中国将对特朗普的贸易要求采取强硬立场（下） [美国媒体]

China Is Set to Take a Hard Line on Trump’s Trade Demands

中国将对特朗普的贸易要求采取强硬立场


as
And think about the military industrial complex and our corrupt "health care" system where Americas investment goes.

再想想军事工业复合体和我们腐败的“医疗保险”体系，美国的投资都流向了那里。

Keynes
“…China is one of the most heavily taxed nations on earth, but contrary to Republican dogma their economy is exploding, much like ours did when Bill Clinton raised taxes…”

“中国是世界上税收最沉重的国家之一，但与共和党的无端观念所认为的相反，中国的经济正在经历爆炸式的增长，就像我们在比尔·克林顿提高税收时期所经历的那样。”

This is known in economics as the “balanced budget multiplier.”

这在经济学中被称为“平衡预算乘数”。

The way to grow an economy is “tax and spend.”

这种发展经济的方法是“税收加开支”。

Cutting taxes and reducing spending (a.k.a. “trickle down” or “Kansas effect”) just shrinks an economy.

削减税收和开支（又称“涓滴效应”或“堪萨斯效应”）只会让经济趋于萎缩。

Dadof2
China has patience, explosive growth, productivity, and now makes just about everything sold in the United State. They can shut the spigot/flood off in a day and turn their ships around. And they know our President is impatient, unwilling to learn all the facts (especially unpleasant ones), and has the long-term vision of a 6 year old. It is quite conceivable that Trump has alienated so many of our major trading partners, that all we'll be left to trade with soon is his pal, Putin, and Russia. In the Pacific, from Australia to Japan, in the Atlantic, virtually all of Western Europe, and our 2 neighbors, Canada and Mexico are ALL displeased with Trump's actions as capricious and insane.

中国拥有耐心、爆炸性的增长和生产力，现在它几乎制造了所有在美国销售的东西。他们可以在一天内关闭“龙头”或“洪流”，然后让他们的船转向回国。他们知道我们的总统是不耐其烦的，它不愿意学习所有的事实（尤其是那些不愉快的事情），并且怀揣着一个6岁孩子的长期愿景。很有可能出现的现实是，特朗普疏远了我们的许多主要贸易伙伴，我们很快就会与他的朋友——普京和俄罗斯进行贸易往来。在太平洋地区，从澳大利亚到日本，在大西洋，包括几乎所有的西欧国家，以及我们的两个邻国——加拿大和墨西哥都对特朗普的反复无常和疯狂行为感到不满。

I can easily see all the nations that ring us, North, South, East and West, saying "Let's get together and isolate the US. What then? Who could hold out longest?

我可以很轻易地看到所有环绕着我们的国家——包括北方、南方、东方和西方的国家都在说：“让我们团结起来，孤立美国。”然后会发生什么？谁能坚持得最后？

tom harrison
Imagine if China announced this coming Oct. 31 that no products will be shipped to the U.S. until January 2. They could cancel Christmas:)

想象一下，如果中国在10月31日宣布，在1月2日之前，不会有任何产品被运往美国，会发生什么？他们有能力取消圣诞节

Kelly
Many Canadians have decided not to travel to, or purchase products from, the US, due to Trump and his cronies' behaviors. The increasingly litigious, name-calling, anxious, etc. climate of American public discourse is also a factor.

由于特朗普和他的亲信的行为，许多加拿大人决定不再前往美国或购买美国的产品。美国公共话语中出现的越来越多的争议性、辱骂性、焦虑性情绪也是一个因素。

Foreign visitors want to avoid being caught in a crossfire ,or being targeted as outsider "haves" by disgruntled residents. Canadians' dissatisfaction with the Trump team's NAFTA negotiation tactics prompt non-purchase of US goods .

外国游客想要避免在交火中被抓住，或者被心怀不满的居民当作待宰的肥羊。加拿大人对特朗普团队采用的北美自由贸易协定谈判策略的不满促使他们不再购买美国的商品。

After many years of friendly "hands across the border" , the current state of affairs is sad . One hopes for better days!

经过多年友好的“跨境友谊”之后，当前的事态是令人悲哀的。每个人都希望有更好的未来！

DonD
When Trump walked away from the TPP, he handed China enormous trade opportunities with Asia and along the Pacific rim. China, meanwhile, has set up its own version of the World Bank, recruiting TPP participants to take part in their int'l investment bank. And, let's not forget that the collective Asian marketplace is the largest in the world.

当特朗普退出跨太平洋伙伴关系协议时，他给中国带来了与亚洲和太平洋地区展开贸易活动的巨大机会。与此同时，中国已经建立了自己版本的世界银行，并吸引跨太平洋伙伴关系协议的参与国参与他们的国际投资银行。而且，我们不要忘记了，亚洲的整体市场是世界上规模最大的。

China can well afford to refuse to negotiate with Trump on trade. It now has bigger fish to fry.

中国很有可能拒绝与特朗普就贸易问题进行谈判。现在它另有要事要办。

McGloin
Have any of you fans of TPP read any of it?
Most of it is secret. The little that is public was leaked.
You are all putting your full support behind an international agreement when you have very little idea what it would actually do.
The leaked parts (which I read, did you) make clear that the system would move your sovereign power to demand that elected officials protect workers, consumers, and the environment, out of the country to global tribunals staffed by corporate lawyers.
It is a global forced arbitration clause that would further advantage global corporations at your expense.
But even though you can't know what's in it, because most of it is a secret, you believe the pundits who work for global corporations?
Why would you be for a giant trade deal that has as one of its provisions that you cannot read it until 90 days after it is passed?
The whole process is against the Constitution. Democracy requires transparency. This is the opposite.

你们这些跨太平洋伙伴关系协议的支持者中有任何一个人读过协议的内容吗？
这份协议大部分都是秘密。公开的少部分信息都是被泄露的。
当你们几乎不知道它到底会做什么时，你们就都在全力支持这一项国际协议。
泄露的部分（我读过，你呢？）清楚地表明，这种制度将会剥除你的主权权力，要求民选官员保护工人、消费者和环境，并且要在这个国家之外由跨国公司律师组成的全球法庭上接收审判。
这是一个全球性的强制仲裁条款，它将以你所付出的代价为基础进一步推动跨国公司的发展。
但是，即使你不知道它的内容有什么——因为大部分都是秘密——但你相信那些为跨国公司工作的专家吗？
为什么你要通过一个重大的贸易协议，而它的条款之一是你无法在它通过后的90天内阅读它的内容？
整个过程都是违宪的。民主需要透明度。这件事却是相反的。

citybumpkin
"The leaked parts (which I read, did you) make clear that the system would move your sovereign power to demand that elected officials protect workers, consumers, and the environment, out of the country to global tribunals staffed by corporate lawyers."

“泄露的部分（我读过，你呢？）清楚地表明，这种制度将会剥除你的主权权力，要求民选官员保护工人、消费者和环境，并且要在这个国家之外由跨国公司律师组成的全球法庭上接收审判。”

Yes, TPP has arbitration mechanisms. Of course it does. How else do you enforce those clauses requiring members to obey common labor standards and IP laws.

是的，跨太平洋伙伴关系协议有仲裁机制。当然它会这么做。否则你如何执行那些要求成员遵守共同劳动标准和知识产权法律的条款呢？

The kind of "sovereignty" you are talking about precisely what China has been hiding behind for decades. Chinese sovereignty doesn't require it to enforce US patents or copyrights. Chinese sovereignty doesn't require it enact the same labor laws as the US. Yay for sovereignty!

你所谈论的那种“主权”，正是中国几十年来一直隐藏在背后的东西。中国的主权不要求它强制执行美国的专利或版权。中国的主权不要求它颁布与美国相同的劳动法。主权真是太好了！

So international tribunal of corporate lawyers , you say? I say, fantastic. Bring it on. ENFORCEABLE common IP and labor laws sound pretty good to me. How is Trump's way working out for you?

那么，你说跨国公司的律师组成的法庭？我想说的是，它太棒了。让它成为现实吧。在我看来，可强制执行的共同知识产权和劳动法很好。特朗普的做法对你来说会造成什么后果？

Christy
If it comes to a trade war, the Chinese will have Trump for lunch. U.S. exports will lose their largest market, American farmers, builders and auto workers will be hard hit, American consumers will be paying more for just about everything they buy and we'll still be burning coal and puttering around on Amtrak while the rest of the world is buying Chinese solar cells and zooming on 300-mph bullet trains. MAGA will be MALA, Making America Last Again.

如果它将导致一场贸易战，那么中国人将会请特朗普吃午饭。美国出口将失去最大的市场，美国农民、建筑工人和汽车工人将遭受重创，美国消费者将支付更多的钱来购买他们所需要的一切，我们仍然在烧煤，坐着美国铁路公司的火车四处闲逛，而在世界其他地方则在购买中国的太阳能电池，搭乘时速达300英里的高速列车。“让美国再度变得伟大”将会成为“让美国再度名落孙山”。

McGloin
This is already happening, because Republicans refuse to invest in their own country, and Democrats refuse to oppose Republicans.

这种局面已经发生了，因为共和党人拒绝在他们自己的国家投资，而民主党人则拒绝反对共和党。

China subsidizes new industries to steal market share, and we refuse to invest in Hebrew industries. They are winning.

中国正通过补贴新产业来窃取市场份额，我们则拒绝投资希伯来人的产业。他们正在赢得比赛。

We have been following Republican economic policy since the Clintons declared surrender in 1992, and we are all suffering for it. It doesn't work, but instead of proposing the opposite, Democrats propose a watered down version of Republican policies that don't work.

自从克林顿在1992年宣布投降以来，我们一直在遵循共和党的经济政策，我们都为此感到痛苦。这是行不通的，但民主党人提出了一种不奏效的共和党政策的打折扣的版本，而不是提出相反的建议。

A ratchet is a tool that only works in one direction. Like a car jack where pushing the lever down raises the car, but letting it up does nothing.

棘轮是一种只在一个方向上工作的工具。就像汽车千斤顶把杠杆推低，抬高了汽车，但这只是让它上升，其他什么也做不了。

Republicans and Democrats have turned our political system into a ratchet. The Republicans push hard to the right, passing legislation and moving policy. The Democrats hide in the center claiming that can't get anything done.

共和党人和民主党人已经把我们的政治体制变成了一颗棘轮。共和党人通过立法和政策努力向右推动它。民主党人则躲在中间，声称他们什么事都做不成。

So when the political pendulum swings right, policy moves right, but when the pendulum moves left, nothing changes.

因此，当政治钟摆向右摆动时，政策就会向右移动，但当钟摆向左移动时，一切都不会改变。

This is now painfully obvious, since after eight years of claiming they couldn't get anything done because of Republican resistance, Democrats now claim they are powerless to stop Republicans, even though they have the least popular president ever.

这是显而易见的，因为在过去8年的时间里，由于共和党的抵抗，民主党人声称他们无法完成任何事情，现在民主党人声称他们无力阻止共和党人，尽管后者拥有有史以来最不受欢迎的总统。

It is quite difficult to believe the Democratic Party is this incompetent by accident.

很难相信民主党的不称职行为是意外之喜。

If you don't want to lose the midterms, you better start fighting for humans instead of corporate free trade.

如果你不想在中期选举中失利，你最好开始为人民而战，而不是为企业的自由贸易而战。

Jack Shultz
What is ironic is that the US largely constructed the existing world order, essentially for its own benefit. Now an American President, who was elected by a minority of Americans it should always be noted, is set on destroying it, largely for his own political benefit.

讽刺的，美国在很大程度上构建了现有的世界秩序，其本质上是为了自己的利益。现在，一个由少数美国人选举产生的美国总统——这一点应该始终被指出——他的目标是摧毁它，这主要是为了他自己的政治利益。

Trump’s presidency may be transitory, but the damage he creates while in power, geo-politically, economically, socially and environmentally will be long lasting. The advantages that Americans had taken for granted since the creation of the present world order At the end of WWII may never be regained and the US no longer be recognized as the first among equals in global affairs.

特朗普的总统任期可能是短暂的，但他在权力、地缘政治、经济、社会和环境方面所造成的损害将是长期的。自从二战结束后，美国人在世界秩序的建立中所获得的优势可能永远无法得到恢复，美国也不再被认为是全球事务中的同侪之首。

Panthiest
As an educator hoping to retire in a few years, the thought of Trump revving up something he doesn't understand (again) scares me because of the massive hit my retirement funds took not long ago when he did the same thing. Of course, he doesn't care, but I'm hoping Congress will at least try to keep a lid on this until it gets resolved.

作为一名希望在几年内退休的教师，特朗普的想法让我（又一次地）感到害怕，因为我的退休基金在不久前还因为他所做的同样的事情而遭受重创，这让我很害怕。当然，他并不在乎这件事，但我希望国会至少能在问题得到解决之前，对他加以控制。

John
Pan, you are confusing the Great Recovery of Obama with the Trump years.

你把奥巴马的伟大复兴与特朗普时代混为一谈了。

Teddi
I am also close to retirement and have pulled every penny out of the market. I can't afford to lose what I have at this time in my life. I don't have the time for the economy to recover. I did the same thing just before everything went belly-up in 2008.

我也快要退休了，而我已经把每一分钱都从市场上抽取了出来。在我生命的这一时间段里，我承担不起失去所拥有的一切的代价。我没有时间等待经济复苏。在2008年一切都濒临破产之前，我也做了同样的事情。

We should be the most economically powerful country in the world, but we keep handing the reigns to Republicans who plunge us over a cliff time after time. Americans have become myopic. They can't see the big picture and I for one have lost faith that they ever will.

我们应该是世界上经济最强大的国家，但我们一直把大权交给那些把我们推向悬崖的共和党人。美国人变得短视了。他们看不到大局，我也失去了对他们的信心。

Steve
I'd be worried, too. The "Tax Cut For the Trump's and Kushner's" is going to put a crimp in someone's Social Security income. Increasing the National Debt by trillions for no reason at all can not be a good idea in the long term.

我也感到担心。“特朗普和库什纳的减税政策”将会对某人的社会保障收入造成影响。从长远来看，增加数万亿美元的国家债务根本不是一个好主意。

G. Sears
China is laser focused economically and has been for well over a decade. Their momentum has been spectacular, well conceived and aggressively executed.

中国在经济上有着明确的焦点，而且它这么做已经有十多年的历史了。他们的势头是惊人的，有着良好的计划，并且得到了积极的执行。

The USA has not had a coherent economic strategy in decades. America’s central focus and largest expenditures have been on behalf of questionable and interminable military conflicts for nearly two decades.

几十年来，美国一直没有一个连贯的经济战略。近20年来，美国的中心焦点和最大的支出一直是可疑的、无休止的军事冲突。

Push back on many Chinese practices are warranted and need credible and committed efforts for balance and redress. What America does not need is an out and out trade war with China.

对中国的许多做法进行反击是要有保证的，需要可信的和坚定的努力来加以平衡和纠正。美国所不需要的是与中国进行一场贸易战争。

What we also do not need is government that sees the issue only in terms of what China must do or not do while turning a blind eye to what America is patently not doing domestically.

我们同样也不需要的是，政府只盯着中国必须做什么或不能做什么这个问题，同时却对美国国内显而易见没有做成的事情睁一只眼闭一只眼。

Our first focus and top priorities should be on no-holds-barred world class education, world class research, development and innovation, world class infrastructure, and world class employment opportunity.

我们的第一重点和首要任务应该放在不受限制的世界级教育、世界级的研究、发展和创新、世界级的基础设施和世界级的就业机会上面。

So far the Trump administration has failed miserably in virtually all of these vital imperatives.

到目前为止，特朗普政府在几乎所有这些至关重要的事情上都遭遇了滑铁卢。

Paul Lief
So basically we're saying China is investing in the future in advanced technologies that will control the future, but since we don't want to leave the past behind they shouldn't either. They will, we won't, and we'll be at their mercy in having to buy those critical technologies from them. That should do wonders for the trade deficit....

所以基本上，我们说的是，中国正在投资未来的先进技术以掌控未来，但既然我们不想把过去抛诸脑后，他们也不应该这样做。他们会，我们却不会，我们将会因为不得不从他们那里购买这些关键技术而受到他们的摆布。这应该会对贸易赤字产生奇迹般的效果。

Tom Q
It was not long ago that Trump forewarned everyone that we might need to endure "a little pain" with the trade wars we are starting with China and Europe. Perhaps now would be a good time to give greater specificity to that choice of words. For instance, will American soybean farmers be willing to take a financial hit if their crop isn't purchased by the Chinese? What about American manufacturers using steel in their products? How much of a price increase will they be able to absorb before their sales plummet?

就在不久前，特朗普还曾警告所有人，我们可能需要为我们与中国和欧洲开打的贸易战而忍受“一点痛苦”。也许现在是时候为这个词的选择赋予更大的特定意义了。例如，如果美国大豆种植户的大豆不被中国人购买，他们是否愿意承受经济损失？要在他们的产品中使用钢铁的美国制造商怎么办呢？在他们的销售暴跌之前，他们能够抬高多少价格呢？

No one likes surprises when it comes to smaller incomes nor do Republicans when it comes to smaller vote totals on Election Day. It goes without saying neither do investors like uncertainty when it comes to the stock market, If, as seems the case now, we are headed towards full blown trade wars with both Europe and China, Trump would be doing all of us a big favor in defining a "little pain."

当涉及到收入减少的问题时，没有人会喜欢这种意外，当选举日当天的选票减少时，共和党人也不会开心的。毫无疑问，投资者在股市上也不喜欢不确定性，如果，正如现在所看到的，我们正走向与欧洲和中国开打全面贸易战的路上，特朗普将会在定义“一点痛苦”方面给我们所有人帮一个大忙。

Henry J
On one side of the equation we have an intelligent leader with extraordinary control over production and economics. * is opening new markets, appealing to our former allies, and capitalizing throughout this process. On the other hand, we have Trump who fails to study complex problems or seek advisers who disagree with his "gut feel".

在等式的一边，我们（的对手）有一个聪明的领导者，它对生产和经济有着非凡的控制。中国领导人正在开拓新市场，吸引我们的前盟友，并在整个过程中进行资本化。另一方面，我们有特朗普，他无法研究复杂的问题，也没有去咨询那些不同意他的“直觉”的顾问。

The outcome is pretty much ordained.

结果是非常确定的。

The US loses clout while China secures our former allies who have no idea what an unstable Trump will do on any given day. The US' inability to remove such an incapable man from a position of power has to stretch the credibility of any nation seeking to do business with the US. We are the Titanic whose rudder was too small to make the necessary course correction before its demise. World leaders use words like "insane" when they depict US policies. Coupled to the completely corrupt republicans in office, we have every reason to be seriously concerned for the future of the US.

美国失去了影响力，而中国则保护了我们的前盟友，他们不知道特朗普在任何一天会做些什么。美国无力将这样一个无能的人从权力的位置上拉下来这一事实必然将削弱寻求与美国做生意的任何国家的确定性。我们是泰坦尼克，但它的舵太小了，在它灭亡之前，我们无法进行必要的航向修正。当世界领导人描述美国的政策时，他们会用“疯狂”这样的字眼。再加上办公室里完全腐化的共和党人，我们完全有理由对美国的未来感到担忧。

James Schwarzwalder
It is clear that the Chinese government invests in domestic industries that then sell products around the world. The American system of investment is more based on private capital with the underlying theory that the government that governs best is one that governs least. It is clear to me that the American government needs to invest more in projects for the common good such as the Gateway Tunnel project to and from Penn Station NY. Our costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have exhausted public financial resources that would have been better spent on domestic infrastructure.

很明显，中国政府投资于国内产业，然后在世界各地销售产品。美国的投资体系更多的是基于私人资本，其背后的理论是，治理得最好的政府是管理得最少的政府。我很清楚，美国政府需要更多地投资于一些有着共同利益的项目，比如通往纽约宾夕法尼亚车站的“通道隧道”项目。我们在伊拉克和阿富汗的代价高昂的战争已经耗尽了公共财政资源，而这些资源本可以更好地用于国内基础设施建设。

Professor M
The only U.S. government agency that is allowed to have an industrial policy is the Department of Defense. It spends on R&D in universities and in many tech companies. It invests in medical R&D as well as in technologies more obviously related to its missions. Too bad that it isn't allowed to have a domestic gun policy as well.

美国唯一被允许制定产业政策的政府机构是国防部。它在大学和许多科技公司的研发上投入了资金。它投资于医疗研发，以及与它的使命相关的技术。糟糕的是，它也不被容许制定一项国内的枪支政策。

Richard B
China by adopting State subsidised capitalism may eventually give the US a problem however it is the Chinese political system not open for outsiders that makes China unique. Also the role of the Chinese currency in trade that may be an even larger threat due to US debt growing by leaps and bounds. China does not see Russia the same way as Americans which adds another of mistrust.

中国通过采用国家补贴的资本主义，最终可能会给美国带来一个问题——然而，中国的政治体制对那些让中国变得独一无二的外来者来说是不开放的。此外，由于美国债务的快速增长，人民币在贸易中的作用可能是一个更大的威胁。中国不像美国人那样看待俄罗斯，这增加了另一种不信任感。