Clintonoids Serve Up Mud Pie Analysis

[Brad De Long]

>I know you all love this stuff so I will keep you
>posted on it.  New briefing paper from EPI. . . .
>
>
>50 LOST OPPORTUNITIES
>Commerce Department’s state-level
>review of supposed gains from China trade
>betrays hollowness of claims of PNTR proponents
>
>
>" . . . The Commerce Department claims its 50 state reports “go beyond
>traditional static analysis of a state’s trade with China.” In fact, the
>reports go beyond traditional statistical analysis. They offer no statistics
>at all about how much they predict exports to China will increase –
>state-by-state or even nationally. Instead, we have “State Export Profiles”:
>a few scant paragraphs of basic information, such as how much the state
>exports to China and where China ranks among the state’s major export
>destinations.
>These are followed by “Sector Snapshots,” which supposedly tell how the
>leading industries in each state will benefit from more trade with China.
>But the “snapshots” are, with only a few exceptions, virtually the same
>for every state. The same paragraphs appear over and over again. How
>interesting that the U.S. Commerce Department seems to believe that the
>economies of California and Massachusetts are pretty much the same, and
>that no business in either state competes with Chinese imports. . . . "
>
>
>N.B. There is no truth to the rumor that BDL contributed
>to the DoC analysis.
>
>mbs

None. Absolutely none. The last time I looked at DoC's database, it 
had such weird things in it as attributing *all* of some 
corporations' exports to whatever state their CEO happened to live in.

They may have fixed it since and thus come up with more reasonable 
estimates, but I wouldn't bet money on it...

Brad DeLong