Attention Economy


Sunday, March 20, 2016

Tackling Widespread Misconceptions Regarding International Trade

Kevin D. Williamson of National Review wisely notes:
“The populist Right’s descent into Trumpism has been accompanied by another chorus of that great daft stupid hymn of American political economy: “We Don’t Make Things Here Anymore.” That is completely untrue, of course: As measured by the Industrial Production Index, we’re producing four times as much today as we did in 1960. Our exports have been flirting with record levels for a while, and we export many times more than what we did in the 1950s or 1960s. The largest markets for our exports are also the countries from which we take most of our imports: Canada, Mexico, and China. This is no surprise. 
Question: Would you rather your grandchildren worked in a Boeing factory, or in a flip-flop factory? Would you rather be a midlevel employee at a textile mill, or at Apple? Of course there is some wage at which working in a flip-flop factory is attractive, but the median American would-be flip-flop engineer’s next-best option is a lot more attractive than that of his counterpart in Wenzhou, and, so, that’s that.”
----------

A great note on a common misconception regarding trade from Daniel Ikenson:
“A noxious fallacy that perpetuates confusion and fuels antipathy toward trade and trade agreements is that trade is a competition played between national teams where the objective is to obtain a trade surplus.  Under this “Us versus Them” portrayal, exports are Team America’s points; imports are the foreign team’s points; the trade account is the scoreboard; and, since the scoreboard shows a deficit, the United States is losing at trade.
But trade is not a team sport. Trade is conducted by billions of individuals, each seeking to obtain value by exchanging some of their specialized output (monetized in the form of salaries or wages) for some of the specialized output of others. The purpose of trade policy is not to secure a trade surplus, but to facilitate this process of specialization and exchange and, ultimately, to produce economic growth.”

A Reality Check on NAFTA

Antidumping Duties – An Insidious Form of Protectionism

Economist Mark Perry on Misconceptions Regarding Trade Deficits:

As usual, Scott Sumner offers a useful corrective to the media hysteria regarding US-China trade:
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2016/03/is_china_trade.html

The Trade-Balance Creed: Debunking the Belief that Imports and Trade Deficits Are a “Drag on Growth”
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/tpa-045.pdf