I hesitate to post this, because the idea of a "global New Deal" is pretty certain to start up what I'd consider pretty unrealistic conspiracy theories. Furthermore, at this point, it's just an idea being pushed by the United Kingdom, not something yet backed by the United States.
My concern: how can countries compete on policies, how can someone leave a flawed system and outcompete the flawed system from without, if there is nowhere else to go? This would seem to be detrimental to our use of competition to drive improvement. If one country adopts poor fiscal or economic policy, another country will do better, and the first country will (likely; at least it is given the option of doing so) adopt the more effective policy. Historically, the world has always enjoyed such a mechanism. Do we want to eliminate it now?
I hesitate to post this, because the idea of a "global New Deal" is pretty certain to start up what I'd consider pretty unrealistic conspiracy theories. Furthermore, at this point, it's just an idea being pushed by the United Kingdom, not something yet backed by the United States.
However, it also has real significance, since there are at least some voices who have concrete opinions on what form such an institution should take. I'm personally concerned as to the anti-competitive nature of such a plan, and I believe that it's worth throwing this out there for debate.
My concern: how can countries compete on policies, how can someone leave a flawed system and outcompete the flawed system from without, if there is nowhere else to go? This would seem to be detrimental to our use of competition to drive improvement. If one country adopts poor fiscal or economic policy, another country will do better, and the first country will (likely; at least it is given the option of doing so) adopt the more effective policy. Historically, the world has always enjoyed such a mechanism. Do we want to eliminate it now?