S*****n
发帖数: 4185 | 1 Since China entered the World Trade Organization in 2001, the massive growth
of trade between China and the United States has had a dramatic and
negative effect on U.S. workers and the domestic economy. Specifically, a
growing U.S. goods trade deficit with China has the United States piling up
foreign debt, losing export capacity, and losing jobs, especially in the
vital but under-siege manufacturing sector. Growth in the U.S. goods trade
deficit with China between 2001 and 2013 eliminated or displaced 3.2 million
U.S. jobs, 2.4 million (three-fourths) of which were in manufacturing.
These lost manufacturing jobs account for about two-thirds of all U.S.
manufacturing jobs lost or displaced between December, 2001 and December
2013.
Among specific industries, the trade deficit in the computer and electronic
parts industry grew the most, and 1,249,100 jobs were lost or displaced, 39
.6 percent of the 2001–2013 total. As a result, many of the
hardest-hit congressional districts were in California, Texas, Oregon,
Massachusetts, and Minnesota, where jobs in that industry are concentrated.
Some districts in New York, Georgia, and Illinois were also especially hard-
hit by trade-related job displacement in a variety of manufacturing
industries, including computer and electronic parts, textiles and apparel,
and furniture.
The growing trade deficit with China has cost jobs in all 50 states and the
District of Columbia. Using a new model and new congressional district data
to estimate the job impacts of trade for the 113th Congress, this study
also finds that job losses occurred in every congressional district but one.
1
This summary of the jobs impact of trade with China arise from the
following specific findings of this study:
Most of the jobs lost or displaced by trade with China between 2001 and
2013 were in manufacturing industries (2.4 million jobs, or 75.7 percent).
Within manufacturing, rapidly growing imports of computer and electronic
parts (including computers, parts, semiconductors, and audio and video
equipment) accounted for 56.0 percent of the $240.1 billion increase in the
U.S. goods trade deficit with China between 2001 and 2013. The growth of
this deficit eliminated 1,249,100 U.S. jobs in computer and electronic parts
in this period. Indeed, in 2013, the total U.S. trade deficit with China
was $324.2 billion—$154.4 billion of which was in computer and electronic
parts.
Global trade in advanced technology products—often discussed as a source
of comparative advantage for the United States—is instead dominated by
China. This broad category of high-end technology products includes the more
advanced elements of the computer and electronic parts industry as well as
other sectors such as biotechnology, life sciences, aerospace, and nuclear
technology. In 2013, the United States had a $116.9 billion deficit in
advanced technology products with China, and this deficit was responsible
for 36.0 percent of the total U.S.-China goods trade deficit. In contrast,
the United States had a $35.6 billion surplus in advanced technology
products with the rest of the world in 2013.
Other industrial sectors hit hard by the growing trade deficit with China
between 2001 and 2013 include apparel (203,900 jobs); textile mills and
textile product mills (106,800); fabricated metal products (141,200);
electrical equipment, appliances, and components (96,700); furniture and
related products (94,700); plastics and rubber products (72,800); motor
vehicles and parts (34,800); and miscellaneous manufactured goods (107,600).
Several service sectors were also hit hard, by indirect job losses,
including administrative and support and waste management and remediation
services (196,900) and professional, scientific, and technical services (169
,900).
The 3.2 million U.S. jobs lost or displaced by the goods trade deficit with
China between 2001 and 2013 were distributed among all 50 states and the
District of Columbia, with the biggest net losses occurring in California (
564,200 jobs), Texas (304,700), New York (179,200), Illinois (132,500),
Pennsylvania (122,600), North Carolina (119,600), Florida (115,700), Ohio (
106,400), Massachusetts (97,200), and Georgia (93,700).
In percentage terms, the jobs lost or displaced due to the growing goods
trade deficit with China in the 10 hardest-hit states ranged from 2.44
percent to 3.67 percent of the total state employment: Oregon (62,700 jobs
lost or displaced, equal to 3.67 percent of total state employment),
California (564,200 jobs, 3.43 percent), New Hampshire (22,700 jobs, 3.31
percent), Minnesota (83,300 jobs, 3.05 percent), Massachusetts (97,200 jobs,
2.96 percent), North Carolina (119,600 jobs, 2.85 percent), Texas (304,700
jobs, 2.66 percent), Rhode Island (13,200 jobs, 2.58 percent), Vermont (8,
200 jobs, 2.51 percent), and Idaho (16,700 jobs, 2.44 percent).
The hardest-hit congressional districts were concentrated in states that
were heavily exposed to the growing U.S.-China trade deficit in computer and
electronic parts and other durable goods industries such as furniture as
well nondurable industries such as textiles and apparel. The three hardest-
hit congressional districts were all located in Silicon Valley in California
, including the 17th (South Bay, encompassing Sunnyvale, Cupertino, Santa
Clara, Fremont, Newark, North San Jose, and Miltpitas2), which lost 61,500
jobs, equal to 17.77 percent of all jobs in the district), the 18th
Congressional District (including parts of San Jose, Palo Alto, Redwood City
, Mountain View, and Los Gatos), which lost 50,700 jobs, 14.72 percent), and
the 19th Congressional District (most of San Jose and other parts of Santa
Clara County, which lost 39,900 jobs, 12.31 percent of all jobs). Of the top
20 hardest-hit districts, eight were in California (in rank order, the 17th
, 18th, 19th, 15th, 40th, 34th, 52nd, and 45th), six were in Texas (31st,
3rd, 10th, 18th, 17th, and 2nd), and one each in Oregon (1st), Massachusetts
(3rd), Georgia (14th), Minnesota (1st), New York (18th), and Illinois (6th)
. Job losses in these districts ranged from 13,900 jobs to 61,500 jobs, and
4.28 percent to 17.77 percent of total district jobs.
The job displacement estimates in this study are conservative. They include
only the jobs directly or indirectly displaced by trade, and exclude jobs
in domestic wholesale and retail trade or advertising; they also exclude
respending employment.3 They also do not account for the fact that during
the Great Recession of 2007–2009, and continuing through 2013, jobs
displaced by China trade reduced wages and spending, which led to further
job losses.
Further, the jobs impact of the U.S. trade deficit with China is not
limited to job loss and displacement and the associated direct wages losses.
Competition with low-wage workers from less-developed countries such as
China has driven down wages for workers in U.S. manufacturing and reduced
the wages and bargaining power of similar, non-college-educated workers
throughout the economy, as previous EPI research has shown. The affected
population includes essentially all workers with less than a four-year
college degree—roughly 70 percent of the workforce, or about 100 million
workers (U.S. Census Bureau 2012).
As earlier EPI research has shown, trade with China between 2001 and 2011
displaced 2.7 million workers, who suffered a direct loss of $37.0 billion
in reduced wages alone in 2011 (Scott 2013a). The nation’s 100 million non-
college educated workers suffered a total loss of roughly $180 billion due
to increased trade with low-wage countries (Bivens 2013). These indirect
wage losses were nearly five times greater than the direct losses suffered
by workers displaced by China trade, and the pool of affected workers was
nearly 40 times larger (100 million non-college-educated workers versus 2.7
million displaced workers).
The U.S. trade deficit with China has increased since China entered into
the WTO
Proponents of China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO)
frequently claimed that it would create jobs in the United States, increase
U.S. exports, and improve the trade deficit with China.4 In 2000, President
Bill Clinton claimed that the agreement then being negotiated to allow China
into the WTO would create “a win-win result for both countries.” Exports
to China “now support hundreds of thousands of American jobs,” and these
figures “can grow substantially with the new access to the Chinese market
the WTO agreement creates,” he said (Clinton 2000, 9–10).
China’s entry into the WTO in 2001 was supposed to bring it into
compliance with an enforceable, rules-based regime that would require China
to open its markets to imports from the United States and other nations by
reducing tariffs and addressing nontariff barriers to trade. Promoters of
liberalized U.S.-China trade argued that the United States would benefit
because of increased exports to a large and growing consumer market in China
. The United States also negotiated a series of special safeguard measures
designed to limit the disruptive effects of surging imports from China on
domestic producers.
However, as a result of China’s currency manipulation and other trade-
distorting practices, including extensive subsidies, legal and illegal
barriers to imports, dumping, and suppression of wages and labor rights, the
envisioned flow of U.S. exports to China did not occur. Further, the
agreement spurred foreign direct investment (FDI) in Chinese enterprises,
which has expanded China’s manufacturing sector at the expense of the
United States. Finally, the core of the agreement failed to include any
protections to maintain or improve labor or environmental standards or to
prohibit currency manipulation.
In retrospect, the promises about jobs and exports misrepresented the real
effects of trade on the U.S. economy: Trade leads to both job creation and
job loss or displacement. (This paper describes the net effect of trade on
employment as jobs “lost or displaced,” with the terms “lost” and “
displaced” used interchangeably.) Increases in U.S. exports tend to create
jobs in the United States, but increases in imports lead to job loss—by
destroying existing jobs and preventing new job creation—as imports
displace goods that otherwise would have been made in the United States by
domestic workers. This is what has occurred with China since it entered the
WTO; the United States’ widening trade deficit with China is costing U.S.
jobs.
From 2001 to 2013, imports from China increased dramatically, rising from $
102.1 billion in 2001 to $438.2 billion in 2013, as shown in Table 1.5 U.S.
exports to China rose rapidly from 2001 to 2013, but from a much smaller
base, from $18.0 billion in 2001 to $114.0 billion in 2013. As a result,
China’s exports to the United States in 2013 were almost four times greater
than U.S. exports to China. These trade figures make the China trade
relationship the United States’ most imbalanced by far (authors’ analysis
of USITC 2014).
Overall, the U.S. goods trade deficit with China rose from $84.1 billion in
2001, the year China entered the WTO, to $324.2 billion in 2013, an
increase of $240.1 billion, as shown in Table 1. Put another way, since
China entered the WTO in 2001, the U.S. trade deficit with China has
increased annually by $21.8 billion, or 11.9 percent, on average. Between
2008 and 2013, the U.S. goods trade deficit with China increased 53.8
billion, as shown in Table 1. This 19.9 percent increase occurred despite
the collapse in world trade between 2008 and 2009 caused by the Great
Recession and a decline in the U.S. trade deficit with the rest of the world
of 16.1 percent between 2008 and 2013 (according to the authors’ analysis
of U.S. ITC 2014). As a result, China’s share of the overall U.S. goods
trade deficit increased from 29.4 percent in 2008 to 37.3 percent in 2013.6
Each $1 billion in exports to China from the United States supports some
American jobs. However, each $1 billion in imports from China displaces the
American workers who would have been employed making these products in the
United States. The net employment effect of trade depends on the changes in
the trade balance. An improving trade balance can support job creation, but
a growing trade deficit usually results in growing net U.S. job displacement.
Total jobs lost or displaced between 2008 and 2013 alone amounted to 1,002,
400, either by the elimination of existing jobs or by the prevention of new
job creation. Figure A shows visually how rising trade deficits have
displaced a growing number of jobs every year since China joined the WTO,
with the exception of 2009 (during the Great Recession). On average, 287,000
jobs per year have been lost or displaced since China’s entry into the WTO
(as shown in Table 1, last row, data column four). The continuing growth of
job displacement between 2008 and 2013 despite the relatively small
increase in the bilateral trade deficit in this period reflects the
relatively rapid growth of U.S. imports of computer and electronics parts
from China, and the fact that the price index for most of these products
fell continuously throughout the study period, as noted later in this paper.
The share of U.S. imports from China accounted for by computer and
electronic products (in current, nominal dollars) increased from 32.9
percent in 2008 to 37.8 percent in 2013 (according to the authors’ analysis
of USITC 2014). | r*****2
发帖数: 3513 | 2 这事应该跟沃尔玛，target，Kmart老板说去 | l*****o
发帖数: 9235 | 3 这文中说受中国贸易影响，失业最严重的是硅谷三县，可是现在硅谷三县房价暴涨，富
得流油啊！ | k*******g
发帖数: 7321 | 4 瞧美国人那点出息，即使没有美中贸易赤字，也会有美越贸易赤字，美韩贸易赤字。 | S****8
发帖数: 401 | | j******g
发帖数: 2689 | 6 快递，物流公司周末休息，我的货从洛杉矶到旧金山因为感恩节要走一个星期，美国人
就这样工作。 | g*****s
发帖数: 1288 | 7 你丫要是赶上春节长假，咋说
【在 j******g 的大作中提到】
: 快递，物流公司周末休息，我的货从洛杉矶到旧金山因为感恩节要走一个星期，美国人
: 就这样工作。
| g*****s
发帖数: 1288 | 8 你丫要是赶上春节长假，咋说
【在 j******g 的大作中提到】
: 快递，物流公司周末休息，我的货从洛杉矶到旧金山因为感恩节要走一个星期，美国人
: 就这样工作。
| S*****n
发帖数: 4185 | 9 沃尔玛被土共收买了。
【在 r*****2 的大作中提到】
: 这事应该跟沃尔玛，target，Kmart老板说去
|
|
