One vision is about competing to make things better and cheaper, which seems like a good thing for everyone. The other is about jobs and a growing sense of unfairness.
My view is that the biggest policy change China could do is simply allow the ¥ to strengthen. The overall trade surplus (goods and services) is mainly a function of how strong or weak a currency is.
You're right - there is nothing wrong with exporting at a category level. But China is a magnet for blame when it is running ever-increasing trade surpluses, especially after the pandemic.
This goes to your point about creating jobs for others. One easy fix for China is to simply accelerate the process of shedding labor-intensive jobs — which given labor market dynamics and a shrinking workforce, they need to do anyway in the coming decades. Given wage levels, this will be mainly lower-wage developing countries, although with a stronger ¥ this could also be higher-wage developed countries.
Bringing the trade surplus back to zero will cause pain but in the long run may be worth it for China. It won't eliminate all of the criticism - after all, trade tensions rose even as China reduced its current account deficit in both % and absolute terms after the GFC - but it would have a positive effect on its trade relations with both the developed and developing world.
Excellent article. And some very insightful comments by Glenn too. I think it helps to state what the real issue is, which as you rightly referred to is “jobs”. - That’s where the value judgement is coming from. I have a question tho. While I think the advice that China should listen to its customers is a wise one.
Can you tell me which developing countries have a problem with China’s “overcapacity” ? I ask this because all I see right now is just rich global North countries complaining because they see themselves losing in the long run to China in a world that they have only dominated.
Obviously jobs is the most important topic for swing state voters, but I think it's much broader than protecting jobs. It is not even clear if growth in advanced manufacturing would generate many jobs because of automation. America/EU can't afford to consume any more without an equal share of production, unless relying on debt forever. There will be protection and incentives. And maybe tech transfer/building up local supply chain for market access.
Great article Kyle and a fair description of the most of the arguments (absent is the now stated policy of US forever primacy, and how this fuels the overcapacity narrative, but a digression for another time...). The solution of the current argument is as you say - JV's where Chinese manufacturers set up in importer countries and hire local workers to operate the factories. However, this would require land purchases in order build those factories, and we know that this is now another thing that is unacceptable to the Western world. What we have then is Western complaints, but no solutions other than China self-sabotage, a la Japan and the Plaza accord.
My view is that the biggest policy change China could do is simply allow the ¥ to strengthen. The overall trade surplus (goods and services) is mainly a function of how strong or weak a currency is.
You're right - there is nothing wrong with exporting at a category level. But China is a magnet for blame when it is running ever-increasing trade surpluses, especially after the pandemic.
This goes to your point about creating jobs for others. One easy fix for China is to simply accelerate the process of shedding labor-intensive jobs — which given labor market dynamics and a shrinking workforce, they need to do anyway in the coming decades. Given wage levels, this will be mainly lower-wage developing countries, although with a stronger ¥ this could also be higher-wage developed countries.
Bringing the trade surplus back to zero will cause pain but in the long run may be worth it for China. It won't eliminate all of the criticism - after all, trade tensions rose even as China reduced its current account deficit in both % and absolute terms after the GFC - but it would have a positive effect on its trade relations with both the developed and developing world.
Excellent article. And some very insightful comments by Glenn too. I think it helps to state what the real issue is, which as you rightly referred to is “jobs”. - That’s where the value judgement is coming from. I have a question tho. While I think the advice that China should listen to its customers is a wise one.
Can you tell me which developing countries have a problem with China’s “overcapacity” ? I ask this because all I see right now is just rich global North countries complaining because they see themselves losing in the long run to China in a world that they have only dominated.
This is a great piece! I think there are a few issues though, I wrote out a response here: https://mspence.substack.com/p/response-to-chinas-overcapacity-reveals would love to keep this conversation going. It's a super important topic!
Obviously jobs is the most important topic for swing state voters, but I think it's much broader than protecting jobs. It is not even clear if growth in advanced manufacturing would generate many jobs because of automation. America/EU can't afford to consume any more without an equal share of production, unless relying on debt forever. There will be protection and incentives. And maybe tech transfer/building up local supply chain for market access.
Great article Kyle and a fair description of the most of the arguments (absent is the now stated policy of US forever primacy, and how this fuels the overcapacity narrative, but a digression for another time...). The solution of the current argument is as you say - JV's where Chinese manufacturers set up in importer countries and hire local workers to operate the factories. However, this would require land purchases in order build those factories, and we know that this is now another thing that is unacceptable to the Western world. What we have then is Western complaints, but no solutions other than China self-sabotage, a la Japan and the Plaza accord.
Can you see a scenario where this might happen?