the.world.is.flat-第62章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


David　Ricardo　（1772…1823）　was　the　English　economist　
226　
who　developed　the　free…trade　theory　of　comparative　advantage；　which　stipulates　that　
if　each　nation　specializes　in　the　production　of　goods　in　which　it　has　a　comparative　
cost　advantage　and　then　trades　with　other　nations　for　the　goods　in　which　they　
specialize；　there　will　be　an　overall　gain　in　trade；　and　overall　income　levels　should　
rise　in　each　trading　country。　So　if　all　these　Indian　techies　were　doing　what　was　their　
comparative　advantage　and　then　turning　around　and　using　their　income　to　buy　all　the　
products　from　America　that　are　our　comparative　advantage…from　Corning　Glass　to　
Microsoft　Windows…both　our　countries　would　benefit；　even　if　some　individual　Indians　
or　Americans　might　have　to　shift　jobs　in　the　transition。　And　one　can　see　evidence　
of　this　mutual　benefit　in　the　sharp　increase　in　exports　and　imports　between　the　United　
States　and　India　in　recent　years。　
But　my　eye　kept　looking　at　all　these　Indian　zippies　and　telling　me　something　else：　
〃Oh；　my　God；　there　are　so　many　of　them；　and　they　all　look　so　serious；　so　eager　for　
work。　And　they　just　keep　coming；　wave　after　wave。　How　in　the　world　can　it　possibly　
be　good　for　my　daughters　and　millions　of　other　young　Americans　that　these　Indians　
can　do　the　same　jobs　as　they　can　for　a　fraction　of　the　wages？〃　
When　Ricardo　was　writing；　goods　were　tradable；　but　for　the　most　part　knowledge　work　
and　services　were　not。　There　was　no　undersea　fiberoptic　cable　to　make　knowledge　jobs　
tradable　between　America　and　India　back　then。　Just　as　I　was　getting　worked　up　with　
worry；　the　Infosys　spokeswoman　accompanying　me　casually　mentioned　that　last　year　
Infosys　India　received　〃one　million　applications〃　from　young　Indians　for　nine　
thousand　tech　jobs。　
Have　a　nice　day。　
I　struggled　over　what　to　make　of　this　scene。　I　don't　want　to　see　any　American　lose　
his　or　her　job　to　foreign　competition　or　to　technological　innovation。　I　sure　wouldn't　
want　to　lose　mine。　When　you　lose　your　job；　the　unemployment　rate　is　not　5。2　percent；　
it's　100　percent。　Nobook　about　the　flat　world　would　be　honest　if　it　did　not　acknowledge　
such　con…　
227　
cerns；　or　acknowledge　that　there　is　some　debate　among　economists　about　whether　Ricardo　
is　still　right。　
Having　listened　to　the　arguments　on　both　sides；　though；　I　come　down　where　the　great　
majority　of　economists　come　down…that　Ricardo　is　still　right　and　that　more　American　
individuals　will　be　better　off　if　we　don't　erect　barriers　to　outsourcing；　
supply…chaining；　and　offshoring　than　if　we　do。　The　simple　message　of　this　chapter　
is　that　even　as　the　world　gets　flat；　America　as　a　whole　will　benefit　more　by　sticking　
to　the　basic　principles　of　free　trade；　as　it　always　has；　than　by　trying　to　erect　walls。　
The　main　argument　of　the　anti…outsourcing　school　is　that　in　a　flat　world；　not　only　
are　goods　tradable；　but　many　services　have　become　trad…able　as　well。　Because　of　this　


change；　America　and　other　developed　countries　could　be　headed　for　an　absolute　decline；　
not　just　a　relative　one；　in　their　economic　power　and　living　standards　unless　they　
move　to　formally　protect　certain　jobs　from　foreign　competition。　So　many　new　players　
cannot　enter　the　global　economy…in　service　and　knowledge　fields　now　dominated　by　
Americans；　Europeans；　and　Japanese…without　wages　settling　at　a　newer；　lower　
equilibrium；　this　school　argues。　
The　main　counterargument　from　free…trade/outsourcing　advocates　is　that　while　there　
may　be　a　transition　phase　in　certain　fields；　during　which　wages　are　dampened；　there　
is　no　reason　to　believe　that　this　dip　will　be　permanent　or　across　the　board；　as　long　
as　the　global　pie　keeps　growing。　To　suggest　that　it　will　be　is　to　invoke　the　so…called　
lump　of　labor　theory…the　notion　that　there　is　a　fixed　lump　of　labor　in　the　world　
and　that　once　that　lump　is　gobbled　up；　by　either　Americans　or　Indians　or　Japanese；　
there　won't　be　any　more　jobs　to　go　around。　If　we　have　the　biggest　lump　of　labor　now；　
and　then　Indians　offer　to　do　this　same　work　for　less；　they　will　get　a　bigger　piece　
of　the　lump；　and　we　will　have　less；　or　so　this　argument　goes。　
The　main　reason　the　lump　of　labor　theory　is　wrong　is　that　it　is　based　on　the　assumption　
that　everything　that　is　going　to　be　invented　has　been　invented；　and　that　therefore　
economic　competition　is　a　zero…sum　game；　a　fight　over　a　fixed　lump。　This　assumption　
misses　the　fact　that　although　jobs　are　often　lost　in　bulk…to　outsourcing　or　
offshoring…by　big　individ

ual　companies；　and　this　loss　tends　to　make　headlines；　new　jobs　are　also　being　created　
in　fives；　tens；　and　twenties　by　small　companies　that　you　can't　see。　It　often　takes　
a　leap　of　faith　to　believe　that　it　is　happening。　But　it　is　happening。　If　it　were　not；　
America's　unemployment　rate　would　be　much　higher　today　than　5　percent。　The　reason　
it　ishappening　is　that　as　lower…end　service　and　manufacturing　jobs　move　out　of　Europe；　
America；　and　Japan　to　India；　China；　and　the　former　Soviet　Empire；　the　global　pie　not　
only　grows　larger…because　more　people　have　more　income　to　spend…it　also　grows　more　
complex；　as　more　new　jobs；　and　new　specialties；　are　created。　
Let　me　illustrate　this　with　asimple　example。　Imagine　thatthere　are　only　two　countries　
in　the　world…America　and　China。　And　imagine　that　the　American　economy　has　only　100　
people。　Of　those　100　people；　80　are　well…educated　knowledge　workers　and　20　are　
less…educated　low…skilled　workers。　Now　imagine　that　the　world　goes　flat　and　America　
enters　into　a　free…trade　agreement　with　China；　which　has　1；000　people　but　is　a　less　
developed　country。　So　today　China　too　has　only　80　well…educated　knowledge　workers　
out　of　that　1；000；　and　it　has　920　low…skilled　workers。　Before　America　entered　into　
its　free…trade　agreement　with　China；　there　were　only　80　knowledge　workers　in　its　world。　
Now　there　are　160　in　our　two…country　world。　The　American　knowledge　workers　feel　like　
they　have　more　competition；　and　they　do。　But　if　you　look　at　the　prize　they　are　going　
after；　it　is　now　a　much　expanded　and　more　complex　market。　It　went　from　a　market　of　
100　people　to　a　market　of　1；100　people；　with　many　more　needs　and　wants。　So　it　should　
be　win…win　for　both　the　American　and　Chinese　knowledge　workers。　
Sure；　some　of　the　knowledge　workers　in　America　may　have　to　move　horizontally　into　
new　knowledge　jobs；　because　of　the　competition　from　China。　But　with　a　market　that　


big　and　complex；　you　can　be　sure　that　new　knowledge　jobs　will　open　up　at　decent　wages　
for　anyone　who　keeps　up　his　or　her　skills。　So　do　not　worry　about　our　knowledge　workers　
or　the　Chinese　knowledge　workers。　They　will　both　do　fine　with　this　bigger　market。　
〃What　do　you　mean；　don't　worry？〃　you　ask。　〃How　do　we　deal　with　the　fact　that　those　
eighty　knowledge　workers　from　China　will　be　willing　
229　
to　work　for　so　much　less　than　the　eighty　knowledge　workers　from　America？　How　will　
this　difference　get　resolved？〃　
It　won't　happen　overnight；　so　some　American　knowledge　workers　may　be　affected　in　the　
transition；　but　the　effects　will　not　be　permanent。　Here；　argues　Stanford　new　economy　
specialist　Paul　Romer；　is　what　you　need　to　understand：　The　wages　for　the　Chinese　
knowledge　workers　were　so　low　because；　although　their　skills　were　marketable　globally　
like　those　of　their　American　counterparts；　they　were　trappedinside　a　stifled　economy。　
Imagine　how　little　a　North　Korean　computer　expert　or　brain　surgeon　is　paid　inside　
that　huge　prison　of　a　nation！　But　as　the　Chinese　economy　opens　up　to　the　world　and　
reforms；　the　wages　of　Chinese　knowledge　workers　will　rise　up　to　American/world　levels。　
Ours　will　not　go　down　to　the　level　of　a　stifled；　walled…in　economy。　You　can　already　
see　this　happening　in　Bangalore；　where　competition　for　Indian　software　writers　is　
rapidly　pushing　up　their　wages　toward　American/European　levels…after　decades　of　
languishing　while　the　Indian　economy　was　closed。　It　is　why　Americans　should　be　doing　
all　they　can　to　promote　more　and　faster　economic　reform　in　India　and　China。　
Do　worry；　though；　about　the　20　low…skilled　Americans；　who　now　have　to　compete　more　
directly　with　the　920　low…skilled　Chinese。　One　reason　the　20　low…skilled　Americans