I have been introduced to so many interesting (and famous!) people through Tyler Cowen’s podcast, Conversations with Tyler. This last one with Joseph Stiglitz is no exception. Tyler knows exactly the tempo to keep the clip of information at a perfect speed. The written follow-up provides links to referenced papers. It’s truly a wonderful service.
The breath of Stiglitz career leaves many areas open for further review. But this comment stumped me a little.
STIGLITZ: Today, the critical issue in trade policy is US CHIPS Act and the IRA. The CHIPS Act was, we had lost the ability to make chips. That meant that if anything happened to Taiwan or Korea, we were in a very vulnerable position. Markets don’t take into account that kind of defense concern, or even the resilience. That goes back to some of my earlier work that markets aren’t very good at assessing risk and pricing risk into the decision-making process.
How does he mean that the market does not take into account national defense? Undoubtedly the chips made in Taiwan are produced at a lower cost than in the US, hence the benefit from trade. But where is the documentation to show the accounting of that price drop? Surely people think that a portion of the discount is from the difference in state governance?
When US retailers buy from a textile plant in Bangladesh, they are aware of the different standards imposed (or not imposed) on the building facilities. Surely they factor that into the the price difference? The US retailers could choose to pay a bit more under the conditions that the building and machinery were held to a high standard, should they choose.
The dynanism of the market will adjust to new circumstances and knowledge as it surfaces under changing conditions.
Home Economics 