If the past is any guide to the present, then scaremongering over outsourcing will increase as we get closer to the November elections. As polling day approaches, any candidate seeking a few extra votes is more likely to throw their lot in with Pat Buchanan, Lou Dobbs, Lyndon LaRouche and the wild-eyed hairy man on the street corner in predicting the swift economic collapse of the American economy due to foreign competition. All the more reason, then, to read this sane, interesting article by Daniel Gross in the sunday Times business section. Gross uses the story of Greg Manciw's public defenestration two years ago,

Economists have also found that jobs or sectors susceptible to outsourcing aren’t disappearing. Quite the opposite.... in recent years there has been greater job insecurity in the tradable job categories. But they [Economists] also concluded that jobs in those industries paid higher wages, and that tradable industries had grown faster than nontradable industries. “That could mean that this is our competitive advantage,” Mr. Jensen says. “In other words, what the U.S. does well is the highly skilled, higher-paid jobs within those tradable services.”

Look out for that one on the stump in the fall. You might be looking for a while.

In another sign that world s of blogging and mobile media continue to merge, TypePad, one of the largest commercial blog hosts, just announced TypePad mobile. This is an application that runs on your mobile phone enabling an easier and quicker experience of posting blog entries, and uploading pictures directly from your mobile phone to your Typepad hosted blog.

Where a number of other blog solutions have supported web based mobile blog posting, this is one of the more advanced blogging native software applications that runs directly on your smartphone. Details and pictures over here...

-- Tim

As things go from bad to ouch in the middle east, Democrats need another conflicting opinion on security issues like a, well, a high profile infighting senate contest. But that, according to the WSJ's excellent Washington Wire, is what we have.

As divided Democrats reacted to the U.K. terrorist plot, a new voice was emerging, pitched somewhere between those pushing for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and those who advocate staying the course. The National Security Network, aimed at gathering the best progressive ideas on national security and providing a counter to the firepower of conservative think tanks, will officially open for business in September.

The group, which doesn't have a website as yet, kicks off at the end of the summer. It is lead by Rand Beers. Beers, in addition to being part of a teaching double act with Dick Clarke at the Kennedy School, advised the Kerry campaign on foreign policy. Which, upon reflection, might be why that "between those pushing for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and those who advocate staying the course" angle is so eerily familiar...........

NDN’s Globalization Initiative and our Hispanic Strategy Centre tend to roam in different parts of the forest. But we join in our interest in story’s like this morning’s Post piece saying that immigrants don’t destroy American jobs. Why is this news? Apocalyptic visions of House Republicans certainly has more to do with it than any earth shattering economic revelation. It is worth restating, nevertheless, that there is no reason in theory to think that immigrants “take American jobs.” (See the “Lump of Labor fallacy for more on this.) In fact, there are some reasons to think that immigrants can increase employment. A recent study of immigrant workers in North Carolina found that Latino immigrants did cost $100m more in services than they paid in taxes, something which shouldn’t really be too surprising given the profile of public assistance users generally. But the same group contributed nearly $10 bn – yes, ten billion – in spending, or approximately 90,000 extra jobs.

Wages are a thornier issue. In theory, low skilled immigrants lower the wages of low skilled Americans, for instance high school dropouts or illiterate adults. Whether they do or not is hotly contested in academic literature. But the wider point is that the type of wage stagnation discussed in Rob and Simon's NDN memo earlier this month has, say most economists, almost nothing to do with immigration levels. (Most agree that this is a long-term term trend born of changing returns to skills, new technologies and patterns of trade.) The best overview i've seen of all of this is the excellent Economist Economics Focus for the pros and cons. But note in particular the final line:

None of these studies is decisive, but taken together they suggest that immigration, in the long run, has had only a small negative effect on the pay of America's least skilled and even that is arguable. If Congress wants to reduce wage inequality, building border walls is a bad way of going about it.

Nicely said. I wonder if anyone is listening?

In between the ads for Ensure and life insurance, Rudy Giuliani said something interesting last night on Larry King Live.  He said that "we are at war with Islamic fascists, this is not a police action."  I think Mr. Giuliani - a terrorism expert according to Mr. King - truly wants to believe that we can defeat terrorists through our involvement in a very twentieth century war, with thousands of American boots on the ground in Iraq.  Mr. Giuliani must have missed the report that the British foiled this murderous plan to blow-up passenger aircraft over the mid-Atlantic by conducting a month-long investigation, involving Scotland Yard, MI5 and security services in Pakistan.  It even looks like the breakthrough in the investigation came from a single undercover agent. 

With the Taliban back on the rise in Afghanistan, the President continuing to substitute "stay the course" for a real plan in Iraq, Arabic linguists vital to fighting terrorism being discharged from the army for their sexuality and Republican "experts" like Rudy Giuliani completely missing the point in this latest episode, it seems suspiciously as if the Republicans are working overtime to give cast-iron credibility to the Democrats' claim that we need a "New Direction" in how we fight terrorism.

Simon was in the Las Vegas Sun yesterday praising the leadership style of Senate Minority Leader Senator Harry Reid.

"Simon Rosenberg, who runs the centrist New Democrat Network but advocates a policy of confrontation with Republicans, said Reid decided that compromise and deal-making could no longer work in the partisan atmosphere of Washington: "Harry Reid understands that if we're playing on their playing field, we have to play by their rules." 

Greg Manciw, an economist at Harvard, runs an intriguing blog on matters economic. He holds his lofty position, at least in part, because of he quit / was pushed from his previous role as Chairman of the President's council of Economic Advisors. This happened after some some heretical thoughts on outsourcing; heretical in the sense that most sane economist's completely agreed with him. (NDN's Rob Shapiro has often notes that this administration doesn't have a serious economist anywhere near the leavers of power so Manciw might not regret his decision much.) Anyway, today Manciw is found musing about what New Lamont's jobs policy tells you about the direction the Democratic party has been taking on trade issues.

This rhetoric scares me. Wages, benefits, and labor and environmental standards are primarily a function of the level of economic development. Complaining about poor countries' low wages and benefits is essentially blaming the poor for being poor.....Demanding "strong standards" can easily become an excuse for imposing trade restrictions, which will only improvish the world's poor even further, as well as denying Americans the benefits of globalization.

Say what you want about Joe Lieberman, but he managed to combine two things that the Democratic party today finds difficult: a strong record on labor issues, with a recognition that open trade benefits the American people. This record makes the task for the mid-terms - and lets put Mr Lamont to one side for moment - clear, but very tough. Democrats must make an issue out of stagnant wages for working people, but not do so in such a way that portray global trade as a pantomime villain. Sadly, not even Tradesport seems able to give these odds.

Simon is in the USA Today discussing Senator Lieberman's decision to run as an Independent.  For more of Simon's thoughts on the CT primary, check out his blog entry from yesterday. 

"Simon Rosenberg, president of the centrist New Democrat Network, called Lieberman's loss "a political failure of great magnitude" and urged him to "end this part of your remarkable career."

And a big NDN hello! to our new readers, after yesterday's fun and excitement. I'll be leaving the state of the nation stuff to Simon, and go for the fripperires instead. Much discussion today of how yesterday's events in Connecticut will play out during the coming three months. Its a toss-up between Democrats heading for cut n'run rack and ruin if you believe the Vice President; Democrats energised and united if you believe the Democratic leadership; or the country hungry for the McCain-Lieberman Party, if you believe David Brooks. How can you tell who is right? Enter a nifty website a friend sent me this morning, Tradesport.com, which uses betting patterns to provide odds on all manner of good things. What do the punters say? Yesterday, it showed that the long term slide in odds of the GOP retaining the House in November continued. Not quite as rosy on the Senate, however. Joementum or not makes little difference in a fairly steady bet that the Dems are in an uphill struggle to take back the Senate. To think: all of that commentary ink spilled, and the betting men are unmoved. A lesson for us all?

NPI Fellow Jennifer Nix is in the San Francisco Chronicle today discussing the impact of the netroots in yesterday's CT Primary.