Topic: Trade and Immigration

Freeing the Farm

Today Cato’s Center for Trade Policy Studies released a new study, “Freeing the Farm: A Farm Bill For All Americans”, as part of our efforts to promote serious and permanent reform of farm policy in the United States. We will be holding a forum to discuss the study on April 26 (register here).

For too long, American consumers and taxpayers have been supporting farmers, many of whom run successful agribusinesses (for more information on subsidies and who receives them, see the excellent work of the Environmental Working Group here). Removing price supports, import barriers and subsidies will save taxpayers and consumers billions of dollars and will expose farmers to the 21st century economy. To the extent that reforms help to achieve a successful conclusion to the Doha round of multilateral trade negotiations, American businesses (including farmers) and consumers will gain further.

How would we propose to achieve all this, given the notorious power of the farm lobby? A one-time, limited buyout of commodity support coupled with legislative changes and contracts.

With any luck, the 2007 Farm Bill will be the last.

Growing Pains in the U.S.-China Trade Relationship

What do I think about Red China?  Looks fabulous on a white, satin tablecloth!  

For more serious thoughts about China (in particular, its trade relationship with the
United States), please check out my interview with People’s Daily, a large Chinese newspaper.  Morgan Stanley Chief Economist Stephen Roach was asked the same questions.  His responses can be found here.

If It’s Not a National ID, Then What is It?

Former IRS Commissioners Doris Meissner and James Zigler editorialize in today’s New York Times about their support for “secure, biometric Social Security cards” as an essential part of immigration law reform.

The give-away line?: “To insist on secure documents with biometric identifiers is not a call for a national ID.” They provide no logical support for this naked assertion. Because it’s false.

Strengthened “internal enforcement” of immigration law means federal surveillance and tracking of all workers. All of them. Including you.

Can We Blame the Record Trade Deficit for Global Warming, Too?

An Associated Press story today on the latest trade deficit numbers noted as an aside, “The trade gap has set new records for five consecutive years, a period when the country lost more than 3 million manufacturing jobs.” 

Thoughtful people can disagree about the long-term implications of the trade deficit, but there is no evidence that the trade deficit itself is responsible for the recent drop in manufacturing employment.  

Manufacturing employment has been on a downward trend, not because of imports, but because of soaring productivity in the sector. In fact, overall manufacturing output in the United States continues to increase. American factories can produce more with fewer workers because the remaining workers are so much more productive.  

During the 1990s, the trade gap set new records for seven years in a row (1994–2000). That was also a period of robust domestic growth in which the country added almost a quarter of a million manufacturing jobs.  

As for the most recent string of record trade deficits (2002-2006), one could also describe that period as one when: 

… the real output of American factories grew by 14 percent.    

… the country added a net 6 million new jobs.   

… the unemployment rate fell from 5.8 percent to 4.5 percent.   

… annual real GDP grew by $1.5 trillion, or 15 percent.  

… the net household wealth of Americans grew from $38.8 trillion to $55.6 trillion.  

As I’ve written recently in a Cato Free Trade Bulletin, the reality behind the trade deficit numbers is more multi-faceted than the public discussion in Washington would lead us to believe. 

Behind China’s Headline Export Numbers

China overtook the United States in the second half of 2006 to become the world’s second leading exporter of goods. That fact, contained in a new report from the World Trade Organization and trumpeted in headlines around the country this morning, is bound to further rile up skeptics of America’s growing trade with China.

Although the United States exported more goods ($1,037 billion worth) in all of 2006 than China (which exported $969 billion), figures for the second half of the year show that China has now claimed the no. 2 spot behind Germany.

For those of a mercantilist mindset, to whom trade is all about exporting more than you import and more than the other guy, this news is guaranteed to be alarming. But the real news is nothing of the sort.

First, China is bound to move up in the world rankings of trade. It represents 20 percent of the world’s population, it is surrounded by thriving, trade-oriented economies, and its increasingly open and free economy has been growing at double-digit rates for more than a decade. We should welcome the news that China is more integrated than ever in the global economy.

Second, the United States continues to be a trade and export powerhouse. U.S. exports of goods grew 14 percent between 2005 and 2006, and surpassed $1 trillion for the first time ever. When combined with the $387 billion in services Americans sold abroad last year, we remain the world’s no. 1 exporter.

Third, most of the goods that China exports are in fact designed and in large part made in other countries, including the United States. “Assembled in China” would be a more accurate label than “Made in China” for most of its exports. More than half of China’s exports are made in foreign-owned factories. The most sophisticated components in the computers and other consumer electronics exported from China are in fact made in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the United States, and other, more advanced economies. China has become the final link in a deepening global supply chain. (For more detail, see my 2006 study on U.S. trade with China.)

Finally, trade is about more than exports. It’s about, well, trade. We export for the purpose of getting back things of even greater value. Americans benefit at least as much from imports as we do from exports. The $2.2 trillion in goods and services we imported last year make our lives better every day.

As author P.J. O’Rourke summarized in his terrific new book, On the Wealth of Nations, “To give [Adam] Smith’s case against mercantalism in extreme concision: imports are Christmas morning; exports are January’s MasterCard bill.” 

Is Benign Neglect the Best Immigration Policy?

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, a professor from the University of California, San Diego, argues that an expanded guest worker program might be less desirable than the status quo. Given the likelihood that politicians and bureaucrats will sabotage even a good idea with needless regulation and red tape, this is a compelling argument:

…from a purely economic perspective, illegal immigration is arguably preferable to legal immigration. …the illegal route is for the moment vastly more efficient than the cumbersome legal system. Illegal immigration responds to economic signals in ways that legal immigration does not. Illegal migrants tend to arrive in larger numbers when the U.S. economy is booming and move to regions where job growth is strong. Legal immigration, in contrast, is subject to bureaucratic delays, which tend to disassociate legal inflows from U.S. labor-market conditions. The lengthy visa application process requires employers to plan their hiring far in advance. Once here, guest workers cannot easily move between jobs, limiting their benefit to the U.S. economy.

Hollywood For the Stylish

I loved this. It seems that there is a push (led by a fashion lawyer and a fashion show consultant, no less) for Washington, D.C. to get its own version of Chicago’s Magnificent Mile. According to today’s Yeas and Nays column in the Examiner (second item), a few D.C. council members are pushing to create a “Commission on Fashion Arts and Events.” It will “recognize the achievements of D.C.’s burgeoning fashion community” (really) and dedicate a section of the “city’s landscape” for fashion retail.