Reading Krugman, it was interesting (if perhaps only because
of my historical ignorance) to see how much he emphasized Japan as the major
perceived economic threat at the time. Now, of course, if one goes by what was
said in the presidential debates on Monday, China is the major economic “threat”
to the US, in addition to perhaps Brazil, India, Russia, and other better off,
large developing countries. Just noticing this difference was interesting
because it suggests that perhaps global “competitors” can change fairly quickly
(over the course of a few years to a decade).
I also can’t help but wonder if there might be other aspects
of China’s economic performance that might make the situation now different
than the situation with Japan earlier. For one, it seems that China, unlike
Japan, has many protectionist policies (rather than the de facto cultural protectionism Krugman describes), such as pegging
its currency, discriminatory industrial policies that favor domestic firms,
discriminatory health and safety rules on imports, and so on [1]. China also
has failed to effectively enforce intellectual property rights [1].
Of course, as Blinder and others have pointed out, even if there
are barriers to free trade, we are often still better off trading freely
ourselves, but as Krugman asserts “free trade becomes very difficult to sustain
politically if there is a widespread and growing perception that one of the
main players is following different rules” (Krugman, 133). This describes
almost perfectly the sort of public attitudes towards China that Romney and
Obama were attempting to address and navigate around on Monday night. Though
Krugman notes that for Japan, because the closed nature of its markets arises
from decentralized cultural forces, threatening protectionism won’t work, he
seems to have little concern about the issue. The Japanese advantage, he says,
hurts our economy only marginally, and suggests that the “Japan problem” might “simply
fade away” on its own (Krugman 152).
I am not sure if we could as easily apply this answer to
China, however. Certainly, many are concerned by the fact that China’s GDP
(purchasing power parity) is rapidly catching up to the US’s ($11.4 trillion versus
$15.3 trillion)[2]. I do not doubt that if China surpasses our GDP that will
have some economic impact on US-China trade, though (again as Krugman predicts)
it might be minimal. However, it seems to me that China’s political position is
far more formidable. With a centralized government, China would reasonably be more
effective in enforcing anti-market and anti-free trade regulations than we are,
and thus once more threats of protectionism from our slow-acting democracy
would prove impotent. Yet there also seems to be another significant difference
between China and Japan, being that China is a very strong military power with
nuclear weapons. As such, China has considerably more leeway than Japan in
using their political power to, say, collect on loans or snub the international
community.
It seems to me that this combination of political power and
economic power is what most concerns and frightens the American public. But I
really wonder how much it matters that China is second (third if you count the
EU as a whole) in GDP, or that this economic power is combined with a very
centralized, powerful state with significant military (and nuclear) power. Krugman’s
discussion of how exports and imports take up a relatively small fraction of
the US economy (and thus our productivity is the most important determinant of
economic growth) seems to suggest that there are limits to how much China can
impact our economy, even if they take a very extreme path (which, given the
current state of international affairs seems fairly unlikely). Though obviously more information and data is needed, it seems that (if Krugman’s analysis is
right) China would be far more of a political threat than an economic one.
[1] Morrison, W. M. (2011). China-U.S. trade issues. Washington,
DC: Congressional Research Service. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1867&context=key_workplace
[2] https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html?countryName=United%20States&countryCode=us®ionCode=noa&rank=2#us
No comments:
Post a Comment