What if the whole Rust Belt decline narrative is wrong? "There's a popular story that politicians in both parties like to tell us: The Rust Belt was a thriving region until China, Mexico and their American business allies tore their manufacturing jobs away with lopsided trade deals," writes Gary Winslett, Middlebury College professor, in The Washington Post. But what if the whole narrative is wrong? "The Rust Belt's manufacturing decline isn't primarily about jobs going to Mexico. It's about jobs going to Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee. To put it in college football terms, the traditional Big Ten has been losing out to the Southeastern Conference."
"In 1970, the Rust Belt was responsible for nearly half of all manufacturing exports while the South produced less than a quarter," continues Winslett. "Today, the roles are reversed, it is the Rust Belt that hosts less than one-fourth of all manufactured exports and the South that exports twice what the Rust Belt does." The reasons why? It's a classic tale of interstate competition, in which the South lured jobs away from the Rust Belt by simply having more pro-business laws and conditions. Right-to-work laws in southern states "created more operational flexibility and attracted capital." The Rust Belt is heavily unionized; the South isn't. The South has cheap electricity and housing, lower tax burdens, more immigrants flocking in to provide cheap labor, and easier and faster permitting processes, argues Winslett.
In one sense, if more people believed this story about manufacturing decline, our political dysfunction might get even worse: Don't look at the Chinese as the ones who took your jobs…look to your own neighbors. But it is important to correctly identify why an entire region has seen such a decline, and maybe constituents should demand that their legislators create more favorable conditions for businesses to thrive if they want to work at those types of businesses. There is a relationship between the types of laws passed and the industries that thrive, and policymakers should be expected to understand the consequences of their actions.
