Thank you
In 1971, Robert Baldwin showed that U.S. imports were 27% more capital-intensive than U.S. exports in the 1962 trade data, using a measure similar to Leontief's.
Responses to the paradox
For many economists, Leontief‗s paradox undermined(破坏) the validity（有效性，正确性） of the Heckscher–Ohlin theorem (H– O) theory, which predicted that trade patterns would be based on countries‘ comparative advantage（比较优势） in certain factors of production (such as capital and labor). Many economists have
A 1999 survey of the econometric literature by Elhanan Helpman concluded that the paradox persists, but some studies in non-US trade were instead consistent with the H–O theory.
Leontief paradox
Leontief‘s paradox in economics is that
the country with the world‘s highest capital-per worker(人均资本) has a lower capital/labor ratio in exports than in imports. This econometric find was the result of Wassily W. Leontief's attempt to test the Heckscher–Ohlin theory empirically. In 1954, Leontief found that the United States—the most capital-abundant country in the world—exported labor-intensive commodities and imported capital-intensive commodities, in contradiction with Heckscher– Ohlin theory ("H–O theory").
Measurements
In 1956, Leontief use the data in 1951 of the US to verify it again found exports of capital / labor ratio is still 6% lower than competing with importeons for the paradox dismiss the importance of comparative advantage as a determinant（决定性因素） of trade. For instance（例如）, the Linder hypothesis（林德假说） states that demand plays a more important role than comparative advantage as a determinant of trade—with the hypothesis（假说） that countries which share similar demands will be more likely to trade. For instance, both the United States and Germany are developed countries with a significant（显著的） demand for cars, so both have large automotive industries. Rather than one country dominating the industry（主导产业） with a comparative advantage, both countries trade different brands（品牌） of cars between them. Similarly, New Trade Theory argues that comparative advantages can develop separately from factor endowment variation（要素禀赋差异） (e.g., in industrial increasing returns to scale).
dismissed（解除） the H-O theory in favor of a more Ricardian model（李嘉图模型） where technological differences determine comparative advantage. These economists argue that the United States has an advantage in highly skilled labor more so than capital. This can be seen as viewing ―capital‖ more broadly, to include human capital. Using this definition, the exports of the United States are very (human) capital-intensive（资本密集）, and not particularly intensive in (unskilled) labor.
In 1980 Edward Leamer questioned Leontief's original methodology on real exchange rate grounds, but acknowledged that the U.S. paradox still appears in the data (for years other than 1947).
In 2005 Kwok & Yu used an updated methodology to argue for a lower or zero paradox in U.S. trade statistics, though the paradox is still derived in other developed nations