Business
Shift in China-U.S. trade is hurting California, helping Texas
As if it weren’t worrisome enough for California that more highly skilled, highly paid workers have been leaving for Texas, evidence shows that the Lone Star State has begun to siphon trade dollars and uncounted jobs away from the Southland’s ports and the distribution hubs in the Inland Empire.
And the apparent cause of the new wrinkle in the Texas-California rivalry is not some new policies or programs adopted in Texas to make it a greater magnet for economic activity that was previously in California. Instead, it’s a consequence of the U.S.-China trade war that began when Donald Trump occupied the White House and has continued with President Biden’s efforts to reduce American dependence on China, especially for high-tech products that involve national security and other issues.
To get around the U.S. tariffs and trade restrictions, Chinese companies have sharply stepped up investments into Mexico and been moving products into the United States by truck instead of shipping by sea through the massive port and distribution systems in Southern California.
The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are the busiest in the nation and handle about 40% of all ocean cargo from Asia. But last year the number of 20-foot-equivalent containers from China entering the San Pedro ports complex fell a combined 12.5% from 2022, to the lowest level in at least a decade, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence.
“If we’re doing less business, it means fewer jobs, quite simply,” said Gene Seroka, executive director of the Port of Los Angeles. He said that every four containers translate into one job. “Economically, where all of us spend our money, if we don’t have this cargo coming through, it will be less — and there will be choices to be made.”
China’s share of all containers entering the Port of L.A. still remains dominant, at 53% last year, although that’s down from 57% in 2022. Seroka sees that percentage slipping to the mid-40s in the coming years.
The Southland’s cargo volume, overall, has picked up significantly in recent months, thanks to the end of labor contract talks and diversions to the West Coast due to military conflict and drought disrupting the Suez and Panama canals, respectively.
But longer term, Seroka said a dwindling of Chinese inbound containers has to be made up elsewhere. In addition to some 15,000 longshoremen, the two ports support hundreds of thousands of jobs in the region — in trucking, warehousing, trade finances and countless small businesses.
California’s stringent environmental regulations and high business costs add to the pressure.
To be sure, increased Mexican imports also benefit Southern California, which historically has gotten a large volume of overland trade, particularly electronic products coming up the San Diego border. But the biggest entry point for Mexican goods is Laredo, Texas, just north of the big manufacturing center in Monterrey, Mexico, and then El Paso, close to Juarez.
“Since more and more goods are coming from Mexico, Texas is geographically and conveniently located,” said Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at Loyola Marymount University.
Tom Fullerton, a border business economist at the University of Texas in El Paso, said a lot of things made in Mexico are intermediate components, many of which go back and forth across the border as many as a dozen times. Some 90% is transported by trucks. No wonder employment for truck drivers in Texas has been growing nonstop, while California’s has come to a screeching halt, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
“Increased Chinese investment simply creates more business opportunities for firms in Texas,” Fullerton said.
At the moment, trade economies in both Texas and California face some head winds, including a slowing U.S. economy as a result of anti-inflation efforts, plus cutbacks by retailers and other buyers that overstocked merchandise even as American consumers have been shifting their spending from stuff to services, such as travel and entertainment.
“Now that we filled the house with everything, everything we could wear and use for years, they’re saying, ‘Let’s go to the movies, the ballgame,’” said Jock O’Connell, a California trade specialist at Beacon Economics. “U.S. demand for imported goods from anywhere is slacking.”
Last year U.S. imports of all merchandise from China, by ship and air, fell by a whopping 20% from 2022, to $427 billion. The Commerce Department reported Thursday that Chinese imports in January were up slightly from December, but down 6% from January 2023.
Meantime, U.S. imports from Mexico continued to rise in January and compared with a year earlier, extending the lead over China. Mexican imports jumped after the worst of the pandemic passed and reached $476 billion last year. It was the first time in more than two decades that Americans bought more merchandise from Mexico than China.
Overall, the U.S. trade deficit of all goods and services fell last year by almost 19%, the largest drop since 2009, as Americans bought less foreign oil and fewer China-made phones, toys and household goods. In January, the trade deficit increased, to $89 billion, as American exports were lower than December and year-earlier figures.
Efforts to diversify production away from China have been going on for years, in part as a hedge against political risks and rising labor and business costs in China. But the move to Mexico and some other nations gained speed after then-President Trump in 2018 slapped large tariffs on a wide array of Chinese imports.
President Biden hasn’t lifted them, and in some ways further tightened the trade screws on China. The pandemic added to the so-called reshoring or near-shoring momentum as multinationals, stung by a breakdown in transport and supply chains, sought to be closer to their markets.
Harry Moser, founder of the Reshoring Initiative to bring manufacturing back to the U.S., said the changes in trade volume by country don’t tell the full story. Although he called the drop in the American trade deficit with China last year a good thing, Moser questioned whether the U.S. is really less dependent on China.
What’s happening, he argued, is that there’s considerable rerouting of trade from China through Mexico. And he fears it could get worse, pointing to the Chinese firm BYD’s plans to build an electric vehicle factory in Mexico for export to the U.S. Even Tesla, which makes its cars in Shanghai as well as Texas, is apparently urging some of its Chinese suppliers to locate in Mexico, he said.
“It’s not time to celebrate the China news,” Moser said of the reported drop in Chinese imports to the U.S.
Apparently there’s no cause to celebrate in the Southland either.
Chinese automotive parts companies have been among the most aggressive in stepping up investments in Mexico. Thirty-three car parts suppliers of Chinese origin are now registered in Mexico, and 18 exported $1.1 billion worth of products to the U.S. last year, up 15% from 2022, said Michelle Sagrero, communications manager at INA, the auto parts industry association in Mexico. She said more Chinese investments are in the works, though she said it was too early to disclose how many companies.
Overall, Chinese foreign direct investment, while stalling in the U.S., has kept growing in Mexico and topped $2.5 billion in 2022, a fivefold increase from 2000-04, according to Red ALC-China, a nonpartisan network of academics in Mexico and other countries. The tally for Chinese investments in 2023 hasn’t been published yet, but “it’ll be substantially higher,” said Enrique Dussel Peters, coordinator for the Center for Chinese-Mexican Studies at UNAM, a university in Mexico City.
The U.S.-China trade war has undoubtedly played a big role, he said. In his study for a United Nations economic group, Dussel Peters found that in 2021, companies exporting goods from China to the U.S. paid 18.8% of the value of their shipment in tariffs and transportation costs. The comparable costs for Mexico-originated exports to the U.S. — 1.05%.
“The difference is substantial, to put it politely,” he said.
Dussel Peters said he expects more Chinese and other foreign companies to invest and set up shop in Mexico. Mexico has free trade pacts not only with the U.S. but also a few dozen other nations, and it has its own sizable domestic market too. But he noted that there is one potential hitch. Thus far, Washington hasn’t come down hard in pressuring Mexico to follow the U.S. on China trade and investments.
“There is always the threat that the U.S. becomes more serious about complying with U.S. regulations and restrictions,” Dussel Peters said. “You can’t continue with a trade war and profound conflict and have a major partner of the U.S. with a sign saying to the Chinese, ‘Welcome to Mexico.’”
Business
Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk
new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey
February 27, 2026
Business
Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office
Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.
If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.
All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.
But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.
That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.
The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.
— Katie Martin, Financial Times
Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.
Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.
Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.
But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.
Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.
That hasn’t been the case for months.
”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”
Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.
Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.
It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.
Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”
Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”
Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.
Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.
“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”
I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.
To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.
Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.
The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.
It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.
That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.
Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.
Business
How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.
Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.
The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.
What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.
But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.
The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.
How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments
To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.
The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.
In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.
In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.
Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.
Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.
Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.
How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies
With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.
The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.
The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.
The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.
One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.
Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.
And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.
Methodology
Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts2 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma1 week agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology6 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology6 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making