Economic Policy Institute
EPI home
EPI home
Search
Navigation tips
Bookstore
Publications archive
Newsroom
Calendar
About EPI
Economists
Contact EPI
Web features
Job postings
Sign up
Support EPI
WEB FEATURES
Datazone
Economic Indicators
Issue Guides
Online calculators
Snapshots
Viewpoints
Audio/video archive

BROWSE OTHER ARTICLES BY
Robert E. Scott


RELATED PUBLICATIONS
What to really do about immigration

Pennsylvania Stagnation: Is Nafta the Culprit?

Overhauling NAFTA

Ohio Voters and Candidates Take a Dim View of NAFTA

Broken promises: NAFTA cost U.S. jobs and reduced wages


Email this pageEmail this page

Print this pagePrint this page    Email this pageEmail this page



Economic Snapshots


 


A weekly presentation of downloadable charts and short analyses designed to graphically illustrate important economic issues. Updated every Wednesday. [See Snapshots Archive.]

Snapshot for December 10, 2003.

NAFTA-related job losses have piled up since 1993
Since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was signed in 1993, the rise in the U.S. trade deficit with Canada and Mexico through 2002 caused the displacement of production that supported 879,280 U.S. jobs. NAFTA is a free trade and investment agreement that provided investors with a unique set of guarantees designed to stimulate foreign direct investment in Mexico and Canada. It has facilitated the movement of factories from the United States to Canada and Mexico. Most of these jobs were high-wage positions in manufacturing industries.

Proponents of new trade agreements that build on NAFTA, such as the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), have frequently claimed that such deals create jobs and raise incomes in the United States. These claims are based only on the positive effects of exports (known as "export effects"), ignoring the negative effects of imports (known as "import effects"). Such arguments are an attempt to hide the costs of new trade deals in order to boost the reported benefits.

The problem with these claims is that they misrepresent the real effects of trade on the U.S. economy: trade both creates and destroys jobs. Increases in U.S. exports tend to create jobs in this country, but increases in imports tend to reduce jobs by displacing goods that otherwise would have been made in the United States by domestic workers. Ignoring imports and counting only exports is like balancing a checkbook by counting only deposits but not withdrawals.

Jobs gained or lost due to U.S. NAFTA trade, 1993-2002

Between 1993 and 2002, NAFTA resulted in an increase in exports that created 794,194 jobs, but it displaced production that would have supported 1,673,454 jobs (see figure). Thus, the combined effect of changes in imports and exports as a result of NAFTA was a loss of 879,280 U.S. jobs. These NAFTA-related job losses suggest that U.S. workers have good reason to be concerned that the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas will threaten jobs and communities.

This week's Snapshot was written by EPI economist Robert E. Scott.

For a detailed analysis of how NAFTA has hurt the U.S. economy, see the EPI Briefing Paper, The High Price of 'Free' Trade.

Check out the archive for past Economic Snapshots.



Did you find this publication helpful? Support EPI's work today!

Copyright © 2008 by The Economic Policy Institute. All rights reserved.

Readers may redistribute this material to other individuals for noncommercial use, provided that the text, data, and all HTML code remain intact and unaltered in any way. This article may not be resold, reprinted, or redistributed for compensation of any kind without prior written permission. If you have any questions about permissions, please contact EPI at publications@epi.org. Other questions or concerns about this Web site can be directed to webmaster@epi.org.

EPI home