Yet another US trade outrageNick Land / text
P. 1
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20130704220851/http://app1.chinadaily.com.cn/star/2003/1127/vo2-1.…
Yet another US trade outrage
Shanghai Star. 2003-11-27
By Nick Land
US President George W. Bush's administration looks set to go down in
history for the most disgraceful trade record since the Great Depression.
There is something bitterly ironic about the fact that while "anti-globalization"
protestors take to the streets to denounce his government, Bush's own trade
policies seem to conform to an anti-globalization agenda almost
indistinguishable from the one his hooligan opponents are demanding.
Rather than learning from the fiasco of its steel tariffs, now shown to have
cost the domestic US economy more jobs among steel users than it saved
(temporarily) among producers, Bush's trade team has immediately turned its
protectionist blunderbuss on the Chinese textile industry. This is only the
latest sign that with protectionist attitudes gaining strength across the US
political spectrum and unprincipled populism taking the driving seat, the
period up to the US presidential election in November 2004 looks set to be a
free-trader's nightmare.
Under pressure from special interests in the US textile industry, which (like
the steel industry) is utterly marginal to the overall economy, import quotas
were imposed on Chinese lingerie. The absurdity of this measure defies
imagination. Economists have long understood that import quotas are the
most irrational type of trade barrier available (among a range of irrational
alternatives), since they serve merely to generate artificial monopoly profits
for both domestic and overseas producers, without even the partial
compensation of tariff revenue.
Like all protectionist measures, they raise prices that act as a regressive tax
on consumers, delay necessary industrial restructuring, boost inflation (thus
threatening the low interest rates that support economic growth), disrupt
international capital flows and invite retaliation. Protection can be reliably
expected to cost jobs, even within the "protected" economy itself, with the
jobs saved being typically lower paying and lower skilled than the jobs
sacrificed.
To add the final surreal twist, the Chinese brassieres subject to these quotas
face no domestic US competition at all - US bras, without exception, are
imported.
The one encouraging aspect of this hideous picture is that informed US
opinion is totally aligned with the outraged response from overseas. In an
important speech on November 20, the chairman of the US Federal Reserve,
Alan Greenspan, re-emphasized the importance of free trade to both US and
world economies, warning about the serious danger posed by trade barriers,
and arguing forcefully that: "It is imperative that creeping protectionism be
thwarted and reversed."
In the conservative US journal, The National Review, influential supply-sider
Bruce Bartlett (of The Wall Street Journal) writes:
"[The measure's] principal impact will be to further enrich a few wealthy
Republican businessmen by protecting them from competition, while further
impoverishing the poorest members of our society by making them pay more
for clothing. This action is utterly unjustified, and disgraceful."