<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] :Falling off the Competitive Edge




X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 19:05:04 -0600
From: clark johnson <clarkjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

for IP if you think it relevant!

Falling Off The Competitive Edge
Christian E. Weller and Tyler Tepfer
March 22, 2005


The United States' trade in advanced technology products used to be one of our economic high points. But in the last year, the United States dropped from number one to number five in the list of successful information technology economies-replaced by places like Singapore, Malaysia and Ireland. We're now running trade deficits in high-tech products-something that won't change without serious policy intervention, says economist Christian Weller.

Christian E. Weller is senior economist and Tyler Tepfer is economic policy intern at the Center for American Progress.

If there is one constant about this recovery, it is that the trade deficits manages to set new record highs every other month. Its sheer size-well above that of other countries that experienced severe financial crises in the past-is threatening future economic growth in at home and abroad. It is often asserted that the United States could regain control over its widening deficit because it has a global competitive edge in high-tech products. Unfortunately, this assertion is not matched by reality. In March, the World Economic Forum declared Singapore the world's most successful economy in exploiting new information and communications technologies, while the United States moved from the top spot to fifth place. Instead of gaining ground, the United States ran a trade deficit in advanced technology products (ATP) in 2004, which was larger than the one in the prior years. Without a serious policy intervention through an active innovation policy, the United States stands to lose more ground in the global market place with ever widening deficits as the result.

Since 2002, the ATP trade balance turned from surpluses into deficits. By 2004, the deficits approached $40 billion. This was not an isolated phenomenon. It cut across a number of high-tech categories and across a range of countries.

Over the past few years, five out of 10 ATP product categories have seen widening deficits. Of particular note are massive deficits in the information and communications technologies, which skyrocketed to $73 billion. In 2004, the increase in this deficit alone wiped out the surpluses among the five ATP surplus categories. In addition, deficits also grew in a wide range of high-tech products, such as optical scanners, nuclear reactors and semiconductor materials.

While the largest deficit is with China, the United States has also lost ground to others. Five of the countries, where the United States has the largest deficits in high-tech products include four Asian countries-China, Malaysia, South Korea and Japan. However, this list also includes Ireland, and Mexico followed closely behind the number six spot, where the United States had a high-tech deficit of almost $6 billion in 2004.

A number of the bilateral deficits in high-tech products are especially troublesome, since they occurred at a time, when it should have been easier for the United States to improve its trade balance due to a declining dollar. A lower value of the dollar makes exports cheaper and imports more expensive, thus helping to shrink a trade deficit. Over the past three years, the dollar has fallen against the currencies of eight countries with the 10 smallest ATP trade balances in 2004, the exceptions being China and Malaysia. Yet, the deficits have either sharply widened or barely changed in five countries from 2002 to 2004. Clearly, something is amiss in the world of high-tech trade for the United States.

The bilateral trade deficits are also troublesome because they occur across a range of industries. For instance, the United States has a large deficit in life science technology-such as MRI machines-with Ireland, Mexico and Germany. In optical sciences, such as optical scanners and semiconductors, the United States has a deficit with South Korea, Japan and Ireland, among others. And there are deficits in biotechnology with Ireland; in advanced materials, such as optical fibers, with Malaysia; and in nuclear technology with China.

To regain control of the slipping competitive edge, policymakers need to act. A comprehensive innovation policy would be one place to start. Policymakers should allocate more resources into research and development of new technologies and to the distribution of existing technologies, so that they can enhance U.S. productivity on a broad scale.

However, the Bush administration has a track record of going the other way. For the 2006 budget, President Bush proposed 1 percent cuts to the Department of Education, while funding for the sciences through the National Science Foundation (NSF) fall below the president's own goals. In 2002, President Bush supported a doubling of NSF's budget in five years. The 2006 budget falls 34 percent short of what would be needed to put NSF on track to meet that goal. Instead, policy makers should restore funds where they are needed. This includes more money to the sciences, more support for science and math education and increased funds for programs that help introduce new technologies to a broad range of users, such as the National Technology and Information Administration. Without much stronger support for the development of innovative technologies and for their dispersion into the economy, the United States is likely to fall further behind and to see widening high-tech trade deficits.

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/