Top 15 Ha-Joon Chang Quotes

[W]e have to work to make it what we want. It's not going to automatically happen, but... in an ideal world we want greater social protection, greater recognition of the importance of the care economy... restructuring of our production and supply networks into something more dispersed, resilient and robust, but... whether these things are necessarily going to happen. ...[T]his is my wish list but it's up to all of us, everyone to demand another world and fight for it.

So... there will be only a limited degree of reorganization, but... in the long run countries and industries that do it in a more sustainable way, making the network more robust, more dispersed, more resilient, will reap the benefit. But let's not underestimate the... seduction of immediate gains. So... despite all this hullabalu the final reorganization will be rather limited. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be done, but my guess is that it will be done in a limited way, because every time there's some disaster... When there was the famous Fukushima earthquake, the problem with the nuclear reactor... there were some sectors that saw... the end of the supply for... intermediate materials because there was one Japanese company that was supplying 70% of the world... Every time that happens, like the earthquake in Taiwan... several years before, everyone says... we have to change the supply chain... make it less concentrated... less complicated, and then... 2 years later we are back to square one. So I'm not too sure about how much change will happen to the global value chains. ...[T]he taste for global free trade will be diminished somewhat, but... on that we should... change the conversation, because... we—especially those who are concerned with the fate of developing countries, like the people that source—we need to talk about intelligent trade in a completely different way. ...[I]t's not just a simple dichotomous problem of free trade versus . ...[T]here are many different ways of organizing . ...There are many ways of regulating trade. Protectionism is only one way. ...[W]e do it with ... with programs... with, in the case of the US, defense policy, so... we need to change the conversation in a more nuanced way...

[F]inally, linking that into the reorganization of the ... [I]n many cases, unless the crisis really persists for 3, 4, 5 years... as soon as things become okay people will just say "Well, let's forget about it because reorganizing the value chain requires investment, hard work... Let's just go back to the old ways." So it's not certain... that... reorganization will happen, and even if it...[does], it will happen only in limited areas... [E]ven if the US wants to bring all the lost manufacturing production in... key sectors back home, it cannot do it. ...[T]hey don't have the supply network. They don't have the correct infrastructure. They don't have the necessary supply of technicians. ...[E]ven if it wanted, Apple cannot bring factories in China to California to make the s.

So... even a relatively poor country can make this as an opportunity to upgrade its economy... I know that [in] the current situation [it] is... difficult to think about the future but... they really need to think... If you have been reliant on tourism heavily... If you're a island state there might be very little you can do but if you are some country... you will have to a) think about ways to make tourism safer... but b) more importantly you need to find a way to get out of tourism and start doing something else.

[A] lot of developing countries are dependent on primary commodities, and especially those that are dependent on oil have been devastated because oil demand has collapsed as a result of the pandemic. ...[I]t is important for developing countries to diversify... production structure to avoid this... Easier said than done... Ecuador, under Rafael Correa, tried for about 10 years to shift the production structure. The pull of the oil was so strong that by the end of his term, it was a bit lower, but the dependence was still very high. ...[I]n the next few years, because of the pandemic... primary commodities... (material products) might actually become more important in relative terms... [T]he overall level of demand will be lower... but... in relative terms, at least, primary commodities are going to fare better than... services. The point... is... what happens in the long run will really depend on what you do with the income that you earn from primary commodities. ...[L]uckily a lot of countries have been thinking about industrializing using more active ... so something might happen in some countries and... some... are already doing... very impressive things... Ethiopia has converted a lot of its garment making facilities—basically investments from east Asia: South Korea, China, Taiwan—into factories producing [medical] personal protection equipment... [I]t has converted... passenger jet planes into cargo planes and is doing more cargo business.

<nowiki>[</nowiki>Capitalism...] [I]t's not how it will change, but how we have to change it... because given the existing , and power, unless the ordinary citizens and the progressive people get organized and press the governments, they are not going to change things automatically. ...We've seen that after the 2008 financial crisis... so for about... 9 months they embraced Keynes... and then the bailed out banks [etc]... and they were going to reform the financial system... After 2 years it was... back to the old game... and then things got even worse because... in some countries like the US and the UK... the right-wing governments were elected, and then... in the US... Donald Trump... invalidated many of the reforms that were introduced to the financial market, after Obama, after the crisis... [I]f we don't keep fighting it's not going to change... [T]here are new opportunities and new solidarities emerging... new ways of thinking, but... how they all will gel together and translate into collective action, public policies, institutional changes, that's... up to us. Everyone.

<nowiki>[</nowiki>Modern monetary theory or Keynesian economic policies...] I'm not a macroeconomist but... those kinds of macroeconomic thinking will become more influential. I wouldn't say dominant because... the current macroeconomic approach [is] a weird mixture of... fiscal conservatives and monetary abandon ...dominant because it serves the powerful interests, so I don't know whether ...the rise of Keynesianism or the monetary theory—which is... certain—will be sufficient to replace the existing [system]... [It is] not just in terms of macroeconomic policy I mentioned that is going to see change. ...[W]e are going to see big changes in the way that we... manage the welfare state, which has implications for taxation policy. ...We are going to see big changes in the structure of production, which will has ramifications for and trade policy. So... it will be in all kinds of areas and hopefully... it will also spill into our approach to fighting . So... it's not just going to be in the macroeconomic area that the conventional wisdom and prevailing orthodoxy are being hit. It's across all areas, reflecting partly the all-encompassing nature about this crisis. So... there will be significant changes, but... whether one economic theory becomes dominant, or at least widely accepted, is in big part a political question. So a lot will depend on how things unfold and how the political elite respond to this.

Opportunity is literally what it is called... [I]f you don't make something out of it, it's not going to produce anything by itself. ...[I]t's very important for citizens to demand, organize, talk about it... How we want to change the society having seen that... we don't all need to be in the office to become efficient workers, can we change the way we organize work? ...Can we work more often from home, if not completely? Can we, in that way, reduce because fewer people will not be ..? All of these things need to be discussed, but... unless we make demands, voice our concerns, it's not going to happen. ...In ...different industries ...the biggest losers will be people who provide face-to-face services. ...[T]his will be a huge problem for many developing countries especially, because a lot... rely heavily on tourism... [T]hat's going to be dead for a few years. Also in developing countries we have this huge informal sector, many of which involve face-to-face services. So when these people do not have customers, how are they going to cope? So in terms of the industry mix... it will depend on the country, but broadly speaking this will negatively affect poor or developing countries with a big service sector, especially informal sector, and countries like the US and the UK which rely on a lot of services, and countries which have a greater strength in manufacturing and material production are going to be relatively better off. So that's my prediction.

[W]hen it comes to basic income, please do not just look at the demand side, but also look at the supply side. ...Whatever amount of income they're going to give you... how are they going to provide those basic ? Some proposals are progressive, but some are not. Some haven't even thought about this. You need to look at both aspects.

[T]his is what's happening in the US. ...The US spends 17% of GDP on health care, compared to 8-12% in other advanced countries, and it has the worst health record in the rich world. ...Part of it is ...because of greater inequality, but a lot of it is because... the treatments are expensive. That COVID-19 test which you can get for free in South Korea, in some American communities, you have had to pay $3,000...

... I'm not a fan... First... a lot depends on how you do it. ...Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek were supportive of universal basic income. ...[T]hese are people who say, "Yea, give everyone £9,000" or whatever, and they can do whatever... with that money. They wouldn't starve to death, but everything about that is not society's problem. ...[I]f it is that kind of universal basic income which is... supported by some of the Silicon Valley billionaires, I'm 200% against it. If it is the more progressive form, I still have a problem because... having income is one thing, but... you need affordable high quality services. ...Unfortunately the supporters of universal basic income do not address this aspect... very clearly... So you convert all the... welfare entitlement... in Britain, so... your NHS service... your , the amount of childhood housing benefits, convert them only to cash... then how are people going to buy these? ...[I]s the government then going to wash ...its hands and say now you can go into the private market and buy it? ...[T]hat will be a disaster, because... many of these services are... provided by the government, which is not seeking profit. Of course, a lot of it has become privatized by stealth, but at least in theory... these, NHS and other bodies that provide these social services... are not out to make money, and... they pool the customers and... get the big discounts. There's a scale of economy provision. Instead of single hospitals going to a pharmaceutical company... to buy diabetes drugs for 5,000 people, the NHS can go to these companies... for 17 million people. ...[T]he kind of discount you get.... it's a totally different planet. So... these services are going to be very expensive... even when you give them the same amount of money, they will be able to buy less.

[I]t's up to societies... especially the citizens to demand these things, to create systems that will... not only enable the country to deal with these kind of crises in the future, but... more importantly that... can make the society more equal. ...My point is, we have to start the discussion. ...We have to talk about this. ...The people have to keep banging on, "Why did you keep all those claps [applause] during those eight weeks in the spring to the nurses but then you didn't pay them any more? ...Why is the NHS so dilapidated? We have to keep pushing... otherwise the people in power are not going to do that.

The pandemic has revealed that... poor people—people in marginalized communities—are more prone to contract the disease and die from it because of generally worse health, limited access to health care, and other things that define this unequal society. ...[A] positive way to respond to this is to accept that and find a way to reduce that inequality, and it is already happening in some countries. ...I'm not usually a cheerleader for my own country, South Korea... we have so many shameful world records... the highest suicide rate, the lowest fertility rate... name it, but South Korea has... managed the pandemic really well, first of all because... despite this general aversion to the welfare state, it has a very robust public health insurance. ...So anyone who had problems could... get tested and treated... This is how you manage to keep the death toll under 300, but in that country... because it controlled the health situation so well, it actually didn't go into full lockdown, but still, people were wary of going out and the biggest sufferers from this was... people... running small bars, restaurants, karaoke bars... [T]hese people were very hard hit and... I was... surprised [the country is] talking about universal employment insurance scheme. So... it doesn't matter what your job used to be... Countries are now talking about introducing that covers people who work in any type of company, self-employed people, social platform workers, people working in the . ...[I]f it happens it will be a really progressive change...

[T]his has been the most corrosive consequence of the recent rise of the... extreme right, but... despite all this mistrust, we have to invest in rebuilding trust in these institutions. Maybe some of the existing institutions have become so discredited, they need to be scrapped. ...Maybe some can be redeemed, but also we could try to create ...a global public information service ...[T]hat sounds overly idealistic, but... it's something that we need because these gainers from the erosion of public trust in these public s... also ...control the media with their money. ...[I]f ...citizens do not have... a UN information service or some global charity that provides fact checks [etc.]... Unless people have these trusted sources, they'll begin to believe whatever... and those who control the media, including things like Facebook [etc.]... through their money will... be in a position to manipulate them to their benefit. ...[D]espite people's misgivings about building yet another international organization trying to restore trust in the public institutions that have already been eroded and dilapidated .., that's the only way out because otherwise it becomes a free-for-all... [which] means all those people with money...

[N]ow we know that the whole community is bound in common destiny... It always has been, but... we now feel it more accurately, and there will be demands... for... greater respect, even for marginalized groups [etc.]... That will create further pressure towards... more emphasis on universal human rights [etc]... However, whether that actually gets translated into laws and international conventions... [I]t's going to be a long struggle, but... to be... forthright... humanitarian progresses have seen many setbacks recently... Trump, Bolsanero, Brexit [etc.]... but... 200 years ago a lot of people... thought it was perfectly okay to buy and sell people... 100 years ago Britain and many other countries put women in prison for asking to vote, and only 78 years ago the founding fathers of today's developing nations, Nkrumah, Kenyatta... these people were all hunted down by the British and the French as terrorists, 40 years ago Margaret Thatcher famously said that anyone who thinks there will be a black majority to rule in South Africa ever, is living in a cloud cuckoo land... but all of these things were achieved, not by luck, but because people organized and fought for them, and... in the long run this crisis might be an occasion for those movements to be more... galvanized... become more international... and have greater chance at success.