Every day it seems like there’s another story about a Chinese product being recalled. The most recent of these is of toys:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – More than 1 million of the popular “Thomas & Friends” wooden railway toys made in China are being voluntarily recalled because some may contain lead paint, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission said on Wednesday.
About 1.5 million wooden vehicles, buildings and other train-set parts for young children are being recalled, the CPSC said in a statement. The toys were sold in the United States from January 2005 through June 2007, the statement said.
Lead is toxic and can pose a serious health risk to young children who often put objects in their mouths. Children under 6 are most at risk.
and nearly every day I see an editorial or op-ed counseling anti-Chinese actions, generally restrictions on Chinese imports of one sort or another. I think that these are misconceived, generally miss the point, and I make a practice of not linking to them but they’re not hard to find if you’re interested.
An enormous proportion of the poorest of the world’s poorest people are Chinese and a growing, prospering Chinese economy has gone a long way towards alleviating that misery. Is there any anti-poverty program that has had the impact of China’s reversal of its decades-long policy of autarky? Or India’s? Unfortunately, China still has a sort of odd one-way autarky and there’s little doubt in my mind that allowing more imports would be good for the Chinese people. Trade has been good for China and, IMO, more trade would be better.
The bonds of trade are mutual—we, as the consumers of Chinese-made products, are bound as much to the Chinese as the Chinese are to us. Maybe more so. There are some products that, for practical purposes, we no longer make here; their manufacture has moved wholly or largely to China. This includes things like vitamins, food flavorings and colorings, things as homely as children’s toys or as critical as computer memories (almost all of which are made in China).
There are some both in China and the United States who see this mutual dependence as a bad thing. I occcasionally read comments about food independence in the Chinese official media and, every so often, you’ll hear some sabre-rattling on the part of a Chinese military official. The recent anti-satellite demonstration (some have called it a test) is troubling in that context. Over here some are concerned about a Chinese military threat, loss of jobs to China, or Chinese hegemony. I think those concerns are exaggerated.
The Chinese military is no threat to us whatever. With little in the way of a blue water navy, China’s ability to project force beyond its borders is quite limited. Its missile and nuclear weapon inventory is a tiny fraction of ours. Since I’m inclined to believe that such things are not entirely the result of accident, I tend to believe that China’s military is more intended for use at home rather than abroad.
China’s immediate neighbors may have some cause to feel uneasy for example, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, India, and Russia. All of these countries are quite able to undertake their own defense and I’ve read more than a single report that some if not all of these countries are able to deal with whatever threat China really poses to them. I see no reason that we should be moved to any particularly strenuous efforts on their behalf. If they’re not willing to defend themselves should we be willing to defend them?
I don’t know that I’d be particularly upset on any but fairly abstract grounds at a Chinese invasion of Viet Nam.
Russia may, perhaps, have the most about which to be concerned. The Russians can take care of themselves.
How is Chinese economic growth a threat to the United States?
Just for fun let’s assume that the Chinese economy continues to growth at 10% per year, an astounding feat, and the U. S. economy continues to grow at 2% per year, quite low by U. S. standards. Here’s what the results would look like:
The red line is U. S. growth, the blue line Chinese. After a generation of unprecedented economic growth the per capita GDP of China would be roughly that of Argentina’s now and a quarter the U. S. per capita income, even after a generation of slow but steady U. S. growth. And, most importantly, although I won’t produce the figures to prove it (you can do that for yourself if you’re interested), China can’t achieve that level of growth without a heckuva lot larger internal market than they’ve got now. A China with that sort of interior market will be a China very, very different and better than the China of today.
It’s not a particularly popular view but I think that the manufacturing jobs that the U. S. has lost over the last 30 years were doomed anyway. They were an artifact of the post-World War II era when the U. S. economy was, for practical purposes, the world’s only functioning economy. It’s a good thing that situation hasn’t endured. The world is better for it.
There just was no future for highly paid unskilled or semi-skilled jobs in a world in which the United States had competition.
Do we need to fear increasing Chinese influence and ability to pursue its own agenda? Although I don’t see it that as something so much to be feared as faced, I believe that’s probably the source of some of the concern. We’re uncertain about what a more powerful, more assertive China may mean for our own future. As was pointed out nearly two centuries ago, America and Russia share some characteristics and I’m afraid that paranoia is one of them. I think we’re capable of learning to deal with it.
I think that there are some reasonable concerns for the future. Take a look at this opinion piece from the International Herald Tribune on the prospect for fascism in Russia and China. And I think that what we really have to fear are the authoritarian leaders of China, so frightened of the loss of their power and status and of their own people that they won’t allow the growth of the domestic markets that are essential to China’s longterm welfare and growth. But trade sanctions and hostility aren’t the way to address either of those problems.
Yeah, except that China should not be making planes, cars, trains, or any number of high end products that they do now make since they required joint ventures to enter their market. There is some distortion there.