Crossposted from Clyde V. Prestowitz on Trade
Most leading economists argue that the U.S. economy is suffering from weakness of demand. This has long been Paul Krugman‘s theme. Joe Stiglitz along with many other well known names seem to agree. I myself do certainly believe that if billionaires from outer space suddenly appeared and began to buy lots of American produced and provided goods, services, and real estate, the outlook for the U.S. economy would be much brighter than it is.

In order to generate jobs, we must domestically produce goods in high demand (Photo: LGEPR / Flickr)
But I have been trying to think about this problem in the context of the current European crisis. One of the stock economist prescriptions for resolution of that situation is for Germany to go on a stimulus binge. This, it is said, would create demand in Germany that could be, at least in part, satisfied by exports from the so called “peripheral” European economies like Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, and even France. These economies would then see a rise in their own domestic demand as workers found new jobs and started spending from their new pay checks, and this in turn would create new demand and jobs in a virtuous circle.
Sounds beautiful and logical, but I keep running into a difficult question: What exactly is it that the peripheral economies are going to sell to the Germans? Cars? But everybody in Europe wants a German car. Electronics? But with a few exceptions, the Europeans get their electronics from Asia. The Spanish have over 25 percent unemployment because their main product was housing and that doesn’t export too well. My point is that that while more German stimulus, demand, and even, to a certain degree, inflation might be more desirable than not, it isn’t fully clear that such stimulus would actually solve or even greatly alleviate the unemployment in the peripheral countries. This is because they don’t make or provide much of what the Germans buy. German stimulus might do a lot for the Chinese, Japanese, or South Korean economies, but not nearly as much for the Greek economy. In this instance, the problem is more than just one of insufficient demand. It is also inadequate and inappropriate economic structure. How a country produces wealth matters and the level of demand may have little to do with it.
Now let’s look at this from the perspective of the United States. As I have said before, it’s not entirely true that we suffer a paucity of demand. We have trade and current account deficits of more than 3 percent of GDP, a level generally considered by economists to be unsustainable in the long term. That means we are consuming (demanding) 3 percent more than we produce. We are borrowing from foreign lenders to fund the purchase of that 3 percent of GDP that we consume in excess of what we produce. Does that sound like lack of demand to you ?
What’s happening is that our demand is leaking abroad. The best example is the cash for clunkers program we operated a few years ago. People replaced their clunkers largely with imports. So the demand for new cars was there, but it was filled by foreign producers rather than domestic ones.
America actually has a substantial growth opportunity without spending a dime on tax cuts or new stimulus programs or quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve system. If it could cut its trade deficit in half, the United States could create 2-3 million new jobs. To do that , however , it must substantially increase the variety of goods and services it produces domestically and exports while decreasing what it buys abroad. And to do that America must avoid the profile of Europe’s peripheral nations and aim for one like that of Germany.
Although America has become a very competitive location for production of autos, it still imports more than a third of the autos it buys. Most of the high tech components of the Apple iPhone can be made quite competitively in America, but they are almost entirely made, not in China as many suppose, but in Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Germany, countries with high wages and costs but with economies of scale and skills and experience that America has failed to match despite its capacity to do so.
So by all means, let’s be sure we are generating enough demand to keep the machine running. But at least as important if not more so is the question of what the machine is producing and of how to get it producing what will be necessary to avoid the peripheral trap and to sustain growing prosperity for all Americans.



5 Comments

Great article. End so called free trade and return to a more balanced trading policy and jobs will start to reappear as some Industries relocate back in the US. Re-set tax policies as well to STOP immediately rewarding companies that go offshore or send their labor component offshore. Why should all of us be rewarding behavior by Int’l Corps. that puts us out of work? The problem isn’t just economic it’s political. The elites consider themselves citizens of the world now or of the US Empire not of America. In short they are traitors. Those of us with no roots in that global economy are without work ( unless we have some kind of career or job that cannot be exported.)
Ten years Ten Trillion in Infrastructure. One Trillion dollars is 10 Million construction jobs. Ten million construction jobs equals 17 Million total jobs.
We need the infrastructure, the rich and banks have 3+ Trillion available. With a buy American provision we can rebuild our infrastructure, convert to a green economy, and employ Americans.
The big problem is asking the rich to pay for it.
The peripheral trap is right where they want us: A reduction of living standards by at least 30 %
We’re going to get a taste of the shit we’ve been shoveling down the throats of the developing world. Don’t think they’ll be much tears shed except our own.
For Prestowitz the answer is trade. Since it’s his field, he’s got to figure out ways to make himself relevant.
Whatever makes him think that car producers, Apple, etc. would shift their production back onshore. The point of globalization was to impoverish the middle class in rich countries by moving production offshore.
Supply side economics is about giving govt welfare to producers.
Bada bing. Guess what happens when you do that. You’ve got excess supply worldwide.
Another silly economist making wrong policy prescriptions, not to mention ones that have no chance of being effected.
As a technical note, he cites the LEVEL of the trade & govt deficits, when it is the CHANGE in them that would make the difference.
Pathetic blather.
We’ve been exporting factories for forty years, machines and all.
In the process, we’ve lost the ability to shift production back home because the tools and the skills no longer exist.
In the case of high-tech items like iPhones, we never did make them.
The MOTU plan has been diametrically opposed to Prestowitz’ advice, what does he think they are going to do, start training people to do things they’ve been doing their best to prevent them from doing?
For twenty years, the big banks have refused to loan money to manufacturers would didn’t intend to build their factories in China, so they’re suddenly going to reverse direction and start financing investment in the good old USA?
Prestowitz op-ed sounds much like retired banker Sandy Weill’s recent admission that he was wrong, and that the big banks should be broken up.
I’d wager Prestowitz used to sing the praises of Globalization, right up until the point that his opinion failed to attract a check.