A Washington Post editorial yesterday commented on an issue brief from the Congressional Budget Office which, "shows just how precipitous the recent decline in manufacturing work has been: 22 percent since the 2001 recession." What is most striking about this editorial is that it gives the impression that the Post's editors were unaware of the sharp decline in manufacturing jobs over the last decade. This is not secret information, it is data can be found on the Bureau of Labor Statistics website in a matter of seconds. The Post is disturbed by the fact that: "The study will provide some ammunition for those inclined to blame free trade for American industry's plight," since it points out that an increase in imports was an important factor in the job loss. Actually, few people are likely to blame "free trade," they are far more likely to blame the current pattern of selective protectionism that largely shields more highly educated workers from foreign competition while explicitly forcing manufacturing workers to compete with the lowest paid workers in the world. Standards "free trade" models show that the U.S. economy would experience large gains if it were as easy for a kid growing up in India to work as a doctor or lawyer or Washington Post editorial writer, as a kid growing up in the New York suburbs. Trade policy has done little to reduce the barriers that protect professionals from this sort of competition.
--Dean Baker
