(Paul Criado / Heights Staff)
President Donald Trump’s economic and foreign policies mark a sharp departure from the United States’ long-standing stances, according to Lindsey O’Rourke, an associate professor at Boston College.
“Donald Trump has been the major break from that tradition compared to his predecessors,” O’Rourke said. “He argues that borders are about killing us on trade because we spend more on foreign imports than they do on American exports. In particular, he’s argued that China’s unbalanced trade with the United States has been the greatest theft in the history of the world.”
The Morrissey College of Arts and Sciences Dean’s Colloquium, hosted in Gasson 100 on Sept. 30, invited four Boston College faculty members to discuss recent shifts in American economic and foreign policy. They explored the origin of Trump’s approach and its potential consequences.
O’Rourke began by contextualizing the issue, giving the audience a brief explanation of the significance of shifts in economic and foreign policy under the Trump administration.
“In the post-World War II era, the United States has promoted free trade policy,” O’Rourke said. “For 70 years, policymakers have agreed that promoting free trade not only increases growth for the country, but also growth for consumers. It’s also seen as beneficial for foreign relations.”
O’Rourke explained how Trump argues that other countries have ripped off the United States in international trade deals, leading him to adopt an isolationist policy, like his decision to impose tariffs on China, for example.
James Anderson, the Neenan Millennium professor in economics, argued that Trump’s promotion of isolationism is based on limited insight and harms the United States’ international reputation, which can prevent future bilateral deals.
“He thinks that we are doing badly by tying ourselves to rules in advance that determine what we can get out of the deal,” Anderson said. ‘If you have a reputation for squeezing every last dollar out of a deal, other people are going to be less likely to work with you in the future. The world is not just the United States.”
Rosen Valchev, associate professor of economics, questioned whether a trade deficit should be considered a bad thing that needs to be fixed.
“We certainly compare the economic growth of the U.S. and Europe, and we’ve got trade deficits and much faster economic growth and much faster investment, these are all symptoms of these trade deficits funding capital investment, which you think can pay for itself down the line,” Valchev said.
Shifting the focus to foreign policy, Valchev also discussed how the United States’ isolationist stance is discouraging immigrants from coming to America, which weakens the country’s innovation and educational output.
“When you look at the really successful entrepreneurs and companies, you’ll find a lot of key people there being first-generation immigrants,” Valchev said. “One of my friends who is Indian said that 15 years ago, the goal was to study hard, come to the U.S., the land of opportunity. But now, he says, ‘Maybe I’ll just stay there.’”