On 6/28/07, Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/27/07, Gar Lipow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So should evaluations of inequality in the U.S. economy also include Mexico?
it depends on what kinds of questions you're trying to answer.
--
Well in this case they are doing EU to U.S. comparison to measure
certain effects of inequality. Mexico is as integrated into the U.s.
economy as many EU nations are to the EU. (So is Canada.) So would a
more reasonable comparison not be NAFTA to the EU rather than U.S. to
the EU. Or are the differences between the two types of integration
different enough that a straight U.S. to EU comparison really is the
way to go. Such a comparison would certainly show more inequality
(since it would include Mexico.) But it would also show more
unemployment since it would include unemployment in Mexico. So it
would not actually change Galbraith's results (or rather it would
strengthen his case). I'm just wondering which is the better way of
measuring to answer Galbraith's particular question.
