In This Issue:
Featured Links:
|
 |
 |
 |
You can sign up to receive ERR and other CEPR e-newsletters at the CEPR Listserve Signup Page. You can find the latest ERR at the Economic Reporting Review Main Page. All ERR prior to August 2000 can be found at Fair.org.
Links to both New York Times and Washington Post articles require registration. To sign up for
these free services, go to the NY Times Sign-up Page
and the Washington
Post Registration Page.
Outstanding
Stories of the Week
Blue
Skies and Green Yards, All Lost to Red Ink
Michael
Moss and Andrew Jacobs
New
York Times, April 11, 2004, Page A1
This
article examines a housing development in the Pocono Mountains which was
marketed heavily among moderate income New Yorkers. The article shows how the
promise of owning a home led many families to make financially ruinous
decisions. It also shows how government policy to promote homeownership
encouraged this scam operation.
Drug Importation Foes Speak Out
Ceci
Connolly
Washington
Post, April 15, 2004, Page A3
This article reports on a hearing at the National Institutes of Health which
examined the merits of allowing drug importation from Canada and other
countries. The article points out that many of the opponents of importation were
on the payroll of the pharmaceutical industry.
A
Difficult Lesson
Nell
Henderson
Washington
Post, April 16, 2004, Page E1
This
article reports on the success of job retraining programs. It points out that
the commitment of resources has generally been insufficient to ensure that many
of the graduates of these programs get the skills needed for available jobs.
Outsourcing
Outsourcing,
Turned Inside Out
Ken
Belson
New
York Times, April 11, 2004, Section 3, page 1
This
article reports on the growth of foreign direct investment in the United States,
which it describes as "insourcing," and implies it has been a major
source of job creation in the United States. The article's efforts to equate
foreign direct investment with job creation in the United States are misplaced,
there is no direct or indirect relationship between the two. The overwhelming
majority of foreign direct investment in the U.S. takes the form of buyouts of
existing companies. For example, when Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler in 1998, this
was recorded as more than $40 billion in foreign direct investment, even though
it did not directly create any jobs. (In fact, the merged company laid off many
Chrysler workers in a restructuring.) Most foreign direct investment has taken
this form.
While
the article includes a quote from an economist who makes this point, it is
completely ignored in the rest of the piece. In fact, the article even includes
a chart showing the number of workers employed at foreign owned affiliates of
U.S. firms, and U.S. affiliates of foreign owned firms. This chart provides no
information whatsoever on the number of jobs created or lost through
trade/outsourcing.
The
article includes a number of inaccurate statements. For example, it describes
supporters of recent trade agreements as "proponents of free trade."
This is not true. These people are in fact ardently protectionist when it comes
to restrictions on foreign professionals working in the United States and also
on copyrights and patents. They generally only support reducing trade barriers
when it has the effect of putting less-skilled workers in competition with
workers in developing countries.
The
article includes a quote from an economist asserting that the last recession
would have been much worse, had it not been for the role of foreign direct
investment. It is not clear what chain of logic could lead to this conclusion.
Had there been less foreign direct investment, the dollar would have fallen,
which would have increased net exports from the United States, thereby creating
more jobs. It is difficult to construct a scenario in which foreign purchases of
U.S. stock over the last three years has been a net creator of jobs.
The
article also includes a reference to the jobs at a Honda plant in Ohio, which
President Bush noted in criticizing efforts by Democrats to restrict trade. It
would have been appropriate to point out that the jobs in the Honda factory in
Ohio are there precisely because of efforts to restrict trade. When the U.S.
auto industry was badly threatened by import competition in the eighties, the
U.S. persuaded the Japanese manufacturers to agree to export restraints. In
response to these restrictions, Honda and other Japanese manufacturers began to
assemble cars in the United States. Trade and direct investment are often
substitutes for each other. As a result of facing limits on trade, the Japanese
auto manufacturers sought to meet demand in the U.S. market with direct
investment.
In the
second to last paragraph the article reports that foreign investment is on an
upward path in the United States, observing that "foreign direct investment
more than doubled last year, to $82 billion." It is worth noting that even
after this increase, the 2003 level of foreign investment in the U.S. is down
more than 75 percent from its 2000 level of $335.6 billion.
Immigration
and Jobs
No
Permit, No Work: A Price of Joining EU
Glenn
Frankel
Washington
Post,
April 10, 2004, Page A8
A Shortage of Seasonal Workers Is Feared
Eduardo Porter
New
York Times,
April 10, 2004, Page B1
These
articles both discuss the impact of immigration on jobs; the Post article in the
context of restrictions on work permits in the European Union, and the Times
article in the context of work visas for low paying jobs in the United States.
Neither article clearly presents the economic issues involved in this political
debate.
In
both cases the issue is whether more low wage workers will be allowed to enter a
high wage country or region and compete for less-skilled jobs. The predictions
of economic theory in this instance are quite straightforward. The availability
of more low wage workers will typically allow for more growth, since many jobs
will be performed at a lower cost. However, the domestic workers who are in
competition with the immigrant labor force for these jobs will be disadvantaged
because their wages will be depressed.
This
situation is analogous to what would happen if 500,000 doctors from India,
China, and other developing countries were suddenly allowed into the United
States. Given the pay differential between developing countries and the United
States, these doctors would probably be happy to work for $40,000 to $50,000 a
year, between 20 and 25 percent of the average pay (net of expenses) of doctors
in the United States. This would provide enormous gains for the U.S. economy -
saving consumers between $120 billion and $130 billion annually on health care
expenses, which would free this money for other purposes - but it would
seriously depress the wages of doctors in the United States.
In the
cases being discussed in these articles, the potential immigrants would be
competing for less-skilled jobs. While both articles imply that the domestic
work force does not want the jobs that the immigrants take, this is clearly not
true. The only reason that domestic workers do not want the jobs is because they
come with low pay and benefits. If employers did not have the option to hire
foreign workers at very low pay, then they would be forced to offer higher wages
for these jobs. While the least productive jobs could disappear, because it
would not be profitable to fill them at a higher wage (e.g. the midnight shift
at a convenience store), the economic cost of not having these jobs filled is by
definition minimal. (If there was a high economic cost to leaving the jobs
vacant, then the jobs would pay more, and they would be filled.)
At one
point the Post article asserts that labor shortages in western Europe are
commonplace. This is not true. While some countries, like Ireland and Denmark
have very low unemployment rates, countries like France, Germany, and Spain all
have unemployment rates above 8.0 percent. This suggests the problem is too few
jobs, not too few workers.
In
support of the argument that western Europe is suffering from a labor shortage
the article presents a quote from a cabinet secretary in Britain that "the
usual cry at London dinner parties is not that the city is overwhelmed with
foreign plumbers but there is not enough of them." The view on immigration
that people hear at dinner parties probably depends on the neighborhood in which
the party is taking place. If the guests are likely to be hiring plumbers, then
they probably do complain about the lack of immigrant plumbers. However, if they
are likely to work as plumbers, this sentiment would probably not be expressed
at their dinner parties.
The
Budget
Under
the Hood
Washington
Post, April 12, 2004, Page A17
Please
note these charts are not available online.
This
set of charts show the pattern of the government deficit, debt, and interest
payments since 1940. While it shows the movements in both current dollars and
constant (inflation adjusted) dollars, it does not show these items measured as
a share of GDP. This is the only realistic way to make comparisons over such a
long time horizon. For example, the chart shows that the deficits run during
World War II as being only slightly larger than current deficits, when measured
in constant dollars. However, the peak World War II deficits topped 40 percent
of GDP (more than $4.4 trillion at present), while the current deficit is
approximately equal to 5 percent of GDP.
Social
Security
Tough
Issues, Awaiting Their Turn
Edmund
L. Andrews
New
York Times,
April 13, 2004, Page E1
This
article discusses the financial situation facing Social Security and Medicare.
The headline and substance of the article imply that there is some need to
address the financial situation of Social Security (it even claims that
Democrats face a problem, because key constituents oppose cuts in the program).
However, none of the information presented in the article supports this
contention. As the article notes, the most recent projections show that the
program can pay all scheduled benefits until the year 2042 with no changes
whatsoever. This means the program is in stronger financial condition than it
has been through most of its existence (large tax increases were needed to
sustain the program in each of the decades from the forties through the
eighties).
The
article would be equally accurate if it asserted that the United States had a
need to default on a portion of its national debt (and that one of the political
parties had a serious problem, if its supporters opposed such a move) as it is
in putting forth its claims on Social Security. In the absence of any evidence
that the program needs any changes in a reasonable political horizon, there is
no obvious basis for the discussion in the article.
In its
discussion of Medicare, the article claims that the Bush administration made the
finances of the program worse with its Medicare prescription drug plan. While
this is true, it would have been useful to note that it was not the prescription
drug plan itself that caused the problem. The prescription drug benefit itself
is being financed out of general revenue, not from the designated Medicare tax,
and therefore does not directly affect the financing of the program. The Bush
administration's bill worsened Medicare's finances because it included
provisions for increased subsidies for private insurance plans as alternatives
to the government run program. The subsidies for private plans moved up the
projected date for the trust fund's depletion by seven years.
The
article also includes an assertion that the Bush administration claims that
privatizing Social Security would "save money in the long run." It
does not provide any reference for this assertion. Every expert who has compared
the operation of a privatized system to the U.S. Social Security system has
found that a privatized system has considerably higher costs. For example, the
Bush administration's Social Security commission estimated that a centralized
private system on the same scale as the Social Security program would have
administrative costs of approximately $20 billion a year. This compares to the
$2 billion annual administrative costs of the Social Security system. A
decentralized private system, like the ones in Chile and Britain, would cost
more than $60 billion annually.
The
article frames the whole discussion by asserting that there are major
philosophical differences between the political parties on these issues. The
article presents no evidence of the philosophical views of either party. It is
clear that both parties have powerful constituencies who are deeply concerned
about the future of these programs (senior lobbies and unions in the case of
Democrats, the pharmaceutical, insurance, and financial industries in the case
of Republicans). It is not clear that any of the prominent figures in this
debate are motivated by their political philosophy and no evidence is presented
to support this contention.
Stock
Options
Presidential
Politics Divide Silicon Valley
Laurie
J. Flynn
New
York Times,
April 12, 2004, Page C1
This
article discusses the attitudes among Silicon Valley business executives to the
presidential candidates. At one point it says that some executives want to
"protect the board use of stock options in employee compensation."
There
is nothing being proposed by either candidate that would in any way limit the
use of stock options as employee compensation. The only item at issue is whether
this form of compensation should be listed as an expense against profits, like
every other form of compensation. Virtually every expert in economics and
accounting has argued that such treatment is an essential part of honest
financial reporting. Under new rules being put in place by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board, firms will be able to issue as many options as they
like, as long as they account for them accurately.
Prescription
Drugs
Price
of AIDS Drug Intensifies Debate on Legal Imports
Gardiner
Harris
New
York Times,
April 14, 2004, Page A1
This
article reports on the decision by Abbott laboratories to quintuple the price of
its AIDS drug Norvir, raising the annual cost from $1,500 to $7,800. At one
point the article refers to the drug industry's argument that the importation of
the same drugs at the lower prices they are sold at in other countries
"would effectively import foreign price controls." It also asserts
that American consumers are subsidizing overseas patients because of the higher
prices paid in the United States.
It is
important to clarify the reason for high prices in the U.S. market relative to
other countries. The United States does not allow drugs to be sold at free
market prices, instead it gives drug companies unrestricted patent monopolies.
In other countries, the government negotiates a price with drug companies -
effectively setting a condition on the government's grant of a monopoly. The
drug industry is absolutely opposed to a free market in drugs in the United
States, rather they want to maintain their unrestricted monopoly, and ideally
extend it to the rest of the world.
While
this does lead to extremely high prices for U.S. consumers, this is only because
the U.S. has opted for an extremely inefficient system. There is no obvious way
in which this represents a subsidy for overseas consumers - drug research costs
could easily be covered with the prices that they currently pay (see "Promoting
Good Ideas on Drugs: Are Patents the Best Way?").
The
article also raises the issue of low quality counterfeit drugs being imported
from abroad. The problem of counterfeit drugs is a direct result of patent
monopolies raising the price far above the marginal cost of production.
Counterfeiting is also a problem in the domestic market, and it will grow as
drug prices continue to rise relative to production costs.
|