Page 12 - SCBJ-201606
P. 12
South China Business Journal
HIGHLIGHT with several non-partisan research Academic researchers recently found the TPP will increase annual real incomes
organizations have warned this would that “trade typically favors the poor, who in the United States by $131 billion. They
cost American consumers $250 billion concentrate spending in more traded also expect around 650,000 more people
per year, cause the loss of up to 4 million sectors.” They find “a pro-poor bias of to work in export-related jobs (and fewer
American jobs, and impose a regressive trade in every country … while high- in lower-wage jobs) because of the TPP.
consumption tax on the typical American income individuals consume relatively
family of more than $2,000 annually. more services, which are among the least Such a shift in the mix of jobs will help
traded sectors.” raise wages: Manufacturing workers
Even “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” can whose jobs depend on exports earn 18%
provide a useful reminder of the Further, the Commerce Department more on average than those that don’t,
devastating results the last time tariffs estimates that foreign tariffs reduce the and trade-oriented service industries pay a
on this scale were imposed (the Smoot- earnings of American factory workers by similar premium.
Hawley tariff). as much as 12%. Non-tariff barriers add
to the damage, which hits other sectors And now the U.S. International Trade
Sanders says trade as well. Trade deals that lift those trade Commission has weighed in, estimating
agreements are barriers help U.S. manufacturers and their that the TPP will boost U.S. annual real
“part of a global race workers. income by $57.3 billion by 2032. (The
to the bottom” and ITC’s estimates have proven conservative,
mostly serve to enrich underestimating the boost to U.S. exports
“the 1%.” from new trade agreements by factors
ranging from four to ten.)
Actually, U.S.
trade barriers Clinton writes that she will only
hit the poor support new trade pacts “if
hardest, and trade they will create good jobs, raise
liberalization wages and advance our national
is particularly security. I opposed the Trans-
beneficial to low- Pacific Partnership when it failed
income Americans. to meet those tests.”
As a paper from
Progressive In fact, a host of studies show the TPP will In sum, there’s a gulf between what the
Economy explains: indeed achieve those goals. candidates are saying about trade and
the facts. The Chamber is committed to
“Because U.S. tariffs are concentrated in The World Bank estimates the TPP would making sure the facts aren’t left behind.
taxation of cheap clothes, shoes, and other boost U.S. national income by more than
home goods rarely made in the United $100 billion. That sum is larger than the
States, they are mostly ineffective as annual economic output of approximately
import limits and regressive as taxation. 130 countries. It’s more than the annual
The main effect of reducing these tariffs economic output of 14 states.
through trade agreements would be to
raise living standards for lower-income Researchers with the Peterson Institute
households and thus ease inequality.” for International Economics estimate that
10
HIGHLIGHT with several non-partisan research Academic researchers recently found the TPP will increase annual real incomes
organizations have warned this would that “trade typically favors the poor, who in the United States by $131 billion. They
cost American consumers $250 billion concentrate spending in more traded also expect around 650,000 more people
per year, cause the loss of up to 4 million sectors.” They find “a pro-poor bias of to work in export-related jobs (and fewer
American jobs, and impose a regressive trade in every country … while high- in lower-wage jobs) because of the TPP.
consumption tax on the typical American income individuals consume relatively
family of more than $2,000 annually. more services, which are among the least Such a shift in the mix of jobs will help
traded sectors.” raise wages: Manufacturing workers
Even “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” can whose jobs depend on exports earn 18%
provide a useful reminder of the Further, the Commerce Department more on average than those that don’t,
devastating results the last time tariffs estimates that foreign tariffs reduce the and trade-oriented service industries pay a
on this scale were imposed (the Smoot- earnings of American factory workers by similar premium.
Hawley tariff). as much as 12%. Non-tariff barriers add
to the damage, which hits other sectors And now the U.S. International Trade
Sanders says trade as well. Trade deals that lift those trade Commission has weighed in, estimating
agreements are barriers help U.S. manufacturers and their that the TPP will boost U.S. annual real
“part of a global race workers. income by $57.3 billion by 2032. (The
to the bottom” and ITC’s estimates have proven conservative,
mostly serve to enrich underestimating the boost to U.S. exports
“the 1%.” from new trade agreements by factors
ranging from four to ten.)
Actually, U.S.
trade barriers Clinton writes that she will only
hit the poor support new trade pacts “if
hardest, and trade they will create good jobs, raise
liberalization wages and advance our national
is particularly security. I opposed the Trans-
beneficial to low- Pacific Partnership when it failed
income Americans. to meet those tests.”
As a paper from
Progressive In fact, a host of studies show the TPP will In sum, there’s a gulf between what the
Economy explains: indeed achieve those goals. candidates are saying about trade and
the facts. The Chamber is committed to
“Because U.S. tariffs are concentrated in The World Bank estimates the TPP would making sure the facts aren’t left behind.
taxation of cheap clothes, shoes, and other boost U.S. national income by more than
home goods rarely made in the United $100 billion. That sum is larger than the
States, they are mostly ineffective as annual economic output of approximately
import limits and regressive as taxation. 130 countries. It’s more than the annual
The main effect of reducing these tariffs economic output of 14 states.
through trade agreements would be to
raise living standards for lower-income Researchers with the Peterson Institute
households and thus ease inequality.” for International Economics estimate that
10
