In US politics attacking China for the American economy's problem is a popular statement to make. Despite its political appeal, this is not an accurate from an economic perspective.
"Imports generate hostility in the U.S. as a symbol of lost jobs and China’s outsize influence. But while imports from China have grown from $321 billion a year in 2007 to an estimated $480 billion in 2012, U.S. exports to China have proportionally grown even more, from $62 billion in 2007 to a projected $120 billion this year. So while the trade deficit has increased (as have the size of the U.S. and Chinese economies during the past five years), China as a market for U.S. companies has grown much more significant."
This article illustrates Gordon Tullock's description of prohibitive tariffs as well as the general economic principle that countries are better off with free trade. Tullock discusses how prohibitive tariffs are equivalent to requiring domestic firms to engage in an inefficient production of a good. It is more efficient for firms, such as Apple, to produce their products in China and import them into the United States. Likewise, there are many goods and services that can be more efficiently produced in the US and exported to China. Thus by allowing firms in the US and China to produce goods at which they have a comparative advantage, both societies are better off. In reality, unfortunately, the situation is more complicated than Tullock's model. An intricate relationship exists between the US and Chinese economies and other problem such as China's currency manipulation exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment