Within the last few years, people throughout the world's most advanced economies have become acutely worried about the economic prowess of China, India, and other emerging countries with large low-wage populations. They fear for their own jobs and for their children's future in a world where they must compete alongside the world's poorest. Those fears are testing political leaders in the world's richest countries.
Newspaper stories are an indicator of this rising concern. I searched the Lexis-Nexis database of English-language newspaper stories around the world that contained all three of the words "outsourcing," "jobs," and "India." In 1999, Lexis-Nexis produced only 39 stories; by 2003, there were 749 stories. In the first six months of 2004, there were already 1208 stories. The results were much the same when I searched "outsourcing," "jobs," and "China." I found similar growth in the use of these three terms together when I searched in French, German, Italian, and Spanish: 90 percent of the stories were in 2003 and 2004.
YUSHA
Why this explosion of concern? After all, advanced countries have been losing manufacturing jobs to less developed countries for more than fifty years. One reason is that the expanding development and use of new information technology, notably cellphones and the Internet, shrinks the world and makes competition from abroad more plausible. In fact, new technologies are probably the most important reason why globalization is advancing at a rapid pace. Cellphones and the Internet link the minds of many people in different countries effortlessly and efficiently, encouraging trade in intellectual creations. At the same time, the new information technology makes us more aware that the kinds of jobs that are migrating to India and China are high-quality jobs, the jobs for educated and skilled people. Over the last fifty years, people in advanced countries have increasingly sought university education and specialized training to protect them from an unforgiving labor market. Now First Worlders are uncertain whether even this will protect their economic status.
Increased fear of competition from emerging countries is also a natural consequence of the collapse of the speculative bubble in equities in 2000; stock markets in some countries fell to less than half their peak value. Once we saw our exaggerated hopes for our investments failing, we began to consider our other sources of income and wealth, only to confront the worldwide economic slowdown that began in 2001. Increased economic anxiety has, unsurprisingly, fueled increasing unease about foreign competition. Earlier this year, I surveyed people who recently bought homes in four American cities. My questionnaire asked: "Do you worry that your (or your household's) ability to earn as much income in future years as you expect might be in danger because of changes in the economy (someone in China competing for your job, a computer replacing your job, etc.)?" Of 442 respondents, 11 percent answered, "Yes, I worry a lot," 36 percent replied, "Yes, I worry a little," and 52 percent said, "No, I don't worry at all." Thus, while most respondents said they were not worried, nearly half expressed some worry.
I asked this question of recent home buyers on the theory that fear of job loss might help explain the remarkable boom in home prices in the US (as well as many other advanced countries). After all, people who fear losing their jobs may seek greater economic security by investing in real property in their own wealthy country, bidding up prices in the process. My survey's results lend some support to this theory. Although 81 percent of the respondents said fear of job loss had no effect on their decision to buy a house, of those who said it did, the number who said it encouraged home purchase outnumbered those who said it discouraged home purchase by a margin of two-to-one.
Growing fear of foreign competition ought to explain a lot of things in the future. People used to feel insulated from economic problems that occurred beyond their country's borders. No more. Fear of competition from abroad is now fundamental, and will change the political process in advanced and relatively advanced emerging countries throughout the world. It helps explain the rise of protectionism, and the failure of the WTO trade talks in Cancun last September to improve emerging countries' access to advanced-country markets.
As a professor, I find that my students often ask me for career advice with a different tone than in the past. What I hear is a fundamental lack of confidence that they will do well in any chosen career. They want to figure out how they can compete with Chinese or Indian workers who have the same, or better, education. Despite bravado about American superiority, the students themselves do not seem to feel superior, and wonder if they will be living in emerging-country lives of their own in coming years.
This sudden fear of emerging countries presents a major dilemma. The fear is real and visceral, and politicians ignore it at their peril. Its further increase could lead to counterproductive protectionist measures. We must not let this happen. The emerging countries are doing nothing more blameworthy than working towards their place as equals alongside advanced countries. It is morally and practically vital that they succeed.
Robert Shiller is a professor of economics at Yale University, and author of Irrational Exuberance and The New Financial Order: Risk in the 21st Century. Copyright: Project SyndicatE
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US