The Trade War: So Much That Trump Didn’t Take Into Account

Published in Taiwan Times
(Taiwan) on 4 October 2019
by Chien-Fu Jeff Lin (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jennifer Sampson. Edited by Patricia Simoni.
According to U.S. statistics, in 2018, the United States exported $120 billion worth of goods to China and imported nearly $540 billion, bringing the U.S. trade deficit close to $420 billion. In the U.S.-China trade war, President Donald Trump often says the U.S. is getting an unfair deal, but is this really true? Just because the U.S. imposes high tariffs on China, will exports from China be blocked? Will Chinese economic development be harmed?

First, the economic theory of “revealed preference” tells us that consumer preference can be understood by looking at purchase behavior. So-called revealed preference is exhibited when consumers buy goods they can afford. No revealed preference is indicated when they don’t buy goods, even though they can afford them. Thus, consumers have revealed a preference for the goods imported in the past from China – not from Mexico or other Central or South American countries, or from Europe – and consumers reveal no preference for goods from other countries. Once tariffs are imposed, consumers no longer buy Chinese goods, instead buying goods from other countries, goods they revealed no preference for before the tariffs. For consumers, this situation is hard to bear, and they are getting a bad deal.

In the past, why did the U.S. import so many goods from China every year? The answer is that the U.S. manufacturing industry was diminished early on, due to international division of labor. Except for some high-tech products, high-value products and munitions, only a few scattered industries remain. However, these industries also need semifinished goods from China, such as components, parts and accessories. Many essential goods have long been imported from China through the effort of Taiwanese businesspeople behind the scenes. And because these ordinary commodities and toys such as high-quality art paper used to print Bibles, colorful inks used to print children’s books and nontoxic ink are inexpensive and of good quality, consumers have long loved them. The U.S. cannot produce such products itself or import them from other countries on a long-term basis to resolve the issue.

Thus, the chances of getting hurt by raising tariffs on China are greater for America than for China, especially regarding goods for which the U.S. heavily relies on China; tariffs are raised, but the U.S. still has to buy the goods. Goods that are imported from other countries to replace those from China will certainly be more expensive. This will cause the cost of living for Americans and the cost of manufacturing for industries to increase as tariffs increase.

Importantly, the uncertainty and market fluctuation the trade war has caused will eventually trigger a recession. On Sept. 4, Trump regretfully acknowledged that without the tariffs, “our stock market would be 10,000 points higher than it is right now.” Even if the U.S. government removes the increased tariffs, the economy will recede and government tax revenue will decrease. Raising tariffs makes up for revenue losses, but it is only a Band-Aid for a fiscal black hole. The American people will not feel the benefits of increased tariffs.

Moreover, if Chinese exports to the U.S. are blocked, will Chinese economic growth really be harmed? Compared with China’s gross export value of $2.5 trillion, that of goods to the U.S. is only $540 billion. Even if China completely loses the U.S. market, it will only lose approximately 20%, which will not hurt its economy. Instead, this will force China to develop its domestic market or relationships with other international markets more vigorously. The Chinese economy will have to change and adjust, and will become a more difficult opponent for the U.S. to deal with in the future.

Basic economic theory also tells us that trade should benefit both sides. Basically, the U.S. trade deficit was caused by the continually falling domestic rate of savings. Even without China, the U.S. would have a deficit with other countries. Therefore, the U.S. is attacking China as a scapegoat for its own overall economic imbalance.

In today’s world of integrated economies, the trade war has destroyed trust between two of the world’s superpowers. The overall impact has not only been felt in indicators, such as trades and tariffs, but also in huge mutual benefits. Now, the trade war is only part of the full-on struggle between the U.S. and China. We should not expect the trade war to end soon and must mentally prepare for long-term turmoil.


(專論) 貿易戰有很多川普沒算到

二○一八年美國的統計,美向中國出口一千兩百億美元貨物,進口了近五千四百億美元貨物。美國逆差近四千兩百億美元。美中貿易戰爭從川普總統經常掛在嘴邊的講法就是美國吃了大虧,真的如此?美國對中國課了高關稅,中國對美出口就受阻?就會重創中國經濟發展嗎?

首先,經濟學上的「顯示性偏好理論」告訴我們,從購買行為可以了解消費者的偏好。所謂對某些物品有顯示偏好就是買得起而且去買,沒有顯示性偏好就是買得起而不去買。因此過去從中國進口那些商品,而不是從墨西哥進口或其他中南美洲、歐洲進口,就是對中國那些產品有顯示性偏好,對其他國家出品沒有偏好。一旦加了關稅,消費者不去買中國的產品,而去買其他國家的產品,那是去買沒有加稅前,買得起而不買的顯示性不偏好產品。這對消費者而言情何以堪,這才是讓美國民眾真正吃虧。

美國過去為何每年要從中國進口那麼多的產品?因為美國製造業由於國際分工早就空心化。除了某些特別高科技產品、高價值產品以及軍火商品以外,只有一些零星的製造業,但這些企業也需要的中國半成品,比如各類元件、零件、配件;而大量的一般的民生商品,早就多由中國進口,這些背後很多有台商的影子。而因為這些日常用品、玩具價廉物美,早就廣為客戶喜愛,例如聖經高級銅版紙印刷、童書的彩色套色,無毒油墨。這些長時期美國也無法自產或者從他國替代進口解決問題。

因此,美國增加中國進口關稅,對於美國來說,傷害自己的機率更大。尤其某些嚴重依賴中國的產品,加了關稅還是要買;或是硬要從其他國家進口商品替代中國,價格肯定高於從中國進口。導致美國民眾的生活成本及企業的製造成本將會隨著關稅的提高而增加。

重要的是,貿易戰導致的不確定性,市場動盪,最終會導致經濟衰退。川普總統九月四日就後悔的承認「如果不對中國商品加徵關稅,美國股市應該會比現在高出一萬點」。增加的關稅,雖然美國政府拿走了,但經濟衰退,政府稅收減少,增加的關稅,只是彌補減少的稅收,只是去填財政的黑洞。美國民眾就享受不到增加關稅的福利。

另外,中國對美出口受阻,就會重創中國經濟發展嗎?五千四百億美元的對美年出口總額,相對於中國出口總額已達到二點五兆美元的規模來說,即使中國徹底失去了美國市場,大約廿%比例而已,將無法重創中國經濟。而且這也會逼中國更大力的發展內需市場或與其他國際市場發展更密切的關係。以上也會強逼中國經濟去改革調整,會成為美國未來更難應付的對手。

經濟學基本理論也告訴我們:貿易是讓雙方更好,讓雙方得利。基本上,美國的貿易逆差是由於國內不斷下跌的儲蓄率造成的,即便沒有中國,也會對其他國家產生逆差,因此,當前美國對中國的打擊,實際上是美國在做為自身總體經濟失衡找替罪羊。

在世界經濟一體化的今天,貿易戰毀掉兩個超級大國之間信任,整體影響絕對不僅是貿易、關稅等數字表像的關係,而是巨大的互利。現在中美之間,貿易戰只是局部,已經進入全面鬥爭階段。千萬不要指望貿易戰短期會結束,更要有長期動盪的心理準備。

(作者為前台灣經濟研究院院長、台大經濟系教授)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Topics

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Related Articles

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

Taiwan: Storm Commentary: The Impact on Taiwan of Trump’s New Global Trade Norms