Get the latest market trends in your inbox

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with the Axios Markets newsletter. Sign up for free.

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Catch up on coronavirus stories and special reports, curated by Mike Allen everyday

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Denver news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Denver

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Des Moines news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Des Moines

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Minneapolis-St. Paul news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Minneapolis-St. Paul

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Tampa-St. Petersburg news in your inbox

Catch up on the most important stories affecting your hometown with Axios Tampa-St. Petersburg

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Please enter a valid email.

Please enter a valid email.

Subscription failed
Thank you for subscribing!

Steel furnace in the U.K., 1954. Photo: Maurice Broomfield/SSPL/Getty

New data have persuaded many economists that Chinese trade, and not robots, is at fault for vanished manufacturing jobs across the Ohio and Mississippi river belts, but a key expert is disputing the finding.

Why it matters: Within the answer may lie the answer to resurrecting at least some of the hollowed out manufacturing heartland, or at least not making the same mistakes again. And it may also help explain the rise of populist leaders like President Trump.

  • A growing consensus is that trade deals such as China's 2001 entry to the WTO are far more to blame for manufacturing job losses than automation.
  • But some economists continue to dissent and seek a larger explanation.

The background: In a long piece earlier this month, Quartz's Gwynn Guilford profiled the work of Susan Houseman, an economist with the Upjohn Institute. In a 2011 paper and subsequent followup work, Houseman found that, when you strip away productivity gains by the computer sector, the rest of the manufacturing economy had super-slow growth starting in the late 1970s, and almost no growth starting about 2000, approximately the time of China's WTO accession.

  • That was puzzling, since a productivity bump should have been present if manufacturing was automating in spades, as was claimed.
  • Therefore something else was responsible for the wipeout of jobs.

David Autor, an MIT economist who pioneered research into China's 2001 entry to the WTO, told me that automation has been "overblown and the importance of trade under-appreciated" in grasping the U.S. manufacturing implosion. From his own work, Autor had already intuited that China's WTO membership was primarily to blame, but Houseman provided the final pieces of data that proved it. "She has cracked a big puzzle," he said.

Other economists said the same thing: At the McKinsey Global Institute, for instance, Sree Ramaswamy added pharmaceuticals as an industry that, along with computing, accounted for almost all the real rise in productivity.

  • The big job hit, he said, was to medium and small manufacturers who, in the cutthroat global competition that erupted after big trade agreements, failed to compete.
  • Karen Harris, director of Bain Macro Trends, said it's now clear that trade was "the key channel" that drove down wages across sectors, leading to the rising income inequality that has dogged the U.S. economy.
  • The suggestion in these conclusions is that, from labor unions to Trump, trade critics have been right to all-but ignore automation and blame pacts like NAFTA.

But but but: In so doing, they challenge the work of Carl Frey, an Oxford economist and co-author of a 2013 paper that is the baseline for the study of the impact of automation on jobs.

  • In October, Frey posted a draft of a new paper in which he linked automation anxiety and Trump's 2016 election: Support for Trump was greater in areas of relatively high robot adoption. Lower adoption, he said, would have swung Michigan, Pennsylvania or Wisconsin to Hillary Clinton.
  • Frey told me that his work had taken account of Chinese trade. "We control ... for Chinese import competition in our study. Doing so, robots still have a significant impact," he said.

In addition, in terms of the populist wave, a new study by University of Pennsylvania political scientist Diana Mutz found a completely separate explanation from job destruction: people have reacted not to lost income, but to a perceived threat to their local status. In other words, it has been tribalism.

  • If Metz is right, no amount of righted trade deals will turn the populism.

Go deeper

13 hours ago - World

Maximum pressure campaign escalates with Fakhrizadeh killing

Photo: Fars News Agency via AP

The assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the architect of Iran’s military nuclear program, is a new height in the maximum pressure campaign led by the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government against Iran.

Why it matters: It exceeds the capture of the Iranian nuclear archives by the Mossad, and the sabotage in the advanced centrifuge facility in Natanz.

Scoop: Biden weighs retired General Lloyd Austin for Pentagon chief

Lloyd Austin testifying before Congress in 2015. Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Joe Biden is considering retired four-star General Lloyd Austin as his nominee for defense secretary, adding him to a shortlist that includes Jeh Johnson, Tammy Duckworth and Michele Flournoy, two sources with direct knowledge of the decision-making tell Axios.

Why it matters: A nominee for Pentagon chief was noticeably absent when the president-elect rolled out his national security team Tuesday. Flournoy had been widely seen as the likely pick, but Axios is told other factors — race, experience, Biden's comfort level — have come into play.

Updated 15 hours ago - Politics & Policy

Coronavirus dashboard

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios

  1. Health: WHO: AstraZeneca vaccine must be evaluated on "more than a press release."
  2. Politics: Supreme Court backs religious groups on New York COVID restrictions.
  3. World: Thailand, Philippines sign deal with AstraZeneca for vaccine.
  4. Economy: Safety nets to disappear in December Black Friday shopping across the U.S., in photosAmazon hires 1,400 workers a day throughout pandemic.
  5. Education: National standardized tests delayed until 2022.