Morpheus
March 10th, 2005, 07:37 PM
http://southwestfarmpress.com/news/050307-textile-trade-deficit/
Textile trade deficit hits all-time high
Mar 7, 2005 10:29 AM
By Forrest Laws
The difference between the export and import numbers is the textile trade deficit of $73.1 billion, also a record.
The U.S. textile trade deficit rose to an all-time high of $73.1 billion last year, leading textile manufacturing groups to question how high it will be in 2005 if the Bush administration doesn’t invoke safeguard provisions soon.
The increase in the textile trade deficit, which accounted for nearly 12 percent of the total 2004 U.S. trade deficit of $617.7 billion, also a record, occurred while textile import quotas were still in place for most categories of textile and apparel entering the United States. Those quotas expired Jan. 1.
Textile and other manufacturing groups seized on the new numbers to complain that the administration isn’t doing enough to slow the flow of imports and stop the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.
U.S. retailers imported $89.25 billion of textile and apparel goods in 2004, or more than five times the total U.S. textile and apparel exports of $16.15 billion. The difference between the export and import numbers is the textile trade deficit of $73.1 billion, also a record.
The American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition said the increase added to the long-term decline in U.S. textile and clothing manufacturing jobs, which fell from 1.05 million in January 2001 to 683,400 in January 2005.
AMTAC said China continues to play the major role in the destruction of the U.S. textile and apparel sector. Chinese manufacturers held a 25.02 percent share of the U.S. textile import market in 2004 – a 40.74-percent increase from 2003.
“These numbers show that China, through the aggressive use of unfair trade practices, already is the dominant player in the U.S. textile and apparel market,” said Auggie Tantillo, AMTAC’s director.
The U.S. textile trade deficit with China rose by 25.3 percent to $17.5 billion in 2004 or 24 percent of the total textile deficit. The deficit figure with China was $14 billion in 2003.
China’s clothing exports to the United States have risen dramatically since some import quotas were reduced after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. In some categories, shipments have risen by more than 700 percent since then.
Textile manufacturing organizations have filed several petitions asking the U.S. government to invoke provisions in China’s WTO accession agreement that were designed to “safeguard” U.S. manufacturers from being buried by tons of goods made with cheap labor in China.
The government’s Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements has granted some petitions and was considering a dozen more when the New York-based U.S. Court of International Trade issued an injunction against further approvals at the request of U.S. importers.
Manufacturer groups have been urging the U.S. government to appeal the ruling so CITA can approve more safeguard petitions, which limit increases in specific categories to 7.5 percent of last year’s total.
“With the expiration of the remaining textile and apparel quotas at the beginning of the year, it is imperative for the U.S. government to invoke the special textile China safeguard before any further disruption to the U.S. market occurs,” said Tantillo.
(Note: I have used the WTO accession of China only as an example of what may become the norm in all industries.)
The U.S. was one of the major forces behind globalization and the formation of the World Trade Organization. It was touted as being good for U.S. businesses because it would open up previously closed markets to U.S. goods. We were also told that globalization would be good for the world because it would spread capitalism. It has been pushed by both the neoliberal Clinton and the neoconservative Bush administrations against strong popular resistance.
Many warned of the dangers, but we are only now beginning to see how the game will be played out. In the short run it will be good for certain large global businesses who will reap the huge profit margins created by manufacturing in third-world countries for slave wages, or buying their products, and then selling in first-world nations. But as the quotas continue to be lifted, as were the textile quotas on Chinese textile imports in the beginning of this year, products from those cheap producers will flood first world markets, gradually, or not so gradually, destroying their manufacturing base. This will bring about further unemployment. The irreversible unemployment will force wage cuts in most sectors, thereby reducing buying power. As is the law in capitalism, prices and wages will eventually reach equilibrium. If you live in China or India that is an improvement. If you live here it's not a good scenario. But by combining the local competitive workforces into one global workforce we will engage in a race to the bottom as far as wages and eventually prices.
By reading this and other related articles the defensive trend is for domestic manufacturers to push for extending protectionist tarriffs and import quotas. The wholesale and retail sectors in turn push to keep those protections eliminated.
1) Do we really believe in a "free-market economy", or do we believe in it as long as we hold an advantage, but then demand protections and subsidies when we're on the losing end?
2) Is world trade really fair trade?
3) Does globalization actually advance anyone besides a few multinational corporations?
4) And most important, who really is manipulating the global economy?
I enter this discussion as a retired member of labor, but in this arena I have found that both business and labor share many concerns.
Textile trade deficit hits all-time high
Mar 7, 2005 10:29 AM
By Forrest Laws
The difference between the export and import numbers is the textile trade deficit of $73.1 billion, also a record.
The U.S. textile trade deficit rose to an all-time high of $73.1 billion last year, leading textile manufacturing groups to question how high it will be in 2005 if the Bush administration doesn’t invoke safeguard provisions soon.
The increase in the textile trade deficit, which accounted for nearly 12 percent of the total 2004 U.S. trade deficit of $617.7 billion, also a record, occurred while textile import quotas were still in place for most categories of textile and apparel entering the United States. Those quotas expired Jan. 1.
Textile and other manufacturing groups seized on the new numbers to complain that the administration isn’t doing enough to slow the flow of imports and stop the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.
U.S. retailers imported $89.25 billion of textile and apparel goods in 2004, or more than five times the total U.S. textile and apparel exports of $16.15 billion. The difference between the export and import numbers is the textile trade deficit of $73.1 billion, also a record.
The American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition said the increase added to the long-term decline in U.S. textile and clothing manufacturing jobs, which fell from 1.05 million in January 2001 to 683,400 in January 2005.
AMTAC said China continues to play the major role in the destruction of the U.S. textile and apparel sector. Chinese manufacturers held a 25.02 percent share of the U.S. textile import market in 2004 – a 40.74-percent increase from 2003.
“These numbers show that China, through the aggressive use of unfair trade practices, already is the dominant player in the U.S. textile and apparel market,” said Auggie Tantillo, AMTAC’s director.
The U.S. textile trade deficit with China rose by 25.3 percent to $17.5 billion in 2004 or 24 percent of the total textile deficit. The deficit figure with China was $14 billion in 2003.
China’s clothing exports to the United States have risen dramatically since some import quotas were reduced after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. In some categories, shipments have risen by more than 700 percent since then.
Textile manufacturing organizations have filed several petitions asking the U.S. government to invoke provisions in China’s WTO accession agreement that were designed to “safeguard” U.S. manufacturers from being buried by tons of goods made with cheap labor in China.
The government’s Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements has granted some petitions and was considering a dozen more when the New York-based U.S. Court of International Trade issued an injunction against further approvals at the request of U.S. importers.
Manufacturer groups have been urging the U.S. government to appeal the ruling so CITA can approve more safeguard petitions, which limit increases in specific categories to 7.5 percent of last year’s total.
“With the expiration of the remaining textile and apparel quotas at the beginning of the year, it is imperative for the U.S. government to invoke the special textile China safeguard before any further disruption to the U.S. market occurs,” said Tantillo.
(Note: I have used the WTO accession of China only as an example of what may become the norm in all industries.)
The U.S. was one of the major forces behind globalization and the formation of the World Trade Organization. It was touted as being good for U.S. businesses because it would open up previously closed markets to U.S. goods. We were also told that globalization would be good for the world because it would spread capitalism. It has been pushed by both the neoliberal Clinton and the neoconservative Bush administrations against strong popular resistance.
Many warned of the dangers, but we are only now beginning to see how the game will be played out. In the short run it will be good for certain large global businesses who will reap the huge profit margins created by manufacturing in third-world countries for slave wages, or buying their products, and then selling in first-world nations. But as the quotas continue to be lifted, as were the textile quotas on Chinese textile imports in the beginning of this year, products from those cheap producers will flood first world markets, gradually, or not so gradually, destroying their manufacturing base. This will bring about further unemployment. The irreversible unemployment will force wage cuts in most sectors, thereby reducing buying power. As is the law in capitalism, prices and wages will eventually reach equilibrium. If you live in China or India that is an improvement. If you live here it's not a good scenario. But by combining the local competitive workforces into one global workforce we will engage in a race to the bottom as far as wages and eventually prices.
By reading this and other related articles the defensive trend is for domestic manufacturers to push for extending protectionist tarriffs and import quotas. The wholesale and retail sectors in turn push to keep those protections eliminated.
1) Do we really believe in a "free-market economy", or do we believe in it as long as we hold an advantage, but then demand protections and subsidies when we're on the losing end?
2) Is world trade really fair trade?
3) Does globalization actually advance anyone besides a few multinational corporations?
4) And most important, who really is manipulating the global economy?
I enter this discussion as a retired member of labor, but in this arena I have found that both business and labor share many concerns.