Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

(Related to the Apply the Concept on page 307) An economic analysis of a proposal to impose a quota on steel imports into the United States indicated that the quota would save 3,700 jobs in the steel industry but cost about 35,000 jobs in other U.S. industries. Why would a quota on steel imports cause employment to decline in other industries? Which other industries is a steel quota likely to affect?

Short Answer

Expert verified
A quota on steel imports would cause employment to decline in other industries because these industries relying heavily on steel for their production processes will face increased production costs due to the elevated steel price. Consequently, they may reduce their output, leading to a decline in the demand for labor, hence, job losses. Industries likely to be affected include heavy machinery manufacturing, automobile, construction, and home appliances industries.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding import Quotas

Import quotas is a trade restriction that sets a physical limit on the quantity of a good that can be imported during a specific period, in this case, steel entering the United States. It's intended to protect domestic industries from overseas competition.
02

Analyzing the Impact of Steel Import Quotas

The quota will lead to a decrease in the supply of imported steel, causing the domestic price of steel to increase. Manufacturers using steel, such as construction, automotive and other heavy industries, will consequently face higher input costs.
03

Breaking Down Employment Impact

The rise in input costs for these companies could lead to a decrease in production, as the companies may not be able to absorb the extra costs while maintaining the same level of output. This decrease in production will lead to job losses, as less labor will be needed.
04

Identifying Affected Industries

Industries that heavily rely on steel as a raw material such as heavy machinery manufacturing, automobile, construction, and home appliances are likely to be affected by the steel quota.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Trade Restrictions
Trade restrictions are measures that governments apply to control the amount of goods that can be traded across their borders. One common form is import quotas. An import quota is a limit on the quantity of a specific good that can enter a country.~ For instance, a quota on steel imports sets a ceiling on how much steel can be imported into the United States.

The primary aim of this restriction is to protect local industries by reducing competition from foreign producers. When fewer imports are allowed, domestic producers can sell more of their products.~ Quotas can also lead to higher prices because the restricted supply cannot meet demand.
  • Fewer imports increase demand for local products.
  • Potentially leads to higher prices for consumers and industries using that product.
These higher prices can then ripple through the economy, affecting various sectors and their workforce.
Steel Industry
The steel industry is a fundamental pillar in many economies, including the United States. Steel is a versatile material, used in construction, transportation, and manufacturing.~ Therefore, changes in its market can have sweeping effects.~ An import quota on steel aims to shield domestic producers from international competition.

By reducing the quantity of imported steel, local steel manufacturers might see a boost in sales and potentially hire more workers.~ This sounds beneficial at first glance, but it's only one piece of the puzzle.
  • Import quotas protect local industries.
  • Prices of domestic steel might rise.
  • May stimulate local production and employment in the steel sector.
However, the increased cost of steel affects downstream industries, creating a broader economic impact.
Manufacturing Impact
The manufacturing industry is strongly affected by steel import quotas. Many manufacturing sectors rely on steel as a critical component of their production process.~ This includes automotive, construction, and heavy machinery sectors.

When a quota reduces the supply of cheaper imported steel, domestic steel prices increase naturally.~ These industries face higher production costs, and they may choose to cut back on production to maintain profitability.~ The result of reduced production is clear: fewer resources, including labor, are needed.
  • Automotive and construction sectors are highly reliant on steel.
  • Higher steel prices lead to increased production costs.
  • Potential reduction in output, leading to job losses.
This creates a difficult scenario where trying to protect one sector might inadvertently harm another.
Labor Market Effects
One of the most significant impacts of steel import quotas is on the labor market.~ While the quotas might protect jobs in the steel industry, they often cause far greater job losses in other sectors. The exercise in question highlights that for every job saved in the steel industry, around 10 jobs could be lost elsewhere.~ This occurs because industries that rely heavily on steel may reduce operations due to higher input costs.

When companies in the automotive, construction, and heavy machinery sectors face increased costs, they need to adjust, often by cutting their workforce.~ Some potential effects include:
  • Workers in dependent industries facing layoffs.
  • Job market shifts as workers transition between sectors.
  • Possible need for retraining displaced workers.
Ultimately, while protectionist measures have intentions to save jobs, they can inadvertently result in widespread job losses and economic disruptions.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

(Related to the Chapter Opener on page 288) While running for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders opposed the TransPacific Partnership in part because he believed that as a result of the agreement, "the U.S. will lose more than 130,000 jobs to Vietnam and Japan alone." Do you agree that reducing barriers to trade reduces the number of jobs available to workers in the United States? Briefly explain.

What events led to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)? Why did the WTO eventually replace the GATT?

In 2017 , shortly after President Trump took office, the U.S. Department of Commerce considered imposing tariffs on European steel companies it accused of dumping steel on the U.S. market. An article in the Wall Street Journal quoted Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross as asserting, "A healthy steel industry is critical to our economy and manufacturing base, yet our steel industry today is under assault from foreign producers that dump and subsidize their exports." What is dumping? If the United States imposes tariffs on imports of steel from Europe, briefly explain who is likely to gain and who is likely to lose.

(Related to the Apply the Concept on page 307) For several years, the United States imposed a tariff on tire imports. According to an analysis by economists Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Sean Lowry of the Peterson Institute, of the additional \(\$ 1.1\) billion consumers spent on tires as a result of the tariff on Chinese tires, the workers whose jobs were saved in the U.S. tire industry received only about \(\$ 48\) million in wages. Wouldn't it have been cheaper for the federal government to have raised taxes on U.S. consumers and given the money to tire workers rather than to have imposed a tariff? If so, why didn't the federal government adopt this alternative policy?

A political commentator makes the following statement: The idea that international trade should be based on the comparative advantage of each country is fine for rich countries like the United States and Japan. Rich countries have educated workers and large quantities of machinery and equipment. These advantages allow them to produce every product more efficiently than poor countries can. Poor countries like Kenya and Uruguay have nothing to gain from international trade based on comparative advantage. Do you agree with this argument? Briefly explain.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free