America’s economic success stems from two key sources: entrepreneurial dynamism and steady productivity.
Each field has its own very personal reasons for its success and like the above for trading it is nothing but the continuous support shown by the traders and the growing popularity of the trading field among the traders. And one major reason that has made this possible is the presence of systems like the fintech ltd.
Still, as real wage increases are consumed by college tuition and health care costs, many Americans feel detached from economic growth.
Resolving this detachment by allowing real wages to grow unencumbered would require major reforms of government and economy. It’s an issue for debate and bold ideas in the future. Yet there are a few things we could do now. Congress could make things better with three simple reforms to America’s transportation infrastructure.
1 Open American ports to foreign vessels
Large container ship in mediterranean coast
First, Congress should open American port-to-port trade to foreign vessels. At present, the Jones Act allows only U.S. flagged ships to travel between two American ports, with only limited exceptions. The problem with this restriction is that it limits the shipping supply pool alongside corollary high demand. Many businesses rely upon shipping trade to supply goods efficiently. But where foreign shipping companies are unable to provide a service to fill the demand gap, the costs on American businesses are inevitably fixed at a high price point. A recent labor dispute at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach shows how damaging a localized restriction in supply can be for the U.S. economy. And that speaks to the broader issue. This is economics 101.
2 Let foreign airlines create jobs in the U.S.
FRANKFURT, GERMANY – JULY 6, 2015: Terminal 1 with passengers airplane decking in Frankfurt, Germany. With 38 million passengers per year it is one of the most important airport in Europe.
Second, Congress should allow foreign airlines to compete for domestic passenger routes. Operating at the high end of service or the low end of cost, any airline flying domestic routes needs Americans to fly. Allowing foreign airlines into the domestic air industry would mean new jobs for American aircrews, new jobs for American headquarters personnel, new jobs for American ground crews and new earnings for other American businesses servicing the airline industry.
That should dispense with labor unions’ major criticism of greater competition — the non-existent risk to America jobs. But what’s most important to U.S. consumers is what greater competition would mean for their pocketbooks. According to the Harvard Business Review, the price of flying U.S. domestic routes has increased significantly above the rate of inflation over the past few decades. It’s easy to understand why. When a passenger needs to get somewhere fast and doesn’t feel like driving for 12 hours, flying is inevitable. This plays to the airlines. Without meaningful competition, they are able to gouge prices out of their consumer base.
Don’t take my word for it; just see how much your airline offers you in compensation next time you’re delayed. It won’t be a lot — the airline knows you don’t have many other options. Foreign airlines would shake up this cozy model. By contesting their U.S. domestic counterparts in service and affordability, all passengers would benefit.
3 Unleash the power of the sharing economy
Th Uber Technologies Inc. car service application (app) is demonstrated for a photograph on an Apple Inc. iPhone in New York, U.S., on Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2014. For San Francisco-based Uber Technologies Inc. which recently raised $1.2 billion of investors’ financing at $17 billion valuation, New York is its biggest by revenue among the 150 cities in which it operates across 42 countries. The Hamptons are a pop-up market for high-end season weekends where the average trip is three time that of an average trip in New York City. Photographer: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Third, we should unburden new ride-sharing firms like Uber, Lyft and Sidecar from looming regulations. Desperate to restore patronage to their labor union masters, politicians like Hillary Clinton and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio are quietly waging a sustained war on human capital. They frame their efforts under the phony pretense of employee protection, but in the end they hate the idea of greater competition beyond the whip of union domination and government regulation.
Most of all, they hate the notion of Americans taking ownership of their own futures. Riders use these car-sharing services because they provide a verified, reliable service at far more reasonable costs than taxi companies. Drivers drive because they want to make extra cash to pay their bills. Just as riders ride when they want, drivers drive when they want. It is a flexible alliance of mutual self-interest and mutual benefit — the ultimate incorporation of capitalism.
Still, while these services are popular and have done much to facilitate new economic activity, the Democratic left isn’t backing down. And left unchecked, the day will come when — as in France — these services are banned in the interest of political patronage.
Consider the alternative. If Uber, Lyft and the like expand, we’ll see more competition and sharing. Soon enough, it will be cheaper for a passenger to take a car to New York from another major east coast city — perhaps sharing with a stranger or two — than it would be to take a bus with 40 other people. Choice matters. Opportunity matters.
Ultimately what links these three suggestions together is the common theme of human interest. And by trusting the invisible hand of capitalism to better guide our transportation infrastructure, America could do great things for its future.