​Don’t miss the latest economic news in 11 minutes:

🎙️ Inflation Concerns & Fed’s Bloated Balance Sheet
🌱 ESG Divestment & Bank Regulation Issues
💸 Biden’s New Tariffs: A Step Backwards!

Thank you for watching! Please like, share, and subscribe for more insights. For more info, subscribe to my newsletter at vanceginn.substack.com and check out vanceginn.com.

​Did you know...

📈 Inflation remains high at 3.3% y/y, and the Fed's slow response is not helping. 

📊 The latest jobs report shows a shift to part-time work and declining labor force participation, with real wages declining.

🏡 The Texas GOP's priorities miss key issues like spending restraint and property tax elimination, which are crucial for economic growth.

Listen, like, share, and subscribe. Check out my newsletter for show notes and more at www.vanceginn.substack.com.

It's a pleasure to speak with the Texas Aggregates and Concrete Association again and enjoy the great resort here with my wife and three young kids. While aggregates and concrete may not always be in the spotlight, they are the bedrock of our infrastructure, forming the foundation upon which we build our homes, businesses, and communities.

Reflecting on my journey, I realize how essential the right direction and strong institutions are in shaping our paths. Much like the solid foundation of concrete, institutions give us the stability to build and grow. Like the economy, my life has been a series of peaks and troughs. In my younger years, I grew up in a low-income, single-mother household in South Houston as my dad had epilepsy, and they divorced when I was five years old. I went to private school from K-2 grades, public school from 3-6 grades, and home school from 7-12. Unlike many of you, I took many risks during my teenage years and began playing drums in a band called "Sindrome," living the rockstar life. But a near-fatal car accident in 2002 was my wake-up call, one of several but the one that turned me toward a brighter path. Through this experience, a month in bed with many bumps and bruises, and a lot of prayer, I found my purpose: to help others through my calling to let people prosper.

We find ourselves at a pivotal point in our country and in Texas. The recent elections tell us that there is a clear call for change in the Lone Star State. The upcoming November elections will be another opportunity for the country to steer towards a path of prosperity or continue down a troubling road. As an optimist, I believe in our potential, but I also recognize our country and state's many economic, political, and cultural issues.

Policy Uncertainty and Economic Volatility

At the national level, we face several economic challenges. The Biden administration has been keen on infrastructure spending, which includes the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. While this aims to rejuvenate our infrastructure, it also raises concerns about efficiency and the role of government in these projects, and the fact that we are running deficits higher than that per year with the national debt at nearly $35 trillion and net interest payments of $1 trillion exceeding national defense expenditures of about $860 billion. Excessive government spending, increased regulation, and interventionist policies often lead to inefficiencies and distortions in the market. Milton Friedman, my favorite economist, warned about the dangers of heavy government involvement, advocating instead for free-market solutions that empower individuals and businesses.

Election years heighten policy uncertainty, which can drive economic volatility. Businesses and investors become cautious, waiting to see which policies will prevail. This hesitation can slow economic activity, affecting everything from job creation to investment in new projects. For the aggregates and concrete industry, this means potential delays in infrastructure projects and fluctuations in demand.

Milton Friedman once said, "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years, there’d be a shortage of sand." This sharp but insightful remark underscores the inefficiency that often accompanies government intervention. In his view, infrastructure projects should be managed by private entities with a direct stake in the outcome and can respond more agilely to changes and needs.

Here in Texas, we are not immune to these challenges. Our state is known for its robust economy and low taxes, but we're grappling with excessive government spending and high property taxes. The Texas Comptroller's report highlights how our spending on transportation is around $10 billion annually. While infrastructure is crucial, we must be mindful of how these funds are used to ensure they generate real value for taxpayers.

Weak Labor Market Amid Headlines of Strength

Despite headlines showing strength, the U.S. labor market reveals underlying weaknesses. Nearly half of Americans think we are in a recession, reflecting a disconnect between reported statistics and personal experiences. Real average weekly earnings have declined by nearly 4% since January 2021, squeezing household budgets and diminishing purchasing power. The labor force participation rate remains low at 62.5%, significantly below the February 2020 level. If participation were the same as it was then, the unemployment rate would be closer to 6% rather than the reported 4% today.

Texas, however, leads in job gains, which is a testament to our state's resilient economy. Yet, we must acknowledge that the 25% increase in the two-year state budget last year was excessive. This surge in spending did not provide sufficient property tax relief, which is critical for maintaining economic vitality and keeping Texas attractive for businesses and residents alike. Moreover, we must prioritize universal school choice next year to ensure educational opportunities that meet diverse needs and drive future economic growth.

Election Year Volatility

During election years, the stakes are even higher. Uncertainty about future policies can cause volatility in markets and economic performance. For instance, debates over infrastructure funding, environmental regulations, and tax policies can create an unstable business environment. Companies may delay or cancel projects, affecting the demand for aggregates and concrete. This uncertainty trickles down, impacting jobs, investments, and overall economic health.

Aggregates and concrete are essential for the development and maintenance of our infrastructure. These materials for things like highways and homes are our physical landscape's backbone. However, it's crucial to approach their use smartly. We don't need to resort to industrial policies with high costs and trade-offs, burdening taxpayers. Instead of a top-down approach, which often fails due to bureaucratic inefficiencies, we should consider a bottom-up approach to transportation projects. This includes government projects, public-private partnerships, and private projects.

A significant portion of infrastructure could be managed through private toll roads. While my ideal vision leans heavily on privatization and tax cuts, I recognize that a balanced approach is more realistic in the current environment. Public-private partnerships can bring innovation and efficiency, reducing the burden on taxpayers while still delivering essential infrastructure.

Let me share an example from my work. My research finds that private toll roads can often be built faster and cheaper than public projects. Private companies are directly incentivized to minimize costs and maximize efficiency. For instance, the LBJ Express project in Dallas, a public-private partnership, was completed ahead of schedule and under budget, demonstrating the potential benefits of such collaborations. There is also a need to move to design-build for projects in Texas rather than today's more costly and time-consuming design-bid-build approach.

Additionally, Texas is experiencing significant population growth, with more people moving to the state, increasing the demand for our infrastructure. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is investing in expanding highways and improving ports to accommodate this growth. Projects like the $7.5 billion North Houston Highway Improvement Project aim to address these demands. However, we must ensure that these investments are managed efficiently and effectively.

Role of Institutions and Central Planning

Another key aspect is the role of institutions. Friedrich Hayek, in his book "The Road to Serfdom," cautioned against the overreach of central planning. He emphasized that central planning often leads to inefficiencies and a loss of individual freedoms. His insights are particularly relevant today as we navigate the complexities of modern infrastructure development.

To truly flourish, Texas needs to embrace more free-market capitalism and resist the creeping influence of socialism in our economy. This applies to transportation and beyond. By focusing on the efficient use of resources, reducing regulatory burdens, and fostering competition, we can build a more prosperous future. The bottom-up approach not only ensures better utilization of resources but also empowers local communities to take charge of their development, aligning projects more closely with the actual needs and priorities of the people.

Consider the example of toll roads in other states. Using private toll roads in Virginia has significantly improved traffic flow and reduced congestion in previously bottleneck areas. This model can be replicated in Texas, where traffic congestion is growing, especially in urban areas. By allowing private companies to manage and maintain these roads, we can ensure they are kept in optimal condition without continuously draining public funds.

Furthermore, private toll roads can be a source of innovation. Companies can introduce advanced technologies for traffic management and toll collection, making the entire system more efficient. For example, using electronic toll collection systems in Florida has greatly reduced vehicles' time at toll booths, enhancing the overall travel experience.

However, this doesn't mean we should eliminate public involvement in infrastructure projects. There are instances where government intervention is necessary, especially in projects that may not be immediately profitable but are crucial for public access and economic activity. This is where public-private partnerships come into play, allowing us to leverage the strengths of both sectors.

The government should act as a facilitator rather than a direct manager of projects. By setting clear regulations and standards, it can ensure that private companies operate fairly and efficiently while also protecting the interests of the public. This approach can help us avoid the pitfalls of excessive government control while still reaping the benefits of private sector efficiency.

Paul Krugman and other progressives might argue that significant government intervention is necessary to address market failures and ensure equitable outcomes. They believe that without government oversight, critical infrastructure could suffer from underinvestment, and social inequalities could worsen. While these points are worth considering, history has shown us that excessive government control often leads to inefficiencies, higher costs, and reduced innovation.

Learning from Failures and Future Outlook

My journey from poverty to rockstar to entrepreneurial economist taught me the value of strong institutions and the importance of aligning personal purpose with societal needs. This principle applies to our infrastructure as well. Just as a solid foundation is critical for a stable building, a robust institutional framework is essential for a thriving economy. We must ensure that our policies and investments in infrastructure reflect this understanding.

As we look toward the future, we must remain vigilant against the encroachment of socialist policies that threaten to undermine the free-market principles that have made Texas a beacon of prosperity. Instead, we should champion policies that promote individual liberty, economic freedom, and responsible stewardship of resources.

Failure provides us with valuable lessons, and too often, people want to mitigate this by expanding government intervention, which can be detrimental to our learning and growth.

We are at a critical juncture in our state's history. The recent elections have shown us that Texans are ready for a change. The upcoming November elections present another opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the principles that have made Texas great. While I am optimistic about our future, we must address the economic, political, and cultural challenges that threaten our way of life.

Election Year Volatility and Policy Uncertainty

One of the most pressing issues is the rise of big government. Across the political spectrum, there is a growing tendency to rely on government intervention to solve problems. This trend is particularly concerning in Texas, where we have traditionally prided ourselves on independence and self-reliance. Many of you might be demanding the government give you handouts or reap the benefits of federal, state, or local spending, but all this comes from taxpayers' pockets. We must try a different approach.

Election year volatility adds another layer of complexity. Businesses and investors are left guessing about the future as policies swing with the political tide. This uncertainty can stall projects, delay investments, and increase costs. The aggregates and concrete industry, heavily reliant on long-term planning and stability, feels these effects acutely.

Conclusion

In conclusion, aggregates and concrete are vital for Texas's growth, but their smart use is paramount. Let's leverage the strengths of the free market, prioritize efficiency, and ensure that our infrastructure investments truly benefit Texans. As we progress, I am eager to collaborate with any of you on projects aligning with these principles. Together, we can build a stronger, more prosperous Texas.

For those interested in further discussions on economic policy and free-market solutions, I invite you to check out my podcast, the Let People Prosper Show on all major platforms, and my Substack newsletter at vanceginn.substack.com, where I delve into these topics in greater detail. You can also visit my website, VanceGinn.com, for more information and resources.

​Thank you for your time and attention. Let's work together to build a future where smart infrastructure investment and strong institutions pave the way for a prosperous Texas.

Originally published at AIER. 

​Both major presidential candidates, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, have leaned towards protectionism, a stance recently echoed by Terry Schilling in The American Conservative. Unfortunately, this perspective misses the mark. 

Protectionism is not the solution to revitalize American manufacturing or the economy. The real culprits are flawed internal policies — excessive government spending, high taxes, and stringent regulations — that stifle growth and innovation.

Politicians from both sides of the aisle often scapegoat countries like China and Mexico for the decline in US manufacturing. This narrative overlooks reality. 

Technological advancements and productivity gains are the primary drivers of change in manufacturing, and that’s a good thing for the many beneficiaries at the expense of the few. Industrial production in manufacturing has remained relatively flat, indicating stable output despite economic fluctuations, while manufacturing employment has declined significantly, reflecting the sector’s increased productivity and automation.

In short, we don’t need as many hard jobs to provide the same output, and those displaced individuals can find better avenues to flourish, even with tough transitions. While it would be great if there were a way to protect everyone’s job, this is a fool’s errand resulting in control by politicians and bureaucrats in government at the expense of everyone else. 

Free-market capitalism is needed now more than ever, not big-government socialism, which is already sending us down the road to serfdom. American manufacturing’s decline is largely due to domestic policies that reject free-market capitalism, thereby hindering economic growth. 

Progressive policies have led to excessive government spending, high taxes, and overregulation. The federal government is spending about 25 percent of GDP and running nearly $2 trillion deficits, including paying about $1 trillion in net interest payments annually, even with record-high tax collections. Add to this how the Competitive Enterprise Institute reports federal regulations cost the US economy $1.9 trillion annually, equivalent to 7 percent of GDP. Spending and regulations shackle about one-third of our economy, creating perverse incentives for businesses and workers to compete and innovate. 

The Trump administration’s efforts to boost manufacturing through tariffs led to trade wars that aimed to bring jobs back to the US. These measures backfired, however, increasing costs for American businesses and consumers, as tariffs are just taxes on Americans. Manufacturing output saw little sustained improvement, and employment gains were modest and short-lived. 

Deficit spending, which contributed to an appreciated currency from foreigners’ demand for the US dollar, made it cheaper to purchase foreign goods, exacerbating the trade deficit. The trade deficit expanded even after Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese goods. Similarly, the Biden administration’s attempts to revitalize the sector through initiatives like the American Jobs Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act have yet to do more than drive up the deficit and prop up specific markets. 

Despite potentially good intentions, these policies have yet to deliver the promised results, often perpetuating the same issues of overregulation and high spending.

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced NAFTA and mentioned in the piece, introduced more protectionist measures than its predecessor. The USMCA’s stringent labor and content rules have complicated trade and increased production costs, undermining its effectiveness in promoting free trade. These provisions counter what should have been done to promote more trade and prosperity.

It is wise to remember that free trade has provided the best opportunities for people to prosper and has significantly reduced extreme poverty globally, including in China. 

America should not isolate itself from other countries, as we benefit from a growing global demand for our products and the supply of goods we can purchase from abroad. Consumers and producers in America are better off with more domestic and international trade. As we don’t want to produce everything we consume daily, trading with others is the most efficient way to meet our needs.

Our national debt, driven by excessive government spending, is a significant economic burden. This debt will continue to grow without the resolve to cut spending and implement a strong spending limit. The Federal Reserve’s monetary policy, which has reduced purchasing power and higher inflation, also impacts manufacturing and should be regulated through a monetary rule. 

The PROVE IT Act aims to ensure that carbon emissions from imports are accurately measured. Still, the underlying assumption of a need to tax carbon dioxide — a necessary component of life — is flawed. Pigouvian taxes are problematic because they often target the wrong factors at incorrect tax rates, essentially serving as tools for government overreach rather than effective economic policy. 

The focus should be on minimizing government control over economic actions, which create more problems. A carbon tax or one of its spinoffs is a misguided attempt to control what the EPA doesn’t consider a pollutant, leading to worse outcomes for everyone, especially the poor.

Another way to improve relationships with countries and put more collective pressure on China to liberalize while meeting the needs of consumers and producers in America would have been to approve a version of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). 

This trade agreement negotiated by the Obama administration allowed expanded free trade with 11 other Asia-Pacific countries (Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam). By partnering with multiple countries, America could have promoted free trade practices that fostered a more robust economic environment that competes with China, Russia, and other potential adversaries. 

The TPP, as detailed by the Council on Foreign Relations, aims to enhance trade and economic integration across the Asia-Pacific region, providing significant benefits to all member nations. The TPP would reduce tariffs, establish common trade standards, and open new markets for American goods and services, ultimately leading to greater economic growth and job creation at home. 

Unfortunately, Trump rejected the TPP when he took office in 2017 instead of trying to negotiate the TPP better. While America was left out, the other 11 countries joined trade agreements after TPP’s demise, a major setback for Americans that could have been avoided.

Revitalizing American manufacturing requires addressing internal policy failures rather than blaming foreign competition.

We can ensure long-term prosperity by reducing government interference, embracing free trade, and fostering a competitive environment. The better path forward with fewer trade-offs lies in free-market principles, which have the power to drive innovation, efficiency, and economic growth. 

It’s time to shift the focus from protectionism to fostering a robust, open market that benefits everyone.

​In This 100th Episode, Dr. Norman Horn, founder and president of the Libertarian Christian Institute, and I celebrate the 100th Let People Prosper Show episode and explore:

📜 Limited Roles of Government: What are the true, limited roles that government should play in our lives?

🎉 Libertarian Convention Recap: How was the Libertarian Convention, and what were the key takeaways?

🔍 Policy Comparisons: Comparing the policies of Joe Biden (Democrat candidate), Donald Trump (Republican candidate), and Chase Oliver (Libertarian candidate).

⚖️ Big-Government Conservatism: Why are Conservative Nationalists and Christian Nationalists essentially big-government, old-school progressives?

🌟 Future of Liberty: What should the future look like for liberty and prosperity?

Like, subscribe, and share the Let People Prosper Show, and visit vanceginn.substack.com and vanceginn.com for show notes and more insights from me, my research, and ways to book me on your show.