Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
    USA

    US' protectionist measures fail

    By Chen Weihua in Washington | China Daily USA | Updated: 2017-08-25 12:37
    Share
    Share - WeChat

    US protectionist measures, including Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974, have not only imposed huge costs on American consumers and its own economy, but also failed to achieve their primary policy aims, according to a report published this week.

    Scott Lincicome, an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, surveyed academic literature throughout US history - from the founding of the US to its entry into the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947; from the GATT's early years to the creation of the World Trade Organization in 1995; and the current World Trade Organization (WTO) era.

    "The surveys show that, contrary to the fashionable rhetoric, American protectionism has repeatedly failed as an economic strategy," he said.

    While most trade specialists and economists agree that US protection measures are costly and not effective, the fact that these measures produce winners and losers is exploited by politicians, according to Lincicome, who is an international trade attorney.

    He explained that winners are concentrated, with concentrated benefits, while losers are very diffuse and have diffuse costs.

    "So, there is clearly this area for political gain by President Obama or by President Trump to pursue trade measures for political gain despite the potential economist cost," Lincicome told China Daily on Thursday.

    A Peterson Institute for International Economics analysis cited in the study shows that threats of retaliation through Section 301 failed to achieve even partial success more than half the time, with actual retaliation working less than 20 percent of the time.

    "These outcomes would likely be worse if similar policies were implemented today, owing to increased American integration into the global economy, the proliferation of global supply chains, the rise of other economic powers, and the creation of the WTO," Lincicome wrote in the paper.

    The US launched a Section 301 investigation on China over technology transfer and intellectual property last week.

    Lincicome believes it's far better for the US to go to the WTO, but it's also too early for people to react much.

    "I would agree that in terms of rhetoric, President Trump's rhetoric is easily the most protectionist of any president in the last several decades. On actual policy, the jury is still out," he said.

    According to the study, US antidumping law, including measures against Chinese imports, has repeatedly been found not only to hurt US consumers and many large American exporters but also to improve only rarely the state of the protected industry. Instead, what often lies in the wake of

    this protection is the bankruptcy of the very firms that lobbied for it.

    The paper cited the high cost of protectionism in Obama's imposition of "special" safeguard duties on Chinese tire imports from 2009 to 2011. The US tariffs imposed $1.1 billion in additional costs on US tire consumers in 2011, and the cost per manufacturing job saved was at least $900,000 that year.

    Most moves did not benefit US workers, but foreign producers in countries such as Thailand, Indonesia and Mexico, which replace Chinese imports. The US tariffs also killed 2,351 jobs in retail and other industries.

    In response to the US tire tariffs, the Chinese government retaliated against US exporters of chicken parts, costing that industry about $1 billion, according to the study.

    Lincicome noted that the US has struggled in recent years to adapt to significant economic disruptions due to trade, automation, innovation or changing consumer tastes, and it is legitimate to discuss policy ideas in response.

    "What should not be up for debate, however, is whether protectionism would help to solve the country's current problems," he said. "History is replete with examples of the failure of American protectionism; unless our policymakers quickly relearn this history, we may be doomed to repeat it."

    chenweihua@chinadailyusa.com

    (China Daily USA 08/25/2017 page1)

    Today's Top News

    Editor's picks

    Most Viewed

    Top
    BACK TO THE TOP
    English
    Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
    License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

    Registration Number: 130349
    FOLLOW US
    免费A级毛片无码鲁大师| 久久精品无码一区二区WWW| 亚洲va中文字幕无码久久| 亚洲精品一级无码鲁丝片| 亚洲中文字幕久久精品无码喷水| 中文字幕精品无码久久久久久3D日动漫 | 久久久久久亚洲Av无码精品专口 | 日韩乱码人妻无码中文视频| 免费无遮挡无码视频在线观看| 亚洲人成网亚洲欧洲无码久久| 日韩中文字幕欧美另类视频| 无码人妻少妇伦在线电影| 国产精品无码无卡在线播放| 亚洲av永久无码精品古装片| 日韩亚洲欧美中文高清在线| 暖暖日本中文视频| 日本中文字幕在线2020 | 亚洲中文字幕无码中文字在线| 88国产精品无码一区二区三区| 亚洲Av综合色区无码专区桃色| 中文亚洲日韩欧美| 中文成人久久久久影院免费观看| 最近中文国语字幕在线播放| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 精品人妻va出轨中文字幕| 影音先锋中文无码一区| 中文最新版地址在线| 丝袜熟女国偷自产中文字幕亚洲| 亚洲国产av无码精品| 人妻中文无码久热丝袜| 久久久噜噜噜久久中文字幕色伊伊| 天天看高清无码一区二区三区| 久久国产三级无码一区二区| 日产无码1区2区在线观看| 西西4444www大胆无码| 涩涩色中文综合亚洲| 人妻精品久久久久中文字幕69| 欧美人妻aⅴ中文字幕| 最好看的电影2019中文字幕 | 亚洲 欧美 国产 日韩 中文字幕| 中文字幕在线无码一区|