A significant part of the justification behind Donald Trump’s recent trade war with China lies in his supposed rapport with the American White working class, specifically those who come from the manufacturing, farming, and mining sector. He repeatedly makes the claim that the outsourcing of jobs and the stealing of U.S intellectual property by countries like China has taken away “millions and millions” of jobs, costing us “billions”. Hence, taxing foreign imports would encourage American industries to “buy and invest local.” The U.S trade deficit plays a huge role in this. China is screwing us, Trump claims, and stealing “500 billion dollars” from our economy.

But if it were really the case that massive trade imbalance harms the economy, then it would follow that at the very least an increase or decrease in the trade deficit would correlate with an increase or decrease in unemployment rates.

The unemployment rate measures individuals who are willing and available to work or are actively seeking work. Those working part-time are considered employed. The trade deficit measures the difference between a country’s net exports (goods leaving the country) and net imports (goods coming into the country).

Compare and contrast, then, U.S trade balance and the unemployment rate since 1980, according to the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics:

 

 

The above graphs of course paint a very complicated picture of the effects of trade balances on employment rate. While the periods between 1981 and 1986-86, and 1988 and 1992-3, saw a slight correlation between rising unemployment and an increasing trade deficit, the period between 1995 and 2000 saw the opposite: there was a huge decrease in unemployment despite a massive widening of the trade deficit. In fact, sometimes it is even the case that decreasing trade deficits correlate with rising unemployment, as is demonstrated by the 2008-2010 period.

So if Trump wants to cause a trade war, he’d best provide another justification, as job losses don’t seem to have much to do with trade imbalances. It also weakens his NAFTA argument—that NAFTA is one of the main culprits in the massive outsourcing of jobs to Mexico. Since the act’s passing in 1993 until the Dot-Com Bubble, employment had actually decreased from about 7% to 4%. So there you have it: “they”—those malevolent, rapacious, cheating foreigners—are not taking away our jobs. The question then remains as to why Trump continues to wage this ridiculous trade war with China, even when it actually hurts American workers.