Categorized | China, Trade



A Reuters Digital Editor writing for the NY Times figures out that the U.S.-China relationship kills jobs and growth.  An uncomfortable moment for this utopian trade-benefits-all believer.

The big surprise, at least for believers (like me) in the classic liberal economic view that trade benefits both parties, is the strong and negative impact of globalization on U.S. workers — Mr. Autor estimates it accounts for 15 to 20 percent of jobs lost.

“The rise of China was such a huge change. It really did matter,” Mr. Autor said. “First, China is such a huge country. Two, China was 40 or 50 years behind in technology, so it had a lot of catching up to do. Third, it happened so fast.”

What is striking, and frightening, is the extent to which, at least in the U.S.-China trade relationship, the knee-jerk, populist fears intellectuals tend to deride actually turned out to be true.

“U.S.-China trade is almost a one-way street. This trade relationship doesn’t clearly give you the benefit that you can sell a lot of stuff to your trade partner,” Mr. Dorn said. “If you talk to someone who is somehow involved in the promotion of free trade, they may say that maybe the headquarters of Apple benefits. That may be true. But the first-order effect is of job loss.”


3 Responses to “Duh.”

  1. maggie says:

    In classical physics, stuff that gets out of balance tends to topple over, capsize and sink, or end up upside down in the ditch.

  2. Jim Schollaert says:

    Chrystia Freeland, the author of this article, is one of the most knowledgable and perceptive reporters out there on today’s most important global economic developments. She is the former Washington Correspondent of the Financial Times, a frequent guest on The McLaughlin Group, and the author of 2 great books, ‘Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Elite’, and ‘Sale of the Century: Russia’s Ride from Communism to Capitalism’. She should be on everyone’s required reading list. Hardy worthy of ‘Duh’, Michael.

  3. Sorscher says:

    It’s not free and it’s not trade.

    The economics profession deserves a swat on the butt. Really.


Leave a Reply

Action: Sign on to 21st Century Trade Agreement Principles

Let's tell Congress how to improve trade agreements to benefit America.

Please sign your organization or company on to these 21st Century Trade Agreement Principles.

Sign up for daily updates


Ian Fletcher’s: “The Conservative Case Against Free Trade”

Ian Fletcher’s “Free Trade Doesn’t Work”