Chart of the Day: The Mystery of Donald Trump’s Missing Year

Here is the Trump administration’s estimate of the benefit of USMCA (aka NAFTA 2.0), the trade deal with Mexico and Canada that was concluded last year. They say that GDP will go up:

OK, it’s a table, not a chart. Sue me. In any case, it claims that Trump’s new trade deal will increase GDP by 0.35 percent, but mysteriously doesn’t say when this increase will happen. I wonder why they’d leave that out?

The answer is that it’s because this increase happens over the course of 16 years. That’s about 0.02 percent per year. Just to make it clear what that means, it’s the equivalent of $100 growing by two cents.

But wait, there’s more! It turns out that the model used by the International Trade Commission actually projects a GDP decrease of 0.12 percent. However, they add 0.47 percentage points because “commitments in USMCA address [] regulatory uncertainty by providing assurance to firms that current conditions will be maintained into the future.” The idea here is that companies can’t really be sure that things we’ve all been doing for decades will continue in the future, and the new treaty clears up this uncertainty.

Maybe so. But if that’s really the case, maybe we should sign a treaty that just clears up the regulatory uncertainty and leaves everything else alone?

This all comes via Dean Baker, who has more to say here.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend