Paul Krugman has done a rough, on the back of a napkin calculation on the cost of jobs due to Chinese Mercantilism alone.

if we think of the United States as bearing a proportionate share, and also use the rule of thumb that one point of GDP = 1 million jobs, we’re looking at 1.4 million U.S. jobs lost due to Chinese mercantilism.

Bear in mind this is not a formal result, simply a very rough estimate put forth on his blog for discussion, not a formal research paper.

A couple of IMF researchers estimated China accounts for 0.9% of GWP (gross world product).

Since China's GDP is heavily export driven, Krugman asserts one can look at this as a negative impact on world exports., which in turn, negatively impacts purchases of goods and services from U.S. providers and this is a multiplier effect.

Then, Krugman notes the target consumer market for China is the United States and it's true, 83% of the U.S. non-oil trade deficit can be attributed to China. Krugman then gives the very rough, wet thumb in the air to measure the wind multiplier of 1% U.S. GDP equates to 1 million jobs.

So, due to China, very roughly, the U.S. has lost 1.4 million jobs.

I'm thrilled to see any major mainstream economist start examining the real statistics and negative impact of China trade policy. I sure hope Krugman gets serious and writes a full-bore research paper and analysis.

Did you know India's offshore outsourcing industry employed 800,000 workers in 2007? Once again, the United States is a huge target for India to capture our jobs. Now how many jobs have been lost due to offshore outsourcing? This is direct wage arbitrage. If you noticed, few mainstream economists even mention the words offshore outsourcing. It's like some hidden, secret taboo and folks, hey, results are results, statistics are statistics and the negative impact of global labor arbitrage needs to be examined, not only for it's affect on the U.S. middle class, but also it's negative impact on the long term economic national health.