Motherboard’s Nicholas Deleon wrote an article about the rise of the App Economy, in which he cited a PPI report.
Apple even claims that 1.9 million jobs have been created in the US in large part to the App Store. (The Progressive Policy Institute, a liberal think tank, suggests similar numbers.)”
Read the article in its entirety at Motherboard.
PPI Senior Fellow and trade expert Ed Gerwin was quoted by The Hill’s Vicki Needham in this article about the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Ed Gerwin, a trade expert with the Progressive Policy Institute, said that the significance of the strategic issues only became clear to him after he traveled to Japan last fall and spoke with their defense ministers where there are rising concerns about China actions in the South China Sea.
“I think in terms of the TPP there’s a huge geopolitical basis for passing it,” he said.
“TPP influences what kind of China we have commercially,” he said.”
Read the article in its entirety at The Hill.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 27, 2016
CONSUMERS WANT ONE SET OF RULES PROTECTING THEIR ONLINE INFORMATION, PUBLIC OPINION STRATEGIES AND HART SURVEY FINDS
National Poll Finds 94 Percent of Internet Users Agree All Companies Collecting Data Online Should Follow Same Rules
WASHINGTON—When consumers go online, they want their privacy protected, and they feel that no matter which company has their data – be it Amazon, Apple, AT&T, Comcast, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, T-Mobile or Twitter – that company should be held to the same set of rules, according to a new national survey by Public Opinion Strategies and Peter Hart.
The survey, conducted on behalf of the Progressive Policy Institute, demonstrates that online consumers do not have different concerns based on which specific entities collect online data. By overwhelming margins, 94% to 5%, Internet users agree that “All companies collecting data online should follow the same consumer privacy rules so that consumers can be assured that their personal data is protected regardless of the company that collects or uses it,” including 82% of Internet users who say they “strongly” agree with that statement.
“Ultimately, consumers want to know there is one set of rules that equally applies to every company that is able to obtain and share their data, whether it be search engines, social networks, or ISPs, and they want that data protected based on the sensitivity of what is being collected” said Peter Hart.
Consumers believe that all internet companies have access to a lot of data about their online behavior, and they want consistent privacy rules to apply to all of these companies regarding the treatment of this data. Of those surveyed, 83% agreed that online privacy should be protected based on the sensitivity of their online data, rather than on who is collecting and using the data.
The national poll of 800 Internet users was completed by a live telephone survey. The results clearly support that consumers want clear, uniform rules that protect their privacy based on the sensitivity of the data, not based on the type of company that uses the data.
###
On behalf of the Progressive Policy Institute, Public Opinion Strategies & Peter D. Hart completed a live telephone survey of 800 Internet users nationally, May 23‐25, 2016. Fully 40% of the telephone interviews were conducted via cell phone, and the margin of error for the survey is +3.46%. The purpose of this memo is to review the key findings from the survey.
Download “Internet-User-National-Survey-May-23-25-Key-Findings-Memo”
In the midst of the chaos of this election cycle, some important themes are emerging. In particular, voters are highly worried about retirement security. Indeed, 91 percent of voters in four swing states agree that most Americans are not prepared for retirement. That’s according to a poll by the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), in partnership with veteran Democratic pollster Peter Brodntiz.
That’s why it’s time for a Universal Pension system that would help all U.S. workers save for retirement by eliminating the need to navigate the maze of tax-favored retirement plans, and making their job-based pensions portable. Specifically, the UP would reduce today’s welter of tax-favored retirement accounts into one universal IRA account (with a choice between a traditional or Roth-style IRA).
The accounts would be managed by private firms, under the supervision of the individual rather than the employer, giving workers more control over their investment choices. Furthermore, when workers switch jobs, they can rollover their existing 401(k) or other company pension plans into their Universal Pension reducing paperwork burdens and financial fees for both employers and employees.
And by helping all workers start saving for retirement from their very first day of work, the Universal Pension would harness the power of compound interest for everyone. It would help to close a yawning wealth gap at a time when wealth inequality is roughly 10 times wider than income inequality.
Continue reading at The Hill.
Amid mounting public concern about climate change, many progressives are giving nuclear energy another look. It’s already America’s biggest source of zero-carbon energy, far surpassing wind and solar. And “next generation” reactor technologies hold great promise for generating nuclear power in safer, cleaner, and cheaper ways.
What’s more, America will need more nuclear energy to meet the ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets President Obama set at last year’s Paris climate summit. According to the White House: “As America leads the global transition to a low-carbon economy, the continued development of new and advanced nuclear technologies along with support for currently operating nuclear power plants is an important component of our clean energy strategy.”
Nuclear energy today accounts for nearly 11 percent of the world’s electricity. Without it, the world produce an additional 2.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. Here in the United States, nuclear energy generates 19 percent of our electricity — 63 percent of all zero-carbon electricity in America. The United States as well as developing countries such as China and India will need more nuclear power to meet growing energy demand without loading more carbon into the earth’s atmosphere. But we’re heading in the opposite direction — decreasing more nuclear capacity than we are adding.
U.S. nuclear companies intend to add five more reactors to the nation’s fleet by 2020. In the meantime, however, they have announced plans to shut down three existing plants — and more may be in the offing. Why so many closures? One of the main reasons is the glut of cheap natural gas stemming from America’s shale boom. Natural gas typically sets the price of electricity on the grid in much of the United States. Today, with natural gas trading on the spot market at around two dollars per BTU, nuclear-generated power is being priced out of electricity markets.
Continue reading at RealClearPolicy.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 19, 2016
Contact: Cody Tucker, ctucker@ppionline.org, 202-775-0106;
Steven Chlapecka, schlapecka@ppionline.org, 202-525-3931
WASHINGTON—Ed Gerwin, senior fellow for trade and global opportunity at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), today released the following statement after the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) released a new report concerning the likely impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement on the U.S. economy:
“The Progressive Policy Institute welcomes the release of the U.S. International Trade Commission’s report on the economic effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership on the American economy. We are pleased that the Commission’s detailed economic analysis concludes that a U.S. economy with TPP would, overall, see higher growth, employment, and exports as compared to a U.S. economy without TPP, and we look forward to reviewing the report in detail.
“It’s important to recognize—as the Commission itself notes—that the USITC’s cautious economic model does not capture the full economic impact of many of the TPP’s high standard reforms. These include the benefits of stronger protections for U.S. intellectual property, the elimination of trade impediments for many U.S. service providers, and reductions in standards-related barriers to American exports.
“In particular, the Commission’s economic analysis does not fully reflect the potentially substantial economic benefits of two key TPP reforms: (1) the many TPP provisions that establish a modern framework for e-commerce and digital trade, and (2) those that make trade easier, faster, cheaper, and more certain for American small business. As the Commission notes, many observers believe—as we do—that the TPP’s provisions on digital trade are ‘the most transformative measures in the agreement.’
“PPI’s analysis has shown that expanding e-commerce and digital trade has particular potential to ‘democratize’ trade, by making trade easier for small and non-traditional traders. And—when taken together with the TPP’s many advancements for small exporters—the TPP’s digital trade provisions can support stronger growth, better jobs, and new pathways for sharing trade’s benefits more inclusively.
“Finally, the TPP would have benefits beyond those that can be measured in economic terms, including strengthening America’s geopolitical ties around the Pacific Rim and supporting important values—like the rule of law, transparency, and the protection of workers and the environment—that we seek to more fully share with our friends and allies.”
###
A PPI report on App Economy jobs is cited in this article from Recode.
Beyond flaunting the growth of Play, Google has another motive in highlighting the success of apps like Prune. It needs to convince regulators in Europe, who have opened an antitrust case against Android, that the operating system boosts other companies instead of thwarting them.
In its argument to regulators, Google is likely to point here, to a recent report from the Progressive Policy Institute. It claims that some 1.66 million app jobs emerged in the U.S. from the “app economy,” more than double the number from three years ago.”
Read the full article at Recode.
All around the world we are seeing the rise of the App Economy—jobs, companies, and economic growth created by the production and distribution of mobile applications (“apps”) that run on smartphones. Since the introduction of the iPhone in 2007, the App Economy has grown from nothing to a powerful economic force that rivals existing industries.
In this paper we examine the production and distribution of mobile apps as a source of growth and job creation for Argentina. We find that Argentina had roughly 33,250 App Economy jobs as of March 2016.
What’s more, Argentina has the potential to add many more App Economy jobs in the near future. With President Mauricio Macri taking office in December 2015, Argentina began the arduous process of regaining its economic stability after the country’s crippling debt disputes of the prior 15 years.
Macri has made some large strides in normalizing the economy such as lifting currency controls, removing several export taxes, and most importantly, settling the debt dispute. By reaching an agreement with the holdout bondholders, Ar- gentina has regained access to international financial markets, giving Argentines, as well as outsider investors, hope for Argentina’s return to economic stability.
Download “2016.05-DiIonno_Mandel_Argentina_The-Road-to-the-App-Economy”
Since entering the presidential race, Donald Trump has been all over the economic map, with fantasy plans like getting Mexico to pay for a wall between the two countries.
But when Trump starts talking about how the U.S. never has to default because we “print the money,” he’s finally pointing to an economic strategy he could actually execute: The Trump ‘inflation balloon.’ If elected, Trump—the king of reneging on debt–would likely do everything he could to pump up the money supply. His goal: To create a rapid and unexpected inflationary surge that would transfer wealth from creditors to debtors.
Trump has already said that he would likely replace Federal Reserve Chairman Janet Yellen, as well as auditing the Fed and running bigger deficits. Taken together, President Trump could engineer an inflationary spiral with little difficulty compared to fixing basic economic problems.
Unexpected inflation makes it easier for debtors to pay back debt, especially when interest rates are fixed and the debt is in the national currency. As a result, in the short-term, the Trump inflation balloon would temporarily help the United States, the world’s biggest debtor country, and hurt China, Germany, and Japan, all creditor nations.
However, history shows that a Trump inflation balloon would end disastrously, sending interest rates soaring, impoverishing the next generation, and potentially leading to global conflict.
Politically, progressives need to be wary of the Trump inflation balloon. The idea of higher inflation will appeal to millions of Americans who have seen their student debt and auto loans soar by 81% since 2007, while their wages have stagnated. To a new graduate struggling to pay back a fixed-rate student loan, a burst of inflation would seem mighty attractive right now.
To fight back, progressive candidates need to stress the importance of growth and innovation for reducing the burden of debt. Rising real wages, propelled by higher productivity, would raise living standards for today’s voters and their children without the need to borrow.
By contrast, a Trump inflation balloon would bring the U.S. back to the 1970s, a time when the misery index—the inflation rate plus the unemployment rate—was sky-high. That would be a disaster.
Rick Rieder cites a PPI report in this piece about the recent growth of the United States economy.
Technology (IGM) is not only one of the fastest-growing industries. It has also created millions of jobs. It’s an important enabler of innovative product development. For example, technology has led to the emergence of the new app economy, creating new jobs. A recent report from the Washington, DC, based Progressive Policy Institute said that the United States had 1.7 million app economy jobs in 2015—up from 750,000 in 2013.”
Read the article in its entirety at Market Realist.
Productivity growth in the United States continues to slump. The latest numbers from the BLS show that multifactor productivity growth was only a tiny 0.2% in 2015.
In particular, gross medical productivity of the US healthcare system fell by 1.2% in 2015, according to PPI’s calculations.* That’s after two years of ticking up slightly.
Falling gross medical productivity implies that healthcare employment is increasing faster than the population, even after adjusting for the changing age mix. That’s not fiscally or economically sustainable over the long run, because it means that healthcare is absorbing more and more of the workforce, and leaving less for other productive activities.
Is this negative productivity trend going to continue? The good news is that innovation in pharma, medical devices, and apps has the potential for reducing the amount of excess labor costs in the healthcare system (see, for example, “The Folly of Targeting Big Pharma,” WSJ, December 10, 2015).
The bad news is that some groups of medical providers are looking to retain or even extend inefficient and costly practices by fighting back against new technologies and online delivery systems. For example, the trade group for optometrists recently filed what they called an “expansive” FDA complaint against a vision-texting app. This app would cut costs and save labor by letting people test their vision at home and send the data to a licensed ophthalmologist for a prescription. Similarly, the optometrists also support a new bill in the Senate that would make it harder and more expensive for consumers to use valid prescriptions to buy their contact lens online, even at a time when more and more shopping is done via the Internet.**
The U.S. needs to embrace productivity growth in the healthcare sector if overall productivity and living standards are to rise for everyone. Hopefully 2015 will turn out to be a blip rather than a trend.
*Gross medical productivity is defined to be the age-adjusted population, divided by the number of workers in the broad healthcare sector, and benchmarked to 2009=100. The population is adjusted for the relative cost of health care at different ages. The broad healthcare sector includes private and public hospitals, ambulatory care facilities, nursing homes, pharma and medical device manufacturers, biotech companies, and health insurers.
Gross medical productivity is an easy-to-calculate measure of how well the health care system is using labor resources to treat the potential patient population. Labor is important because it accounts for a large share of the cost of health care. We use age-adjusted population as the numerator because any of us—no matter how healthy—can become an involuntary consumer of healthcare at any moment.
** PPI first wrote about this issue in 2001, in a policy paper entitled “The Revenge of the Disintermediated: How the Middleman is Fighting E-Commerce and Hurting the Consumer.”
PPI President Will Marshall was quoted in an article on economic despair from CNNMoney‘s Steven A. Holmes.
In a recent AP poll, 54% of respondents described the economy as “poor.” In a new CNNMoney/E*Trade survey, a majority graded the economy as a “C” — or worse. In Gallup’s weekly survey, 60% of Americans said the economy was “getting worse,” the poorest rating given this year, and the worse since last August.
“The nation seems to be wallowing in a degree of economic pessimism,” said Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a Democratic think tank.”
Continue the article at CNNMoney.
The nominating contest grinds on, but the Acela primary set the stage for a general election faceoff between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Trump’s solid majorities mean that GOP voters, in their inscrutable wisdom, have spoken, choosing a political neophyte who’s never held any public office, has no discernable governing philosophy, and whose campaign consists mainly of bigoted outbursts and vicious personal attacks on anyone who gets in his way.
In contrast, the Democratic center seems to have held. Bernie Sanders’ call for an anti-capitalist “revolution” enthralled millenials, but his dream of turning America into a European-style welfare state—a colossal Denmark—struck out with black and Latino voters, and with women, who preferred the pragmatic Clinton.
What’s more, Clinton now has a cause that can galvanize a campaign that’s been criticized for lacking passion and inspiration—saving America from Donald Trump. Although some diehard Bernie Bros may decide to sit out the November election, she should have little difficulty uniting her party around the goal of keeping the billionaire bully out of the White House.
Continue reading at the Daily Beast.
It is not our place to offer UK voters any suggestions for their Brexit vote, scheduled for June 23. Moreover, we see no reason to duplicate George Osborne’s widely-discussed analysis of the economic impacts of a vote for leaving the European Union.
Rather, we simply want to give our assessment of the United Kingdom’s current economic situation and prospects, assuming that the country stays in the EU. Start with the bad news. The UK is suffering from a severe productivity slowdown, which is dragging down growth and real incomes. But it’s not purely a UK problem—the same slowdown is hitting the U.S. as well continental Europe.
But the good news is that the UK is about to take advantage of its key position in the global economy.
The UK is the country best poised to take advantage of the reforms in the global tax system. The country is in the midst of lowering its corporate tax rate to 17% as of 2020, and has put into place a “patent box” that will attract research and development activity from higher-tax countries such as the U.S. and Germany. What’s more, the BEPS reforms from the OECD make it more difficult for multinationals to seek out tax havens without actually moving workers into those countries. As a result, the low-tax UK—with its network of connections to the rest of the world and attractiveness to skilled workers—will be increasingly appealing to global companies.
At the same time, the UK is establishing itself as a tech powerhouse. The information and communications sector now in the UK accounts for 4% of total jobs. That’s higher than the comparable 3.2% figure in the US.
Moreover, the UK has 321,000 App Economy jobs, first in the EU by a wide margin, according to PPI research. The UK also has 178,000 jobs in the Fintech Economy (these figures include a conservative estimate of spillover effects). London leads all EU cities with 136,000 App Economy jobs, way ahead of second place Paris. The city also has 109,000 Fintech Economy jobs, somewhat ahead of New York City and way ahead of Silicon Valley (based on our update of 2014 research).*
Currently the UK is benefiting from its dual status. On the one hand it is part of the European Union, giving it access to the continent’s markets and skilled workers. On the other hand, its historical ties to the US makes it the logical landing place for US multinationals. These economic advantages are not to be given up lightly.
As the world becomes more connected and our shared economic prosperity is related to global scale, investment from the US, Asia and other strong economic players need a friendly home inside the EU. The UK is winning that race by a long mile–why would they quit now?
*This figure includes spillover jobs, making it not directly comparable to our 2014 figure for fintech jobs in London).
A PPI report on the growth of the tech economy was referenced in this piece from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
Thanks to growing companies like Citi, Enterprise, NISC, ESRI, Curas, BoardPaq and many others, St. Charles County is a strong part of the ‘Silicon Prairie’ in metro St. Louis and the Midwest,” Ehlmann said. “There are tremendous opportunities right now and for the foreseeable future for our residents to pursue lucrative careers in information technology or to pursue an entrepreneurial dream in IT.”
The Progressive Policy Institute ranked St. Charles County “one of America’s top 25 tech counties” in a 2015 report on high-tech job growth.”
Read the entirety of the article at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
