Media clips
-
The growing trade deficit between the world’s two largest economies cost the U.S. $37 billion in lost wages in 2011, a study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) has found, and is likely to cost the economy more as the deficit widens further.
According to the study, 2.7 million jobs have been lost in the U.S. between 2001, when China entered the World Trade Organization, and 2011, the bulk of which were in the manufacturing sector. The report took 2011 as a snapshot of the cost of these losses and found that when these displaced employees were re-employed in non-trade-related industries, they lost an average of $13,504 per worker in 2011, creating a total of $37 billion in wage losses over the year.
CNBC October 1, 2013 -
Trade with China is driving down U.S. wages and resulting in big job losses for Americans, according to a study released today by a Democratic-leaning Washington think tank.
The study by the Economic Policy Institute found that the growing trade deficit with China has cost the U.S. billions of dollars in lost wages: $37 billion in 2011 alone.
Between 2001 and 2001, the trade deficit eliminated 2.7 million U.S. jobs, with nearly 77 percent of them in the manufacturing sector, the study said.
McClatchy October 1, 2013 -
It is going to be increasingly important to watch the entire board as Washington lurches from crisis to crisis over the next month or so. While we’re all worrying about what will happen in the general brawl over the Affordable Care Act, and transfixed by the beautiful flames that rise when Republicans light their own hair on fire, and the national economy with it. there very likely will be some real mischief going on off-stage. (Keep an eye on anything involving our old pal, the Keystone XL pipeline.) It would not surprise me in the least if the deficit-hawks seized the moment to declare themselves not only “the only grown-ups in the room,” but also the “champions of bipartisanship,” and, eventually, “the people who can get things done.”
For example, this morning, Fred Hiatt’s special-class at The Washington Post chose this particular moment to warn us again that, unless more people who are not Fred Hiatt are forced to feel a little pain, The Deficit will eat us all in our beds. This is, by my count, the third time that the class has set this warning aloft since June. Over the past three years, through rain and sleet and derisive laughter, the Post has continued to feed Vaal. This time, in addition to continuing the meretricious technique of including Social Security in the doomsaying, the Post is worried about what’s going to happen in 2038. (They have a CBO report to use for an economic panic room.) In this, the Post has more than a few allies on the Democratic side, especially in the consultant community and, perhaps, even in the White House. This whole mess is going to become, as the corrupt lawyer Lama Parmentel said of New Orleans in The Big Easy, a marvelous environment for coincidence.
Esquire September 27, 2013 -
In May 2012, researchers from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) took a stab at calculating the overall CEO-to-worker compensation ratio with the information already available. Here’s what they found: In 2011, the average CEO’s compensation was equal to 209.4 times that of the average worker, at least when stock options were included in compensation. That was up substantially from the 18.3-to-1 ratio found in 1965, but barely half of the 411.3-to-1 found in 2000.
MSNBC September 27, 2013 -
Is it 147-to-1, the reported ratio in Germany, the economic powerhouse of the European Union? Is it 58-to-1, the ratio from the late 1980s, according to the Economic Policy Institute, before the stock options craze of the 1990s really got going? Or to be purely arbitrary (if more realistic), should it be 100-to-1?
Even by that more generous figure, the “right” amount of executive pay today, according to Drucker, would be about $1.3 million (and that’s using a worker pay figure calculated by the Economic Policy Institute that it says “clearly overstates” typical worker pay).
The Washington Post September 27, 2013 -
EPI Director of Health Policy Research Elise Gould discussed with The Wall Street Journal’s Carl Bialik the limitations of the official poverty threshold, saying, “To use one poverty line to measure whether or not people are doing well across the country is absolutely inadequate.”
Wall Street Journal September 27, 2013 -
No matter which side of the trade debate a group is on, it is almost certain to invoke a recent study on jobs to bolster its argument.
Labor unions and other critics of recent trade deals argue that the pacts have cost U.S. workers good jobs, as big corporations send manufacturing work offshore to countries with fewer worker protections and lower wages.
In the debate over data, unions and other trade skeptics have focused on a recently implemented free-trade deal with Korea, one the Obama administration renegotiated to include additional labor incentives. The 18 months of data show that U.S. exports to Korea have declined since the pact took effect.
In a study this summer titled “No Jobs from Trade Pacts,” Robert Scott of the Economic Policy Institute looked at the Korea numbers and projected the Trans-Pacific Partnership could be “much worse than the over-hyped Korea deal.”
Scott wrote that even though President Barack Obama said the U.S.-Korea deal would increase U.S. goods exports by $10 billion to $11 billion, supporting 70,000 American jobs, “things are not turning out the way the president predicted.”
Roll Call September 27, 2013 -
“It matters how many jobs you’re creating in what context. You need to know how many jobs you should have created just to sort of stay at neutral,” says Doug Hall, director of the Economic Analysis and Research Network—a group of state and local policy organizations—at the liberal Economic Policy Institute. “You’re really only doing well if you’re actually ahead of that benchmark.”
The Washington Post September 27, 2013 -
Labor economist Heidi Shierholz at the Economic Policy Institute has estimated the number of so-called “missing workers” at slightly over four million. Her estimate is based on analysis of a comprehensive prediction of labor force participation for the period 2007-2016, by economists at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2007, before the Great Recession hit.
The BLS prediction assumed that then-current job market conditions and economic trends would continue over the following 10 years. So the difference between what was predicted, and what has actually happened, can be attributed to cyclical economic conditions — in particular, the extremely poor labor market of the Great Recession and the recovery that has followed.
The largest single bloc of “missing workers” — 2.4 million of them — are of prime working age, 25-54. Another 1.3 million are under the age of 25. The smallest bloc of “missing workers” is aged 55-plus — 700,000 workers. Of that group, the overwhelming majority are women. In the other two age cohorts, more men than women have left the workforce than were expected.
Shierholz calculates the deficit of older women currently in the workforce is 583,000, including 127,000 over the age of 75. They likely got laid off or quit their jobs in the downturn or perhaps owned a small business that shut down. Shierholz says that in this very weak economic recovery, it’s hard for them to get new jobs — especially new jobs approaching the salary and skill level of the jobs they lost.
“Older workers are on average a little less likely to lose their jobs than younger workers,” Shierholz says. She adds that contrary to popular assumptions, many employers value older workers’ experience and maturity, and will lay them off last if given a choice. “But if they (older workers) do lose their jobs,” she continues, “it’s much harder to get reemployed, to find a job that matches their skills and experience.”
Marketplace September 27, 2013 -
The Nation September 20, 2013