By Kevin D. Williamson
Sunday, January 10, 2016
Donald Trump exemplifies one of the strange and
lamentable dynamics in democratic discourse: People tend to have the strongest
opinions on those things about which they have the least knowledge. Herr
Apfelstrudelführer imagines himself issuing decrees that presidents have no power
to issue, and he doesn’t seem to understand that illegal immigration — his
headline issue — isn’t in the main driven by people walking across the Mexican
border. He doesn’t seem to understand how laws are made or how government money
is appropriated. He has, to say the least, a lot to learn.
Now he wants to launch a trade war with China over a
trade deficit that he isn’t bright enough to understand.
This isn’t that surprising. Trump inherited a fortune,
and, like many heirs, he’s a bit thick when it comes to the realities of money
— my habitual comparison of him with Paris Hilton is not offered
tongue-in-cheek. Those companies didn’t bankrupt themselves. Most of his
success as a businessman has been in the entertainment business, and that’s a
perfectly respectable racket, but I don’t want to see the troops saluting
President Gwyneth Paltrow or President Kim Kardashian, no matter how much money
they’ve piled up, and Trump is in essentially the same league, albeit with
worse taste than Mrs. Kanye West.
Our trade relations with China are a legitimate issue of
some concern, but they aren’t the issue that Trump and his ilk imagine.
American manufacturing wasn’t hollowed out by unfair competition from wily
Orientals — it wasn’t hollowed out at all, in fact, U.S. manufacturing output
today being far higher than it was during the so-called golden age of the
postwar era. Manufacturing wages have remained strong, too. What’s changed is
the share of the work force employed in manufacturing, which has declined for
several reasons: One of those is growth elsewhere in the economy, especially in
the service sector (you know, all those crappy jobs in software companies and
investment banks) and another is the fact that our manufacturers have grown
much more efficient, requiring fewer (but better) workers than they did a
generation ago. Which is to say, manufacturing employment has declined for the
same reason agricultural employment did in another era.
Trump proposes to lay a 45 percent tax on American
shoppers who buy Chinese-made goods. He won’t put it quite that way, of course:
Those who want to tax trade always pretend that the wicked awful scheming
foreigners are the ones who will pay the tax, but consumers usually end up
being the ones who suffer. If the price of Chinese-made electronic calculators
goes up 45 percent, you can bet that the price of U.S.-made or Swiss-made
electronic calculators is going to go up 40 percent.
Trump insists that this is necessary because, in his
words, “They do it to us.”
But they don’t. Not really.
China has some tariffs, as most countries do, but they
aren’t for the most part remarkably high, and Beijing has in fact been reducing
taxes on consumer goods in recent years because — get this — Chinese consumers
don’t like being made to pay artificially high prices for cosmetics (tariff
reduced from 5 percent to 2 percent) or diapers (cut from 7.5 percent to 2 percent)
or other things they want and need. China did put a punitive retaliatory tariff
on some cars made by GM and Chrysler, arguing that the U.S. government’s
bailout of those firms constituted an illegal subsidy under the World Trade
Organization rules to which both the United States and China are voluntarily
bound. (The WTO ruled against Beijing, but, if you ask me, a bailout is a
bailout.) That was a 12.9 percent tariff, incidentally, nothing like the 45
percent that Trump imagines, and it is being withdrawn. Chinese buyers in fact
love American cars — a Buick is a much bigger status symbol in China than in
New Jersey.
China exports two classes of goods to the United States:
Consumer goods (all the stuff you see in Walmart labeled “Made in China”) and
capital goods, meaning electronic equipment, machinery, and the like used by
U.S. companies to produce the goods they sell. So Trump proposes to put a 45
percent tax on people of modest means who buy toys and shoes at Target, and on
U.S. businesses looking to invest in real productive capacity here in the
United States — i.e., to drop a European-level tax on companies working to
employ Americans building stuff here in the United States. That’s a special
kind of genius, if by “genius” you mean mud-eating stupidity.
Trade imbalances are not necessarily a bad thing, or even
a thing at all. The nice people of Greenwich, Conn., probably buy a lot more
steaks from American cattle ranchers than cattle ranchers buy
hedge-fund-management services from guys in Greenwich, and the pinstripes in
Greenwich don’t feel any poorer for that. (Neither do the cowboys.) We have
run, from time to time, pretty significant trade deficits with countries such
as Switzerland and Germany, in no small part because nobody ever looked at a
fine wristwatch or a sports sedan and said, “Wow, it’s made in China — you know
it’s good.” Ted Cruz is not being exploited by wicked men in Geneva in spite of
the fact that his Patek wristwatch probably represents a sizeable personal
trade deficit with the Swiss.
All in all, the Chinese buy about 30 cents’ worth of
U.S.-made stuff for every dollar’s worth of Chinese-made stuff we buy. And,
because we’re talking about the world’s two largest national economies here,
those numbers get pretty big. If it isn’t tariffs — and it isn’t — why is our trade
deficit with China so large?
For one thing, China is poor. Its economy has been
growing, and it’s far better off than it was a generation ago, but it’s poor in
a way that Americans don’t know from poor: The average family income in rich
Shanghai is less than $5,000 a year, and in relatively hardscrabble Gansu, it
is less than $2,000 a year. A pair of made-in-the-U.S.A. Frye boots costs a
month’s pay in China, and very poor people don’t buy a lot of what the United
States exports: airliners, software, pharmaceuticals and medical devices, etc.
Beijing interferes with trade, of course, but the fundamental economic fact
behind our trade imbalance is that the Chinese still aren’t rich enough to buy
a lot of the stuff that we Americans make. They buy tons and tons of our
soybeans, but they can’t afford very many of our awesome bicycles.
Beyond that, China may be officially socialist, but it
doesn’t have much of a welfare state, so the Chinese save — a lot. Chinese
families generally save a quarter or more of their income, because they don’t
believe that they can rely on the government to take care of them when they get
sick or old or face other troubles. So even though they’re earning a lot of
U.S. dollars with their exports, they aren’t using those dollars to buy a lot
of U.S. goods — rather, China holds a lot of dollars in its reserves, in effect
lending us a portion of the goods we consume or, looked at another way,
financing our purchases with negative real interest rates. And on top of all
that, China isn’t blessed with a lot in the way of the natural resources it
needs to make its economy go, so it has to spend a lot of the dollars it earns
on raw materials and supplies from abroad (and the United States is only one of
many suppliers here) because nobody will take renminbi when U.S. dollars are to
be had.
(Would you?)
Our trade deficit with China isn’t a product of the
Chinese getting rich — it’s a product of their being poor. We will not have
more-balanced trade with China until Chinese people have a standard of living
that is more like that of Americans. Putting a 45 percent tax on American
shoppers and people who build computers in the United States (you know who does
that? Lenovo, a Chinese company) or build robotics systems using some imported
components isn’t going to change any of that. What’s worse, it will exacerbate
one of the real problems that U.S-based firms do face: relatively high business
taxes. Remember, much of that Chinese trade deficit comes from electronic
equipment and industrial machines used by American companies rather than from
cheap plastic waterguns, and Trump wants to put a 45 percent
materials-and-equipment tax on top of the 40 percent they pay in corporate
income taxes.
On economic matters as on so much else, Donald Trump is a
dangerous buffoon — and so are those so-called conservatives who have rallied
to his cause. Time to grow up.
No comments:
Post a Comment