On today’s show we are looking at recent history. We know that history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.

We are going to look and see what we can learn from recent protectionist sentiments that were supposed to help.

The trade war of the 1930’s resulted in a 60% reduction in global trade. The impact was much more confined because international trade made up a small percentage of each country’s GDP compared with today.

No we have a much more meaningful comparison. Let’s look at Brexit which was the UK’s attempt to regain control over their national agenda leading up to the 2016 referendum.

These arguments collectively painted a picture of a UK potentially more independent, prosperous, and secure outside the European Union framework.

So the question for you is whether any of this sounds similar to what we are hearing from the White House? Let me be clear, I have no stake in this agenda. I’m neither supporting not opposing the current White House initiatives. I’m simply seeing parallels at two different points in history.

Brexit is a play on words, the combination of Britain and Exit. Of Course Britain was a founding member of the European Union and a strong proponent of the benefits of a single market with freedom of movement. The EU formed part of the globalization trend that

The World Trade Organization was a structure created in part by the US in which the rules of international trade were established that made it fair for countries that formed part of the WTO.

But now the US seems intent on breaking apart the WTO and negotiating individual trade deals with each nation based on criteria defined by the current White House. The US is also clearly trying to secure its borders.

These goals sounds incredibly similar to the Brexit arguments. In the years since Brexit, the UK has demonstrably suffered as a nation. The British pound lost value. The UK lost a lot of jobs and manufacturing. The UK has been isolated politically and economically.

Het gaat niet om de grootte, maar om de prestaties