Will Davos bow before Brexit?
It might take awhile
The crème de la crème of the global elite got their annual meeting underway Monday in Davos, Switzerland. Then on Tuesday, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced her country will be exiting the European Union's "single market" — setting up a dramatic test of one of the Davos crowd's most cherished beliefs.
When Britain shocked the world last June when it voted to leave the EU, it still left open the question of a "soft" or "hard" Brexit. Should the country simply renegotiate Britain's EU status or cut ties completely? The "Davos class" that spent the last few decades championing globalized free trade sided pretty strongly with the former. Waves of prestigious groups and think tanks put out multiple projections that a hard Brexit would leave the United Kingdom's economy permanently poorer — perhaps dramatically so.
Now May's declaration means that Davos' free-trade faith will be put to the test: Britain is leaving the EU — no ifs, ands, or buts about it.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
For believers in free trade, the EU's single market is close to an ideal. It allows all member states to trade goods, services, capital, and (to a large extent) people back and forth without tariffs or barriers. But enjoying the benefits of the single market comes with a reciprocal requirement: that member states abide by EU norms on a whole raft of issues, from immigration rules to business regulations to welfare state design and more. That was what the Brexiteers objected to. Hence, May's commitment to a hard Brexit.
Now, Brexit will probably be a two-year process, which should kick off in March. And when all is said and done, Britain will still want to trade with the EU, and vice versa. But it's very unlikely that any trade deals struck in the post-Brexit era will be as frictionless as the single market. Why would the EU give Britain all those goodies back without demanding all those reciprocal obligations? That's why most projections say Britain will be poorer in the long run.
To be clear, Britain's economy won't stop growing. It's just that by, say, 2030, it won't have grown as much as it would have in a world where Brexit never happened.
There's reason to be skeptical of this, though. At bottom, the case for maximizing free trade rests on the idea of "comparative advantage" — that some countries are just better at doing certain things than others, be it banking, wheat farming, electronics manufacturing, or whatever. But Britain is an advanced market economy. It seems unlikely, to put it very mildly, that there's something other EU member countries are doing so much better than Britain that it would make a big difference to the British economy.
The most important factor in long-term growth is productivity, which boils down to know-how. But that won't be a problem for Britain because it has enough heads — over 60 million — to problem solve. The one other thing that the island could lack is natural resources. But again, Britain will still have plenty of access to trade post-Brexit — including trade with resource-rich non-EU countries like America — and it's unlikely that the costs of getting those natural resources will go up that much.
In fact, the computer models used by economists have a very tough time figuring out whether free trade actually helps countries grow at all. Obviously, one should take economic models with a grain of salt. But the ones used in this case actually have a pretty good track record when it comes to mimicking the real world. And when economists run big changes in global trade regimes through these models, the effects on economies are minimal. That faith in free trade persists despite real doubt is one of the economic profession's more embarrassing secrets.
Nonetheless, let's say the low-end projections prove right, and the British economy winds up 2 or 3 percent smaller in 13 years than it would be if it remained in the EU. That's a few hundred billion dollars, which isn't nothing. But most British workers would still be better off if Brexit redistributes incomes within the country.
That's because adding a bit more friction to Britain's imports and exports could reduce its trade deficit, creating more domestic jobs and raising wages. More importantly, the free flow of capital around the EU single market allowed London to become one of the global hubs for financial services. This became such a huge part of Britain's exports that it warped the rest of the country's economy and its exchange rates, driving up inequality and creating a boom in London while the rest of the national economy suffered. A hard Brexit could very well break up the London financial industry and its hold on the rest of the country.
Of course, we won't really have a handle on Brexit's aftermath for at least a decade. But eventually the Davos crowd might have to eat crow.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Jeff Spross was the economics and business correspondent at TheWeek.com. He was previously a reporter at ThinkProgress.
-
Meet Youngmi Mayer, the renegade comedian whose frank new memoir is a blitzkrieg to the genre
The Week Recommends 'I'm Laughing Because I'm Crying' details a biracial life on the margins, with humor as salving grace
By Scott Hocker, The Week US Published
-
Will Trump fire Fed chair Jerome Powell?
Today's Big Question An 'unprecedented legal battle' could decide the economy's future
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Sri Lanka's new Marxist leader wins huge majority
Speed Read The left-leaning coalition of newly elected Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake won 159 of the legislature's 225 seats
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published