Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

More on Free Trade’s “Pro-Poor Bias”

by March 29, 2024
March 29, 2024
More on Free Trade’s “Pro-Poor Bias”

Scott Lincicome

Among the research I commended in the 2024 Economic Report of the President (ERP) last week was a solid section on free trade’s “pro‐​poor bias,” i.e., that eliminating US government barriers to cross‐​border commerce disproportionately benefited Americans with lower incomes. This week, the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis highlights a brand new paper showing much the same thing (emphasis mine):

In a Minneapolis Fed staff report, Monetary Advisor Michael Waugh models how lower trade costs play out for richer and poorer households (Staff Report 653, “Heterogeneous Agent Trade”). Waugh finds starkly different effects, with poor households (defined by their level of consumer spending) gaining much more as freer trade lowers prices.

The reason is not that poorer households buy a larger proportion of imported goods. Rather, it is their higher marginal utility of consumption: Falling prices provide more value to households with tighter budgets, as evidenced by their sensitivity to prices. Low‐​income households react more strongly as trade drives down the prices of imports and competing domestic goods. These households increase their consumption more as their buying power increases, and they are quicker to substitute new products in pursuit of savings.

Waugh finds that all US households benefit from a 10 percent reduction in US trade costs. But the poorest fifth of households experience a welfare gain more than 4.5 times larger than the richest.

Given the ample academic research cited in the ERP, these new findings, while welcome, are unsurprising. However, they do raise the following question related to the 2024 US presidential campaign: If an across‐​the‐​board 10 percent reduction in US trade costs generates outsized gains for America’s poor, what does an across‐​the‐​board 10 percent increase in those same costs—say, via the universal tariff proposed by Donald Trump—do?

For more on the benefits of free trade and the costs of protectionism, be sure to check out Cato’s ongoing Defending Globalization project or this 2022 Cato paper from me and Alfredo Carrillo Obregon.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Ninth Circuit: Prop 65 Warnings Can Count As Compelled Speech
next post
Buy Breakout or Fade Divergence on Growth Stocks?

You may also like

Book Review: The Many Mistakes of Murder the...

August 21, 2025

Orwellian Justice: The Trial Penalty Under Fire

April 28, 2025

New Evidence Underscores the Value of Tobacco Harm...

July 16, 2025

Census Bureau Analysis Supports Cato’s MENA Analysis

October 9, 2023

Congress Should Restrain ‘Emergency Spending’

September 26, 2023

Note to Brazil’s Judicial Crusaders: Censorship in the...

April 23, 2024

Temporary Tax Extenders Are Still Bad Policy

November 30, 2023

Friday Feature: Rock by Rock

November 22, 2024

The CBO Budget and Economic Outlook: Debt Projected...

February 8, 2024

Federal Judge: President Trump Can’t Unilaterally Rewrite Election...

April 25, 2025

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • XRP price prediction hits new highs, GMO Miner helps you earn $6,800 a day

      August 28, 2025
    • West End retailers lose £310m from VAT-free shopping ban in first half of year

      August 28, 2025
    • Dollar slips as Trump moves to sack Fed governor Lisa Cook in unprecedented clash over central bank independence

      August 28, 2025
    • CDC Director Susan Monarez refuses to be fired as other officials call it quits

      August 28, 2025
    • Bill Gates met with Trump to talk ‘importance of US global health programs and health research’: spox

      August 28, 2025
    • Trump asks SCOTUS to uphold freeze on billions in USAID payments

      August 27, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,900)
    • Investing (2,246)
    • Politics (16,503)
    • Stocks (3,228)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved