 --> 0:00:57.920
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg News in Washington. Jeffrey Sacks, of professor at Columbia

0:00:58.040 --> 0:01:01.280
<v Speaker 1>University in New York, is the author of a new

0:01:01.360 --> 0:01:07.480
<v Speaker 1>foreign policy, Beyond American Exceptionalism, published by Columbia University Press

0:01:08.120 --> 0:01:11.039
<v Speaker 1>out October two. He joins us this week, Jeff, Welcome

0:01:11.080 --> 0:01:15.360
<v Speaker 1>to Benchmark. Great to be with you, Jeff. Every few

0:01:15.440 --> 0:01:19.240
<v Speaker 1>years there are calls for a new approach to America's

0:01:19.280 --> 0:01:23.480
<v Speaker 1>dealings with the world. What's unique about this moment that

0:01:23.560 --> 0:01:28.000
<v Speaker 1>warrants a big change? Maybe we've needed a change for

0:01:28.160 --> 0:01:35.440
<v Speaker 1>quite a while. America has been admissed in wars almost perpetually,

0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:42.160
<v Speaker 1>almost NonStop. Now for decades, we seem to be creating

0:01:42.880 --> 0:01:46.600
<v Speaker 1>lots of crises, or engaged in a lot of crises,

0:01:47.040 --> 0:01:52.280
<v Speaker 1>and we're not solving major challenges that we face, such

0:01:52.320 --> 0:01:58.440
<v Speaker 1>as the global environmental crises. So what we are doing

0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:02.880
<v Speaker 1>is not working, and I think that that's why I'm

0:02:02.920 --> 0:02:05.280
<v Speaker 1>calling for a new foreign policy. But perhaps for years

0:02:05.280 --> 0:02:08.200
<v Speaker 1>and years there's been a sense that we're not on

0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:13.080
<v Speaker 1>the right course. Naturally, different critics would have a different

0:02:13.120 --> 0:02:16.440
<v Speaker 1>point of view. My point of view is that America

0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:21.520
<v Speaker 1>got awfully arrogant in thinking that it runs the show.

0:02:22.440 --> 0:02:27.359
<v Speaker 1>I used the familiar term American exceptionalism, and I think

0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:29.359
<v Speaker 1>that this is a big part of our hang up.

0:02:29.840 --> 0:02:32.360
<v Speaker 1>And when people remind an audience that the U. S.

0:02:32.400 --> 0:02:35.280
<v Speaker 1>Military is the most powerful in the world, we seem

0:02:35.320 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 1>to hear that fairly often. Is that necessarily wrong or

0:02:40.400 --> 0:02:42.840
<v Speaker 1>or does it miss the point? Or is it is

0:02:42.919 --> 0:02:48.400
<v Speaker 1>it not really that relevant anymore? We are far and

0:02:48.440 --> 0:02:52.680
<v Speaker 1>away the most powerful military in the world. We have

0:02:54.200 --> 0:02:58.040
<v Speaker 1>nuclear warheads that, as they say, can make the dust bounce.

0:02:58.320 --> 0:03:02.520
<v Speaker 1>We can destroy the world many times over. We have

0:03:03.880 --> 0:03:09.800
<v Speaker 1>hundreds sometimes it's numbered around seven hundred military bases and

0:03:09.840 --> 0:03:14.360
<v Speaker 1>around seventy countries around the world. We can project power

0:03:15.080 --> 0:03:20.040
<v Speaker 1>on our naval fleet, we have a basis for intervening

0:03:20.639 --> 0:03:26.320
<v Speaker 1>in other countries. So this military power is vast, without question,

0:03:26.400 --> 0:03:29.440
<v Speaker 1>But what is it getting us? What? What? What is

0:03:29.480 --> 0:03:35.400
<v Speaker 1>the point? After all? Well, it does, of course provide

0:03:35.440 --> 0:03:38.880
<v Speaker 1>a defense. No one would dream of invading the United States.

0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:43.920
<v Speaker 1>That's fine. But what it also has done has led

0:03:44.040 --> 0:03:49.680
<v Speaker 1>us into one conflict after another in Syria, in Iraq,

0:03:49.960 --> 0:03:55.880
<v Speaker 1>in Afghanistan, in Libya, in Somalia, in countless other countries

0:03:56.280 --> 0:04:04.440
<v Speaker 1>were covertly engaged or provide aiding air support as in Yemen,

0:04:05.280 --> 0:04:09.640
<v Speaker 1>and we're not solving anything from these conflicts, just like

0:04:10.200 --> 0:04:15.680
<v Speaker 1>we experienced with the Vietnam War, America with over powering

0:04:15.920 --> 0:04:22.080
<v Speaker 1>military strength, but we ended up leaving after more than

0:04:22.120 --> 0:04:26.200
<v Speaker 1>a million Vietnamese died in that war, and I would

0:04:26.240 --> 0:04:29.599
<v Speaker 1>say it was a war for absolutely no point. How

0:04:29.680 --> 0:04:33.960
<v Speaker 1>critical are the tectonic shifts that the global economy has

0:04:34.000 --> 0:04:37.040
<v Speaker 1>witnessed in the past few decades to the foreign policy

0:04:37.200 --> 0:04:44.160
<v Speaker 1>challenge presenting us now? My basic argument is historical. I

0:04:44.240 --> 0:04:48.960
<v Speaker 1>point out that because of the Industrial Revolution, Britain became

0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:52.760
<v Speaker 1>the dominant power of the nineteenth century. It was the

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:57.640
<v Speaker 1>pos Britonica, the British Peace, the British Empire on which

0:04:57.680 --> 0:05:00.800
<v Speaker 1>the sun never set. And then I explained that in

0:05:00.839 --> 0:05:04.480
<v Speaker 1>the twentieth century, because of World War One, the Great

0:05:04.520 --> 0:05:09.800
<v Speaker 1>Depression in World War Two, essentially the British Empire faded

0:05:10.360 --> 0:05:15.560
<v Speaker 1>and the American Empire succeeded it. And in ninety one

0:05:15.800 --> 0:05:21.480
<v Speaker 1>the Time magazine editor Henry Loose christened the American Century,

0:05:22.000 --> 0:05:25.400
<v Speaker 1>and that was the declaration that America now rules the

0:05:25.480 --> 0:05:29.320
<v Speaker 1>roost and that we are the top dog in the world,

0:05:29.360 --> 0:05:33.720
<v Speaker 1>which was the case even during the Cold War when

0:05:33.800 --> 0:05:38.360
<v Speaker 1>it was a confrontation with the Soviet Bloc. The US

0:05:38.480 --> 0:05:45.720
<v Speaker 1>was far and away economically, more developed, more advanced, more prosperous.

0:05:45.960 --> 0:05:48.080
<v Speaker 1>Of course, both sides had enough to blow up the

0:05:48.080 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 1>world many times over. It's almost a miracle that it

0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:56.840
<v Speaker 1>didn't happen when the Soviet Union collapsed at the end

0:05:56.839 --> 0:06:00.400
<v Speaker 1>of the nineteen eighties, and then literally does of the

0:06:01.400 --> 0:06:08.960
<v Speaker 1>politically in December, the US took that as the full

0:06:09.200 --> 0:06:13.360
<v Speaker 1>confirmation that not only was it the American Century, we

0:06:13.360 --> 0:06:17.159
<v Speaker 1>were the only superpower standing. It was then called the

0:06:17.279 --> 0:06:23.680
<v Speaker 1>unipolar world. I found that very naive, very arrogant, and

0:06:23.800 --> 0:06:27.599
<v Speaker 1>very risky, because, after all, when you're five percent of

0:06:27.640 --> 0:06:31.520
<v Speaker 1>the world population, are you really running the rest of

0:06:31.520 --> 0:06:34.920
<v Speaker 1>the world? You really presume it. And I watched with

0:06:35.000 --> 0:06:38.080
<v Speaker 1>my own eyes and visits year after year the rise

0:06:38.120 --> 0:06:43.919
<v Speaker 1>of China, which really began its rapid ascent in eight

0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:50.400
<v Speaker 1>So we were declaring the unipolar world. America's the colossus,

0:06:50.520 --> 0:06:54.680
<v Speaker 1>America's the new Rome, America's the indispensable country, America's the

0:06:54.720 --> 0:06:59.360
<v Speaker 1>exceptional country. Just at the moment when a very large

0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:04.080
<v Speaker 1>country with four times the population was soaring ahead in

0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:11.560
<v Speaker 1>terms of investment, infrastructure, technological capacity, and by some measures

0:07:12.560 --> 0:07:17.360
<v Speaker 1>which one can technically argue about, China's roughly the same

0:07:17.400 --> 0:07:21.600
<v Speaker 1>size economy as the United States now, or or even larger,

0:07:22.320 --> 0:07:26.320
<v Speaker 1>And that suddenly runs against the grain of what do

0:07:26.360 --> 0:07:29.520
<v Speaker 1>you mean, were the unipolar power? How can China be

0:07:30.360 --> 0:07:33.600
<v Speaker 1>the same size? How can China be the larger trade

0:07:33.640 --> 0:07:37.000
<v Speaker 1>partner of other countries in the world. Now this is

0:07:37.320 --> 0:07:42.240
<v Speaker 1>again motivating yet another wave. This is the fundamental driver

0:07:43.120 --> 0:07:49.080
<v Speaker 1>of Trump trying to really break the international rules of

0:07:49.120 --> 0:07:52.920
<v Speaker 1>the game, because he he thinks that the US will

0:07:52.960 --> 0:07:58.240
<v Speaker 1>fall behind if these rules continue the way they are.

0:07:59.200 --> 0:08:03.080
<v Speaker 1>In one sense, He's right. If we actually play fair

0:08:03.120 --> 0:08:06.240
<v Speaker 1>and open, it wouldn't be surprising that a country four

0:08:06.320 --> 0:08:09.440
<v Speaker 1>times more populous than the United States and very clever

0:08:09.600 --> 0:08:14.200
<v Speaker 1>and uh and very effectively governed, would be able to

0:08:15.200 --> 0:08:19.920
<v Speaker 1>reach American technology levels. And that that is exactly what's happening.

0:08:20.960 --> 0:08:23.000
<v Speaker 1>Let's go back to the end of the Cold War.

0:08:23.320 --> 0:08:28.160
<v Speaker 1>President George H. W. Bush is generally praised for his

0:08:28.280 --> 0:08:32.160
<v Speaker 1>handling of that period. You had a vantage point as

0:08:32.200 --> 0:08:36.000
<v Speaker 1>an advisor to Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the

0:08:36.080 --> 0:08:39.800
<v Speaker 1>Soviet Union. Jeff, what did you observe well? I did

0:08:39.880 --> 0:08:45.880
<v Speaker 1>have an unbelievable seat at the theater, really unbelievable. And

0:08:46.360 --> 0:08:52.960
<v Speaker 1>where George Bush Sr. Was quite good was nineteen eighties,

0:08:53.600 --> 0:08:59.200
<v Speaker 1>eight eight nine in teaming up with Gorbachev for a

0:08:59.360 --> 0:09:07.360
<v Speaker 1>peaceful transformation of Eastern Europe and for German reunification. I

0:09:07.400 --> 0:09:14.960
<v Speaker 1>believed strongly then that Gorbachev's vision of a peaceful common

0:09:15.000 --> 0:09:18.920
<v Speaker 1>home of Eurasia that would stretch from Rotterdam to a

0:09:19.000 --> 0:09:21.680
<v Speaker 1>lot of astok as he said, from the Atlantic to

0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:25.520
<v Speaker 1>the Pacific in a common home was was really a

0:09:25.559 --> 0:09:30.120
<v Speaker 1>great idea. But the idea that Cheney had, who was

0:09:30.160 --> 0:09:33.160
<v Speaker 1>the Defense Secretary at the time, and started to be

0:09:33.240 --> 0:09:37.960
<v Speaker 1>implemented was head No, we won. Now we're on top.

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:41.360
<v Speaker 1>This isn't an open world, this is now a US

0:09:41.520 --> 0:09:46.400
<v Speaker 1>led world. And the so called neo CON's began their ascent,

0:09:46.520 --> 0:09:50.280
<v Speaker 1>and I was chagrined at the time, but not really

0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:55.079
<v Speaker 1>understanding the full import of how misguided this was. I

0:09:55.720 --> 0:10:02.959
<v Speaker 1>was rather idealistic. I thought Gorbachev was terrific, and I thought,

0:10:03.320 --> 0:10:07.400
<v Speaker 1>let's all live in peace, as it were. And instead

0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:12.200
<v Speaker 1>what the US did was start to expand NATO. One

0:10:12.280 --> 0:10:14.880
<v Speaker 1>might have thought NATO could have been disbanded. It was

0:10:15.480 --> 0:10:20.520
<v Speaker 1>the military alliance against a country that no longer existed.

0:10:21.200 --> 0:10:25.040
<v Speaker 1>But no, not only did it continue, but it started

0:10:25.080 --> 0:10:30.080
<v Speaker 1>to expand eastward uh and pretty relentlessly, until, as I

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 1>point out in the book, it really crossed a trip

0:10:33.440 --> 0:10:38.360
<v Speaker 1>wire in two thousand and eight when the US invited

0:10:38.760 --> 0:10:44.760
<v Speaker 1>Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, and Putin said, are you kidding?

0:10:45.400 --> 0:10:49.920
<v Speaker 1>That's our border? No way, And that is a lot

0:10:50.000 --> 0:10:57.600
<v Speaker 1>of the recrudescence of the tensions that are plainly evident

0:10:57.920 --> 0:11:47.120
<v Speaker 1>until now, ye Jeff moving eastward from Soviet Union in Russia.

0:11:47.320 --> 0:11:51.040
<v Speaker 1>I have to admit that, as a journalist covering economics,

0:11:51.160 --> 0:11:54.480
<v Speaker 1>I went straight to the economic section of your book

0:11:54.480 --> 0:11:57.520
<v Speaker 1>and found the framing of the whole situation as you

0:11:57.640 --> 0:12:01.880
<v Speaker 1>discussed earlier, As you discussed earlier, very interesting. I was

0:12:01.960 --> 0:12:08.400
<v Speaker 1>particularly struck by your writing about the japan relationship with

0:12:08.480 --> 0:12:13.360
<v Speaker 1>the US and the parallels with today's relationship between the

0:12:13.480 --> 0:12:16.600
<v Speaker 1>US and China. And and you talk about how the

0:12:16.679 --> 0:12:22.480
<v Speaker 1>US was responsible or at least complicit, in Japan's economic

0:12:22.559 --> 0:12:26.360
<v Speaker 1>collapse after its boom in the nineties eighties, and now

0:12:26.440 --> 0:12:28.559
<v Speaker 1>the US seems to be trying some of the same

0:12:29.080 --> 0:12:33.120
<v Speaker 1>kinds of tactics against China. How do you see those

0:12:33.200 --> 0:12:37.240
<v Speaker 1>parallels and why do you think again America will will

0:12:37.320 --> 0:12:42.400
<v Speaker 1>not be able to contain China's economic rise. Well, let

0:12:42.400 --> 0:12:46.960
<v Speaker 1>me say first that my view is a bit heterodoxident unusual.

0:12:47.160 --> 0:12:50.360
<v Speaker 1>It would not be the textbook or the mainstream view,

0:12:51.640 --> 0:12:56.200
<v Speaker 1>and I can't prove it to the decimal point. But

0:12:56.920 --> 0:13:02.920
<v Speaker 1>having been quite involved with Japanese policymakers and US policymakers

0:13:03.000 --> 0:13:08.640
<v Speaker 1>over the years, my sense is that in the nineties

0:13:08.640 --> 0:13:12.880
<v Speaker 1>seventies when Japan was soaring, and then in the early

0:13:12.960 --> 0:13:17.679
<v Speaker 1>eighties when one of my colleagues at Harvard, wonderful sociologist

0:13:17.679 --> 0:13:21.640
<v Speaker 1>and writer As Vogel, called Japan has number one uh.

0:13:21.679 --> 0:13:24.520
<v Speaker 1>And there was the talk that, well, Japan is going

0:13:24.559 --> 0:13:29.080
<v Speaker 1>to outstrip the US as the dominant industrial power of

0:13:29.120 --> 0:13:36.160
<v Speaker 1>the world. That American strategic thinkers, the formers of statecraft, said,

0:13:36.800 --> 0:13:42.040
<v Speaker 1>no way, anyway, Japan is under our security umbrella. Ours

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:45.600
<v Speaker 1>Japan depends on US, and no way Japan is going

0:13:45.640 --> 0:13:48.920
<v Speaker 1>to take our semiconductor industry. No way it's going to

0:13:49.440 --> 0:13:52.680
<v Speaker 1>take our steel industry. No way it's going to take

0:13:52.720 --> 0:13:56.400
<v Speaker 1>our auto companies down. We're going to stop that. And

0:13:56.640 --> 0:14:00.800
<v Speaker 1>all through the eighties, the US, which has a lot

0:14:00.840 --> 0:14:05.640
<v Speaker 1>of leverage on Japan, first put in so called voluntary

0:14:05.760 --> 0:14:12.840
<v Speaker 1>export restraints, and then in eighty six James Baker uh

0:14:13.040 --> 0:14:19.560
<v Speaker 1>engineered is Treasury Secretary engineered a sharp appreciation of the

0:14:19.760 --> 0:14:26.800
<v Speaker 1>end really undermining Japan's export competitiveness. And in nineteen to

0:14:28.440 --> 0:14:33.280
<v Speaker 1>the Japanese financial bubble burst and Japan went into the

0:14:33.360 --> 0:14:39.440
<v Speaker 1>doldrums for twenty years, not a profound crisis, but definitely

0:14:39.520 --> 0:14:44.200
<v Speaker 1>hinto the doldrums. And that whole idea of Japan overtaking

0:14:44.280 --> 0:14:48.800
<v Speaker 1>US was gone. And I would say, in my interpretation,

0:14:49.120 --> 0:14:55.400
<v Speaker 1>vanquished by active high level US state craft. So is

0:14:55.440 --> 0:14:59.360
<v Speaker 1>there a template there for the current situation. I think

0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:03.240
<v Speaker 1>we're walking the same game plan play out right now,

0:15:04.400 --> 0:15:06.960
<v Speaker 1>and I see it in a number of ways. The

0:15:07.080 --> 0:15:11.840
<v Speaker 1>US is saying no to China's exports, trying to block

0:15:11.960 --> 0:15:16.040
<v Speaker 1>the way. And then if the yuan the redmand b

0:15:16.600 --> 0:15:22.080
<v Speaker 1>starts to depreciate, they scream currency manipulation, currency manipulation, and

0:15:22.120 --> 0:15:28.239
<v Speaker 1>the Chinese right now lean against appreciation, partly because they

0:15:28.240 --> 0:15:31.960
<v Speaker 1>want to avoid the charge of manipulating the currency. To me,

0:15:32.120 --> 0:15:35.040
<v Speaker 1>this is all a game. What do you mean manipulating

0:15:35.040 --> 0:15:37.320
<v Speaker 1>the currency? You start a trade war, you put on

0:15:37.400 --> 0:15:40.200
<v Speaker 1>export barriers. Of course the currency is going to depreciate,

0:15:40.920 --> 0:15:45.880
<v Speaker 1>But the US goal is to slow the Chinese economy,

0:15:45.920 --> 0:15:49.720
<v Speaker 1>to break the export led growth model, and ultimately to

0:15:49.840 --> 0:15:54.360
<v Speaker 1>stop China's rise. And this I think is not just

0:15:54.520 --> 0:15:58.880
<v Speaker 1>an innocent surmise. This is pretty explicit, and I think

0:15:58.880 --> 0:16:04.880
<v Speaker 1>it's pretty clear from the Trump administration foreign policy documents

0:16:04.920 --> 0:16:10.560
<v Speaker 1>that China is really accused of all sorts of nefarious things,

0:16:10.720 --> 0:16:18.280
<v Speaker 1>which are gross exaggerations, vulgar exaggerations in certain contexts, definitely

0:16:18.640 --> 0:16:25.720
<v Speaker 1>trying to provoke the sense of crisis and use America's

0:16:25.840 --> 0:16:32.320
<v Speaker 1>policy instruments to hurt the Chinese economy. I doubt that

0:16:32.400 --> 0:16:35.880
<v Speaker 1>this is going to work in the end. I think

0:16:35.960 --> 0:16:40.800
<v Speaker 1>it's very regrettable and very dangerous. But the US is

0:16:41.480 --> 0:16:46.040
<v Speaker 1>thinking probably strategically in a sense, not just Trump's whims

0:16:46.440 --> 0:16:49.640
<v Speaker 1>while We're gonna pull off Europe because they depend on

0:16:49.760 --> 0:16:53.480
<v Speaker 1>us for security, and so it's going to be the

0:16:53.600 --> 0:16:57.240
<v Speaker 1>US and Europe. We're gonna block China from gaining new technology.

0:16:57.840 --> 0:17:01.240
<v Speaker 1>Russia's kind of ambivalent in all of this. India is

0:17:01.280 --> 0:17:03.960
<v Speaker 1>going to be on side, So we're progressively going to

0:17:04.119 --> 0:17:09.080
<v Speaker 1>isolate China. That's the idea. I think it's fatuous. I

0:17:09.119 --> 0:17:12.600
<v Speaker 1>think it's dangerous, and it is the kind of actions

0:17:12.680 --> 0:17:19.280
<v Speaker 1>that lead to a spiral of arms race and eventually

0:17:20.000 --> 0:17:25.919
<v Speaker 1>potentially hot conflict because Chinese not just hardliners now, but

0:17:26.359 --> 0:17:31.159
<v Speaker 1>mainstream annalists are saying and it's completely understandable the US

0:17:31.359 --> 0:17:35.760
<v Speaker 1>is trying to break us. A lot of contemporary commentary

0:17:36.119 --> 0:17:40.000
<v Speaker 1>links American retreat in Asia to say, disputes about the

0:17:40.040 --> 0:17:44.440
<v Speaker 1>South China Sea or withdrawal from the Trans Pacific partnership.

0:17:45.280 --> 0:17:49.240
<v Speaker 1>In the book, Jeff, you reach back much further to one,

0:17:49.840 --> 0:17:53.320
<v Speaker 1>the year before Nixon's visit to China, what happened in

0:17:53.440 --> 0:17:58.720
<v Speaker 1>nine one that sets the scene for today. Well, one

0:17:58.760 --> 0:18:03.600
<v Speaker 1>thing that happened in nineteen seventy one is that the

0:18:03.600 --> 0:18:10.640
<v Speaker 1>world order dramatically changed when the US unilaterally ended the

0:18:10.680 --> 0:18:14.320
<v Speaker 1>financial system that had governed from the end of the

0:18:14.359 --> 0:18:20.040
<v Speaker 1>World War two and Nixon unilaterally broke the bond of

0:18:20.520 --> 0:18:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the dollar and gold. That set off many different things,

0:18:25.200 --> 0:18:30.000
<v Speaker 1>including eventually the rise of the Euro. We also had

0:18:30.359 --> 0:18:34.440
<v Speaker 1>then the opening to China, and that was a strategic

0:18:34.800 --> 0:18:39.320
<v Speaker 1>move of the US to try to get a flanking

0:18:39.400 --> 0:18:43.840
<v Speaker 1>maneuver against our adversary, the Soviet Union, by beginning and

0:18:43.920 --> 0:18:48.280
<v Speaker 1>opening to China, and the idea there was will let

0:18:48.359 --> 0:18:55.000
<v Speaker 1>China into the system to outflank our main foe. In fact,

0:18:56.320 --> 0:19:01.480
<v Speaker 1>that moment really did start to lee to a transformation

0:19:01.560 --> 0:19:07.280
<v Speaker 1>that dramatically accelerated in nineteen seventy eight when Mao died

0:19:07.320 --> 0:19:09.920
<v Speaker 1>in seventy six and then Don chaw Pin came to

0:19:10.000 --> 0:19:15.680
<v Speaker 1>power opened the Chinese economy to market forces and to

0:19:16.119 --> 0:19:22.480
<v Speaker 1>globalization itself. The US normalized relations with China. China's rise

0:19:22.640 --> 0:19:26.280
<v Speaker 1>was seen to be to the US advantage. At the time.

0:19:26.800 --> 0:19:29.600
<v Speaker 1>We always describe it as well playing by the rules

0:19:29.600 --> 0:19:32.720
<v Speaker 1>in an open system. But what's happening now is that

0:19:33.040 --> 0:19:37.040
<v Speaker 1>open system from the point of view of those who

0:19:37.119 --> 0:19:40.040
<v Speaker 1>think that the job of the US is to remain

0:19:40.280 --> 0:19:44.920
<v Speaker 1>on top no matter what. Boomerang, because it opened the

0:19:44.960 --> 0:19:51.760
<v Speaker 1>way for China to regain economic strength, and again, nothing

0:19:51.840 --> 0:19:56.320
<v Speaker 1>like our standard of living, because China is still a

0:19:56.440 --> 0:19:59.760
<v Speaker 1>fraction of America's standard of living, but because it's so

0:19:59.800 --> 0:20:03.600
<v Speaker 1>much bigger in population to reach the scale of the

0:20:03.720 --> 0:20:09.320
<v Speaker 1>US economy in the aggregate. Jeff, one more economic theme

0:20:09.400 --> 0:20:13.639
<v Speaker 1>that you address is that there is a populist cycle,

0:20:13.760 --> 0:20:17.159
<v Speaker 1>not just a business cycle, but a populist cycle, you know,

0:20:17.200 --> 0:20:21.960
<v Speaker 1>that can run in countries that turn inward with their policies.

0:20:22.000 --> 0:20:26.240
<v Speaker 1>Can you talk about how how this concept relates to

0:20:27.040 --> 0:20:32.399
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump's America First policies and and the protectionist turn

0:20:32.760 --> 0:20:39.480
<v Speaker 1>that he's taking Right first. I think it's not right

0:20:39.560 --> 0:20:45.440
<v Speaker 1>to say that America First is isolationist, America first is unilateralist.

0:20:45.880 --> 0:20:50.880
<v Speaker 1>The idea of America First is the notion I'm out

0:20:50.920 --> 0:20:55.840
<v Speaker 1>for the United States. Rules are a hindrance to freedom

0:20:55.880 --> 0:21:00.000
<v Speaker 1>of maneuver. I don't believe in international rules. I believe

0:21:00.040 --> 0:21:03.240
<v Speaker 1>than the art of the deal. So we're not going

0:21:03.320 --> 0:21:09.439
<v Speaker 1>to be trapped by rules. We are sovereign and we

0:21:09.560 --> 0:21:13.960
<v Speaker 1>can act as we want. That's America first. One of

0:21:14.000 --> 0:21:21.000
<v Speaker 1>those ideas is that protection can be to America's benefit.

0:21:21.520 --> 0:21:26.280
<v Speaker 1>There are different parts of the argument. Apparently, one is

0:21:26.400 --> 0:21:31.240
<v Speaker 1>will protect our manufacturing. That's a kind of straight, simple

0:21:31.280 --> 0:21:36.080
<v Speaker 1>minded economics. The other is will break China's rise. That's

0:21:36.119 --> 0:21:45.280
<v Speaker 1>more international statecraft geopolitics. Populism is a bit different, but

0:21:45.760 --> 0:21:52.840
<v Speaker 1>part of the Trump package. Populism is really short term

0:21:52.880 --> 0:21:57.199
<v Speaker 1>appeal to your base by spending money you don't really have.

0:21:58.160 --> 0:22:04.480
<v Speaker 1>And I have watched these populous cycles repeatedly in Latin America.

0:22:04.720 --> 0:22:10.600
<v Speaker 1>I started my career in Latin America watching countries in bankruptcy,

0:22:10.680 --> 0:22:15.359
<v Speaker 1>in debt crisis, in hyper inflation, and typically there had

0:22:15.400 --> 0:22:19.240
<v Speaker 1>been a strong strong man like a Juan Perone or

0:22:19.520 --> 0:22:24.439
<v Speaker 1>a n Ugo Chavez in Venezuela, and they wanted to

0:22:25.560 --> 0:22:31.640
<v Speaker 1>appeal to the masses, and so they spent wildly, and

0:22:31.800 --> 0:22:34.840
<v Speaker 1>everything was fine because you get a bit of a

0:22:34.960 --> 0:22:39.040
<v Speaker 1>kinesie and aggregate demand boom at the beginning, and your

0:22:39.560 --> 0:22:43.840
<v Speaker 1>currency remains stable because you still have reserves and Eventually

0:22:44.400 --> 0:22:48.160
<v Speaker 1>you run out of cash and you start borrowing because

0:22:48.200 --> 0:22:51.320
<v Speaker 1>you still have some borrowing capacity. And then eventually you

0:22:51.400 --> 0:22:53.719
<v Speaker 1>hit the wall on what you can borrow, and then

0:22:53.760 --> 0:22:56.639
<v Speaker 1>all hell breaks loose, and typically you end up with

0:22:56.720 --> 0:23:00.520
<v Speaker 1>hyper inflation, which is Venezuela's case now. And I can

0:23:00.520 --> 0:23:03.480
<v Speaker 1>tell you it is not easy to bankrup Venezuela. It's

0:23:03.480 --> 0:23:07.439
<v Speaker 1>a very rich country. It took Chavez and Maduro a

0:23:07.560 --> 0:23:13.000
<v Speaker 1>generation of mismanagement to end up in hyper inflation. So

0:23:13.119 --> 0:23:16.639
<v Speaker 1>what is Trump doing. Trump's whole career has been borrow

0:23:16.680 --> 0:23:20.960
<v Speaker 1>other people's money, put it into a corporate shell, take

0:23:21.080 --> 0:23:25.000
<v Speaker 1>some of it out for the family, bankrupt the shell,

0:23:25.960 --> 0:23:30.320
<v Speaker 1>leave the creditors high and dry, and keep at least

0:23:30.320 --> 0:23:33.280
<v Speaker 1>some measure of private wealth. And he's made a career

0:23:33.680 --> 0:23:35.720
<v Speaker 1>out of doing this. He's just doing it with my

0:23:35.840 --> 0:23:39.480
<v Speaker 1>money right now, and your money and other America's money

0:23:39.520 --> 0:23:43.919
<v Speaker 1>because his ideas he doesn't want to give away money

0:23:43.960 --> 0:23:47.959
<v Speaker 1>to poor people like maybe Perrone or Chavez did. He

0:23:48.000 --> 0:23:50.959
<v Speaker 1>wants to give tax cuts for the rich. Uh, And

0:23:51.080 --> 0:23:54.439
<v Speaker 1>so we had a two trillion dollar tax cut. The

0:23:54.520 --> 0:24:00.199
<v Speaker 1>Republicans are apparently wanting to do it again, despite the

0:24:00.240 --> 0:24:03.240
<v Speaker 1>fact that we're running a one trillion dollar a year

0:24:03.480 --> 0:24:08.119
<v Speaker 1>budget deficit. You get into a cycle, and Trump is

0:24:08.160 --> 0:24:11.080
<v Speaker 1>doing what he's done all his life, which is using

0:24:11.119 --> 0:24:16.199
<v Speaker 1>other people's money to bolster probably his personal fortune, but

0:24:16.240 --> 0:24:19.720
<v Speaker 1>at least his political fortunes right now. But it's such

0:24:19.720 --> 0:24:23.440
<v Speaker 1>a short term game, and it's really expensive, and if

0:24:23.480 --> 0:24:27.560
<v Speaker 1>it goes on for very long, which obviously depends on

0:24:27.560 --> 0:24:32.720
<v Speaker 1>our electoral cycle among other things, it becomes incredibly destructive.

0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:37.240
<v Speaker 1>Jeffrey Sex, thank you for joining Benchmark. It's a pleasure

0:24:37.280 --> 0:24:40.800
<v Speaker 1>to be with you. The book is a new foreign

0:24:40.840 --> 0:24:49.679
<v Speaker 1>policy beyond American Exceptionalism, published October second. Benchmark will be

0:24:49.720 --> 0:24:52.080
<v Speaker 1>back next week. Until then, you can find us on

0:24:52.080 --> 0:24:55.440
<v Speaker 1>the Bloomberg Terminal, Bloomberg dot com, or Bloomberg app, as

0:24:55.480 --> 0:24:59.639
<v Speaker 1>well as podcast destinations such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Flora

0:24:59.720 --> 0:25:02.080
<v Speaker 1>where for you listen. We'd love it if you took

0:25:02.080 --> 0:25:04.600
<v Speaker 1>the time to rate and review the show so more

0:25:04.640 --> 0:25:07.639
<v Speaker 1>listeners can find us. And you can find us on Twitter.

0:25:08.040 --> 0:25:13.600
<v Speaker 1>Follow me at Scott Landman Dan You're at Moss Underscore Pico,

0:25:14.280 --> 0:25:17.960
<v Speaker 1>and our guest Jeffrey Sachs is at j E F

0:25:17.960 --> 0:25:22.600
<v Speaker 1>F D S A c pH S. Benchmark is produced

0:25:22.640 --> 0:25:26.639
<v Speaker 1>by topor foreheads. The head of Bloomberg Podcasts is Francesca Leafy.

0:25:27.080 --> 0:25:28.920
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for listening, See you next time.