【评论】马士基：中国对美出口上季度增长了5-10%，美国对中国的出口下降了25-30% [美国媒体]

Maersk CEO; "Chinese exports to the U.S. grew 5-10 percent last quarter. Meanwhile, U.S. exports to China fell by 25-30 percent."

【评论】马士基：中国对美出口上季度增长了5-10%，美国对中国的出口下降了25-30%

a_gusto
This is mentioned in the article but one of the primary reasons there has been an enormous push to bring goods in before the end of the year is because the additional duty owed on the final list of the administration 301 tariffs increases from 10% to 25% on January 1st.

这是文章中提到的原因，但在年底之前大量采购进口商品的一个主要原因是基于301关税条款所要缴纳的附加关税税率将从明年1月1日起从10%增加到25%。

——————————————

MasterBerter
But there doesn't appear to be a similar scramble on China's side like for our soy beans for example. Even if it's a one time thing it still puts us behind to use Trumps terminology.

但中国方面似乎没有出现类似的争抢行为，比如我们的大豆。即使这是一锤子买卖，用特朗普的话来说，它仍然让我们落后了。

——————————————

twenafeesh
The Chinese government is using this as an opportunity to wean their farmers/ranchers off of US soybeans entirely. They don't plan to come back even if the tarrifs are lifted.

中国政府正利用这一机会，让他们的农民和农场主完全摆脱对美国大豆的依赖。即便关税措施解除了，他们也不打算回来了。

——————————————

MasterBerter
Yeah, it looks he's increased the trade deficit between the US and China in both the short and the long term.

是的，不管从短期还是长期来看，他似乎都增加了美中之间的贸易逆差。

——————————————

ZepperMan
Well shit... how much can we salvage once 2 years but and a new president takes over.
Will it have been too late by then?

真糟糕……两年后，当一位新总统接手的时候，我们还能抢救回多少东西。
到时候会不会太迟了呢？

——————————————

Iswallowedafly
The China market has been lost to American farmers.

美国农民已经丢掉了中国市场。

——————————————

realrafaelcruz
No one knows what the final outcome will be until the negotiations are over. I have no doubt that if the Chinese Gov. decides that it's in it's interests to close the trade deficit in some sort of agreement then they'll switch right back.
I'm not saying this will end well, but China has an interest in landing this trade conflict too.

在谈判结束之前，没有人知道最终的结果会是什么。我毫不怀疑，如果中国政府认为通过某项协议消除贸易逆差是符合自己的利益的，那么他们就会马上改变立场。
我不是说这种局面将会结束，但中国已经对让这场贸易冲突安全落地感兴趣了。

——————————————

twenafeesh
They do, but if you read the article it discusses how getting off of US soy has been a strategic goal of the Chinese government for a long time. This just gives them the perfect justification to slap a tariff on it to help their goals.

的确如此，但如果你读过这篇文章，你就会发现它讨论了长期以来中国政府的战略目标——摆脱美国的大豆。这只是给他们提供了一个完美的理由，对其征收关税来帮助他们实现这一目标。

——————————————

AndrewWaldron
China just figured out how to grow rice in salt water, creating a food source for 80million people. How many people was US soy feeding? For now, China doesn't need the food. But, anything can change.

中国刚刚想出了在盐水中种植水稻的方法，为8000万人创造了一种新的食物来源。美国大豆喂饱了多少人？目前看来，中国不需要这种食物。但是，任何事情都是可以改变的。

——————————————

twenafeesh
If you read the article, you'll see that US soy wasn't feeding people, but used as livestock feed, for which there are other alternatives.

如果你读过这篇文章，你会发现美国大豆不是用来给人吃的，而是用来喂牲畜的。

——————————————

-What-Zit-Tooya-
Because the Chinese company are state-controlled and I'm sure the government is sending the message about buying less US-products.
US govt. can't impose such stipulation on US companies or consumers.

因为这家中国公司是国家控制的，我相信政府正在发出减少购买美国产品的信息。
美国政府不能将这样的规定强加给美国企业或消费者。

——————————————

MasterBerter
Yeah, one of the reasons everyone was telling Trump that this trade war was in fact not going to be easy to win.
Edit: I don't personally think one side will win and oppose tariffs and trade wars. I was just addressing Trumps own argument.

是的，这就是每个人都在告诉特朗普这场贸易战实际上并不容易打赢的原因之一。
编辑：我个人不认为某一方会打赢这场贸易战，我反对关税和贸易战。我只是在强调自己的观点。

——————————————

Arcturus519
No-one 'wins' a trade war, just one side loses more than the other. It's a terrible thing to do, as it hurts everyone.

没有人会“赢得”贸易战，只是一方会比另一方输得更多。这是一件很糟糕的事情，因为它伤害到了所有人。

——————————————

SamSlate
this. why do people think hurting them more than ourselves is winning? economics is not a zero sum game ??

为什么人们认为对方所受伤害比我们自己所受伤害更深就是胜利呢？经济学不是零和游戏。

——————————————

veritasvosliberabit9
Trump is doing this for political reasons, not economic.

特朗普这样做是出于政治原因，而非经济原因。

——————————————

up48
Maybe, but he also doesn't seem to understand economics at all.
There is a good chance he does personally think economics is a zero sum game.

也许吧，但他似乎一点也不懂经济学。很有可能他个人就认为经济学是一场零和博弈。

——————————————

bagbroch
I’ve had conservatives passionately tell me they think it is. It’s actually unreal how prent this belief is.

保守派热情洋溢地告诉我，他们认为确实是这样的。这种信念非常普遍，先得很不真实。

——————————————

anonFAFA1
He understands econmics just fine just as most high ranking folks in Washington, as much as we like to think otherwise. It's a tactic to bring more favorable trade terms to the United States. China has been taking the US (and many other countries) for an unfair trade ride for decades taking advantage of politicians who are too afraid to rock the boat. On top of that, they actively steal and use foreign technologies. So to recap, they steal the Western world's shit and build it with Western world's money. Trump and many others have had enough.

他对经济学的理解和华盛顿大多数高级官员一样深，就像我们想的那样。这是给美国带来更多优惠贸易条件的一种策略。几十年来，中国一直在利用对美国(以及其他许多国家)的不公平的贸易优势，利用那些不敢捣乱的政客。除此之外，他们还积极窃取和使用外国技术。因此，简单回顾一下，他们窃取西方世界的东西，然后用西方世界的钱来建设自己。特朗普和其他许多人已经受够了。

——————————————

Morten14
Same reason why most people would rather have 100 dollars if everyone else got 80 dollars, than having 120 dollars if everyone else got 150 dollars. Most people get most satisfaction by being relatively better off than being absolutely better off. The reason for that is that most people are selfish pricks by the end of the day.

这和大多数人都宁愿在别人能拿到80美元的情况下自己拿到100美元，而非别人能拿到150美元，而自己只能拿到120美元是一个道理。大多数人是通过相对富裕而不是绝对富裕来获得最大的满足感。究其原因，大多数人终归都是自私的混蛋。

——————————————

senselessthings
If this expands to a whole world sort of situation, prices would correspond to most people having $80 and you have $100, or where most people have $150 and you have $120.
So you would be better off being wealthier than others than poorer than others.

如果把这种情况拓展到整个世界，价格对应大多数人有80美元而你有100美元，或者大多数人有150美元而你有120美元。
所以你比别人更富有要好过你比别人更穷。

——————————————

PhaetonsFolly
Because China is building aircraft carriers. China is on pace to match the United States Navy in the Pacific by 2040. This is only because of the wealth China has gained through trade. If National Security concerns are factored in, a trade war is the economic solution if the potential war is predicted to be extremely costly.

因为中国正在建造航空母舰。中国正准备在2040年赶超美国海军。这都是因为中国通过贸易获得了财富。如果考虑到国家安全因素，如果可能爆发的战争预计代价极其高昂，贸易战就是比较经济的解决方案。

——————————————

SamSlate
it would be insanely costly, like unprecedented..

它的成本将极其高昂，前所未有地高昂

——————————————

AlexCoventry
economics is not a zero sum game
War is about power, not money.

战争关乎权力，而非金钱。

——————————————

rcglinsk
Winning a trade war is simple. Everyone knows that tariffs are net harmful to any economy. So don't impose them. If your opponent is hitting themselves by imposing tariffs, there's no reason to hit yourself back. Your tariff free economy will prosper while your opponent's economy will suffer under the burden of tariffs.

要想打赢贸易战很简单。每个人都知道关税对任何经济体都是有害的。所以不要强加于人。如果你的对手通过征收关税来打击自己，你就没有理由展开反击。你的零关税经济体将获得繁荣，而你的对手的经济将承受关税的负担。

——————————————

Gentlescholar_AMA
If China stops intellectual property theft then the United States will have made the right move. If theh refuse to stop their policies designed for IP theft then the USA will have lost.

如果中国停止窃取知识产权，那么美国将采取正确的行动。如果他们拒绝停止他们为窃取知识产权而制定的政策，那么美国将会输。

——————————————

the_jak
Are we talking about actual theft? Or the rules of operating in China which often requires you to share technology.
Disliking the deal you have to make in order to sell into their market is in no way "theft".

我们说的是真正发生的偷窃行为吗？还是在中国运营公司的规则，它通常需要你分享技术。
讨厌这笔交易的你却不得不这么做，只是为了在他们的市场上销售商品，这绝对不是“偷窃”。

——————————————

the_jak
You've clearly never heard of the chicken tax.
We do things in a way very similar to China. But it's wrong for them but not us?

你显然从未听说过鸡肉税。
我们做事情的方式非常相似。但对他们来说，这就是错的，对我们来说却不是？

——————————————

Gentlescholar_AMA
We have IP laws that we enforce, domestic companies do not get a set of laws distinct from foreign ones.

我们有我们自己的知识产权法律，国内公司所适用的法律和外国公司是一样的。

——————————————

the_jak
Don't we? We have specific lists of countries we cannot sell or work in technology with. Aerospace and China is one example. There are a fuck ton of laws about working on defense IP with other countries. So again, we do this shit and it's a-ok. China does it and it's braying mules screaming "muh IP theft".
All of this could be alleviate by NOT SELLING IN CHINA, but none of these dolts seem to realize that. Either sell in China with the rules that exist or don't and you don't risk you IP getting "stolen".

难道我们不是吗？我们有具体的不能销售特定产品或在技术领域与之合作的国家名单。航空业和中国就是一个例子。我们还有一大堆关于与其他国家合作保护知识产权的法律。所以，我们也在这么做，却完全没问题。中国也在这么做，却有人在高喊“啊，这是知识产权偷窃”。
所有这些都可以通过不在中国销售这种选择来得以解决，但这些傻瓜似乎都没有意识到这一点。要么按照现有的规则在中国销售产品，要么干脆不在中国销售，这样你就不用冒着知识产权被“窃取”的风险了。

——————————————

Joss-Laypeg
I’ve heard the Chinese are now so sneaky that they’re stealing your intellectual property by inventing it first!

我听说中国人现在非常狡猾，他们会通过抢先发明一样东西来窃取你的知识产权！

——————————————

Gentlescholar_AMA
And by forcing American companies to hire government liaisons and hand over access to proprietary information to state corporations. And by turning a blind eye to reverse engineering and counterfeiting

中国强迫美国公司雇佣政府联络人，并将私有信息的使用权移交给国有公司。对逆向工程和山寨视而不见

——————————————

Gentlescholar_AMA
If you want to sell in China, you have to give over your IP. Not produce in China, sell there.
You're basically saying Americans should just embrace China being abusive and giving an upper hand to state run industry. That we should allow them to circumvent global laws for their own advantage, while our companies invest trillions in research that they steal with an iron fist.

如果你想在中国销售产品，你必须放弃你的知识产权。我说的不是在中国生产，而是在中国销售。
你基本上是在说美国人应该接受中国滥用规则，并让国家主导的行业占上风这件事。我们应该允许他们为了自己的利益而规避全球法律，而我们的公司则在他们使用铁腕窃取的研究上投入了数万亿美元。

——————————————

Where2cop857
Then don’t sell. Period.
Leave China alone. Don’t invest in their state-owned enterprises.
“global laws” is subjective anyways. Just look at our domestic U.S. laws that disproportionately hurt racial minorities; crack cocaine gets heavy sentencing than cocaine
CCP’s MIC2025 is socializing their RMB to invest in R&D. Yet Trump attacks that. As if there is no academic research merit to attaining a STEM PhD? Working in post doc positions?
Perhaps you have a case with Chinese alleged IP theft. But there still needs to be work to build
If China does indeed steal all the trillions, maybe us Americans should nuke them and steal back the IP?

那就不要卖。
请径直离开中国。不要投资他们的国有企业。
无论如何，“全球法律”是主观的。看看我们美国国内的法律吧，它不成比例地伤害了少数族群；对快客可卡因的判刑比可卡因更重。
CCP的中国制造2025正在将大量人民币用于研发投资。然而特朗普对此进行了抨击。好像获得理工科博士学位没有学术研究价值？在博士后的岗位上工作呢？
如果中国真的窃取了所有的数万亿美元，也许美国人应该用核武器攻击他们并把知识产权窃取回来？

——————————————

Where2cop857
Also, no I’m not saying all those allegations are ok. that’s why I’m sayin don’t invest in China anymore. Trade war, fade war. Like I said, we should just nuke them to destroy the unfair and ugldly “trillions” that the Chinese took in research. It’s not gonna make the U.S. a winner without our own Industrie 4.0 plan, y’know the one that the Chinese copied from the Germans with MIC2025. Where’s our own industry modernization-advancement plan? The tit-for-tat tariffs bickering is one thing and sure Trump/Pence can double it to $500bn... Where’s our fucking national innovation-manufacturing-modernization plan to save America’s Heartland and reduce expensive overinflated/bloated healthcare industry complex we have as well if not for Obamacare? MIC2025 plan includes ameliorating healthcare costs and accessibility. To me, it seems that MIC2025, which again, is modeled after Germany’s Industrie 4.0, is the what America desperately need for nation-building into the 21st century. Yet it’s the fearmongering and inflated Western-exceptional-superiority-complex-at-all-costs is what impedes is to admitting our faults and engage ina fundamental rethink on how to properly economically plan for the future. By the GOP rhetoric of “making China pay” essentially boils down to a Cold War in its ultimately final boss form. Like I said earlier, is Americans might as well just nuke China. After all, Mao famously said to a Finnish diplomat that they can be nuked and loss 300M Chinese people and they’d still be able to recover. And hopefully by then, we can come to our senses aware from the scaremongering to actually plan for tomorrow instead of all this democratic process of inefficiently wasteful left-right-binary-political infighting and perceived enemy scapegoating.
Continue this thread

而且，不，我不是说所有这些指控都没问题。这就是为什么我说不要再在中国投资了。贸易战争是导致衰退的战争。就像我说的，我们应该用核武器摧毁他们，摧毁中国人在研究中获取的不公平和丑陋的“数万亿美元”。如果没有我们自己的工业4.0计划，美国就不会成为赢家，你知道中国人的中国制造2025计划时从德国人那里学来的吗。？我们自己的产业现代化推进计划在哪里？针锋相对的关税纷争是一回事，特朗普和彭斯肯定能让它翻一番，达到5000亿美元。如果没有奥巴马医改，我们国家旨在拯救美国核心地带，减少昂贵的、过度膨胀和臃肿的医疗产业的创新-制造-现代化计划在哪里？中国制造2025计划包括了改善医疗成本和可利用性。在我看来，同样是模仿德国工业4.0的中国制造2025计划正是美国在21世纪迫切需要的国家建设计划。然而，正是西方那种令人恐惧和夸大的例外优势——不惜一切代价的复杂性——阻碍了我们承认自己的错误，并促使我们从根本上重新思考如何正确地为未来制定经济计划。共和党关于“让中国买单”的花言巧语，基本上可以归结为一场最终以大BOSS的形式爆发的冷战。就像我之前说的，美国人也可以用核武器攻击中国。毕竟，毛曾对一名芬兰外交官说过一句名言：他们可以被轰炸，可以承担得起失去3亿中国人的损失，但他们仍有能力恢复。希望到那时，我们能从危言耸听中清醒过来，真正地为明天做打算，而不是将精力都集中在低效浪费的左右二元政治内斗和将假想敌作为替罪羊的民主进程当中。

——————————————

the_jak
It's absolutely buyers remorse but these fools are either too stupid or too prideful to admit that they just don't like the deal they made.

这绝对是买家懊悔的表现，但这些傻瓜要么太愚蠢，要么太自负了，不愿承认他们只是不喜欢自己做的交易。

——————————————

the_jak
Then don't sell in China. Who is forcing anyone to do so?

那就不要在中国销售商品了。有谁在强迫别人这么做吗？

——————————————

Muybuenas
If its just the govt mandating compliance, then is there a point when chinese importers react? They re potentially a powerful alliance.

如果这只是政府的命令，那么当中国进口商做出反应时，还有什么意义呢？他们可能是一个强大的联盟。

——————————————

mingy
China found other suppliers for soybeans. They will probably not return to the US for them.

中国找到了其他大豆供应商。他们可能不会再为了大豆回来找美国了。

——————————————

throwawayforrealsie
They have a lot of alternative sources of soybeans and they are able to make massive economic movements because of the level of state control. They aren't going to give the US the satisfaction of increasing soybean purchases. This is a political war.

他们有很多大豆的替代供应商，由于国家的控制，他们能够展开大规模的经济运动。他们不会让美国拥有增加大豆购买量的满足感的。这是一场政治战争。

——————————————

a_gusto
There is a meeting between Trump and China in early December, many of the people I work with are hoping an agreement is made then. Alternatively, Congress has put some stopgap measures in place to reduce the regular duty owed on manufacturing components, so maybe now with a primarily democratic house we could see a bill to further reduce the duties. Beyond that your guess is as good as mine, I'd put my money on when trump leaves office. I should note that I work as a US customs broker so the majority of people that I interact with about this subject are opposed to the tariffs, so I might be a bit biased.
Edit -- It's also worth saying that these tariffs are pretty much uncharted waters for everyone I've spoken to. Some of the tariffs (like the 50% duty on Turkish steel) came out of nowhere, and other restrictions (like quotas on Korean steel) are changing constantly. Making any accurate predictions is impossible from what I can see.

特朗普和中国领导在12月初会有一次会面，很多和干同一行当的人都希望届时能达成协议。另一种选择是，国会采取了一些权宜之计，以减少对制造业零部件的常规关税，因此，或许现在在一个由民主党控制的众议院里，我们可以看到一项进一步降低关税的法案。除此之外，你的猜测和我的一样，我愿意在特朗普离任时进行投资。需要提醒注意的是，我是一名美国海关经纪人，所以我接触的大多数人都反对关税，所以我可能带有一点偏见。
编辑：值得一说的是，这些关税对我交谈过的每个人来说都是一个未知的领域。一些关税(比如对土耳其钢铁征收的50%的关税)都是凭空而来的，其他的限制(比如对韩国钢铁的配额)也在不断变化当中。在我看来，做出准确的预测是不可能的。

——————————————

ddoubles
Unpopular decisions are known to have few fans. Doesn't make it right or wrong. Trumps theory, if we can call it that, is that he will negotiate better terms for the future, hence unpopular decision now, but popular when new terms are installed. That's Donald Trump gambling. He want's to be known as the best president in America and goes all-in, and doubles down in every decision he makes.
I guess will find out... the worst or the best, he's not going to remembered as someone mediocre.

众所周知，不受欢迎的决定没有多少支持者。这还不能意味着它是对的还是错的？特朗普的理论(如果我们可以这么说的话)是，他将为未来的谈判提供更好的条款，因此现在的决定是不受欢迎，但当新条款出台的时候，就会受到欢迎了。那是唐纳德·特朗普的赌博。他想成为美国最优秀的总统，他在全力以赴，在每一个决定上都加倍努力。
我想最终我们会知道答案的……不管他是最差的还是最好的总统，他都不会被认为是平庸之辈。

——————————————

LiviNG4them
I’m hearing this from small businesses in NY. They’re rushing in product before end of year. I’m sure this is part of it.

我从纽约的小企业那里听到了这个消息。他们在年底前赶着进口产品。我相信这是其中的一部分。

——————————————

maosaysmiao
Additionally, most US companies that purchase from China increase purchases now to cover for the downtime during Chinese New Year.

此外，大多数从中国采购的美国公司现在都增加了采购量，以弥补春节期间的停工状况。

——————————————

burbledebopityboo
You will NEVER get China to back down by browbeating them in public. They will simply wait out the Trump presidency, however long that takes. To persuade the Chinese to change their mind requires quite pressure without any stated goal. You crack down, quietly, on Chinese imports, by changing laws, by implementing non-tariff regulations, and you never say what it's about - but you make sure they know. Then you let the Chinese offer to do something for you in exchange for you taking them off. Without a face saving way to reach an agreement the Chinese will absolutely never cave, no matter what the cost. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor his lunatic trade rep Navarro know anything at all about the Chinese.

在公共场合恫吓中国，你是永远也无法让他们退缩的。他们只会等着特朗普下台，不管需要多长时间。要说服中国人改变主意需要施加没有明确目标的相当大的压力。通过修改法律、实施非关税法规，你正在悄悄地打击中国进口商品，但你从来没有说过这是怎么回事——但你要确保他们知道这一点。然后，你让中国人主动为你做点什么，作为取消这些措施的交换条件。如果没有一个可以挽回面子的方式来达成协议，中国人绝对是不会屈服的，无论付出什么代价。不幸的是，特朗普和他的疯狂的贸易代表纳瓦罗都对中国人一无所知。

——————————————

marcusaureliusjr
This is very true.
The Chinese will not give in, because it will show weakness, within their country and to the world.
Their politicians can not show weakness or will lose control of their own country.

的确如此。
中国人不会妥协的，因为这样做的话他们将在自己的国家和全世界面前显露出自己的弱点。
政客们不能显露出弱点，否则将失去对自己国家的控制。

——————————————

zeistsam
You will NEVER get China to back down by browbeating them in public
No country will back down by browbeating.

任何国家都不会因为恫吓而退让的。

——————————————

PhaetonsFolly
Your suggestion has not worked in modern Chinese history. Soft Power has never been an effective tool in trying to direct the course of China. China does what it wants and what it feels it can get away with. While all countries do this, China is easily one of the most brazen. That's a privilege nuclear weapons afford you. Both the United States and Japan had visions of shaping China for the better, and decades of effort have resulted in a more wealthy, more hostile, and more militaristic China.

你的建议在中国近代史上不起作用。软实力从来都不是引导中国走向的有效工具。中国做自己想做的事，做自己觉得可以侥幸取得成功的事。尽管所有国家都在这么做，但中国无疑是最厚颜无耻的国家之一。这是核武器给你们的特权。美国和日本都有把中国塑造得更好的愿景，几十年的努力造就了一个更富有、更敌对、更军国主义的中国。

——————————————

ThomasVeil
While all countries do this, China is easily one of the most brazen.
I dunno. The US has been pretty brazen when projecting power. After all - they had wars right at the Chinese border, while China gets criticized when they have ships around their own country.
It's not that I like these brewing conflicts - and I hope people come to a table at some point. But I mean... it's the most populous nation on earth. So you would expect them to have influence. That part is how it should be, compared to how powerless they used to be in recent centuries.

我不晓得。美国在投射实力方面一直相当厚颜无耻。毕竟，他们在中国边境挑起过战争，而当中国在自己的国家领土范围内驾驶船只时，却饱受批评。这并不是说我喜欢这些酝酿的冲突——我希望人们在某个时刻坐在一起好好谈谈。我的意思是，中国是世界上人口最多的国家。所以你会期望他们拥有影响力。与他们在最近几个世纪的软弱无能相比，这才是它应该有的样子。

——————————————

burbledebopityboo
I wasn't speaking of soft power. You are never going to persuade China to do what you want them to do unless they see it as in their own interests. That means you have to hurt them. But you have to do it more subtly than Trump is doing so they can compromise while saving face.

我说的不是软实力。你永远无法说服中国做你想让他们做的事，除非他们认为这符合他们自己的利益。这意味着你必须伤害他们。但你必须比特朗普做得更巧妙，这样他们才能在保全面子的同时妥协。

——————————————

ExtendedDeadline
IIT everyone talking about tarriffs when the main thing America desperately is trying to rein in is ip theft.
I'm not going to advocate for Trump, but dealing with the IP issues is something every American government over the last 20 years has totally failed at. I think this trade war will hurt all parties and is hurting all parties.... But if we don't address IP theft now, the American technology landscape is going to be very different in the next decade. Pharm as well.

当美国拼命想要控制的主要问题是知识产权盗窃时，每个人却都在谈论关税。
我不是要支持特朗普，但解决知识产权问题是过去20年里每个美国政府都完全以失败告终的事情。我认为这场贸易战会伤害各方，它也正在伤害各方。……但如果我们现在不解决知识产权盗窃问题，美国的科技格局将在未来10年发生很大变化。同样如此的还有制药行业。

——————————————

dunno_maybe_
There's absolutely no way China's going to yield on their IP practices, trade war or not.

中国绝对不可能在知识产权问题上让步，无论是否爆发贸易战。

——————————————

US economic dominance for the past 50 years has been based on high tech IP. The US makes and designs stuff no one else in the world can. The world pays a premium to buy from the US monopoly, and the US gets a boost to the demand for USD, its GDP, and its standard of living. Having military dominance due to better planes and missiles doesn't hurt either.

过去50年里，美国经济的主导地位一直建立在高科技知识产权的基础上。美国制造和设计的东西是世界上其他人做不到的。世界为从美国垄断企业手中购买这些产品而支付溢价，美国则对其美元、GDP和生活水平的需求加以提振。拥有更好的飞机和导弹所带来的军事优势也不会造成伤害。

——————————————

Now other developing countries like have pulled the IP theft shtick before. But nowhere on the scale of China or with the same amount of attention. That's because they don't have the size to do more than erode America's tech monopoly in a few scattered fields. If Japan wants to eat into American auto manufacturing and Korea wants to go head to head with Apple, no big deal. It's only a few sectors of the economy. Throw them a few bones, let them sell in their closed markets if it'll keep them under the American umbrella. If it gets too bad afterwards, you can always use the size of the US market to get them to buckle in private negotiations.

其他的发展中国家也曾经实施过知识产权盗窃。但在规模和关注度上都比不上中国。这是因为他们没有足够的规模来削弱美国在若干个不同领域的技术垄断。比如日本想蚕食美国的汽车制造业，而韩国想与苹果正面交锋，那没什么大不了的。这只是经济中的几个部门。如果这能让他们继续呆在美国的保护伞下的话，扔给他们几根骨头，让他们在封闭的市场里销售也无妨。如果事后证明情况太糟糕了，你总还可以利用美国市场的规模让他们在私下谈判中屈服。

——————————————

The difference with China is scale. China has the scale to duplicate not just a few sectors of the American economy, but the entire American economy inside their own borders. Apple, Microsoft, GM, GE, Boeing, Lockheed, China can have a copy for every single one of them for domestic consumption. And when they learn how to produce domestically, they'll start selling internationally. Suddenly the US global tech monopoly actually has a serious competitor for every single one of their products.

它们与中国的区别在于规模。中国的规模不仅可以复制美国经济中的几个部门，还可以复制美国经济的全部。苹果、微软、通用汽车、通用电气、波音、洛克希德，中国复制了它们中的每一个来供国内消费。当他们学会如何在国内生产后，他们就会开始向国际销售这些商品。突然之间，美国这个全球科技垄断企业的每一款产品实际上都碰到了一个严重的竞争对手。

——————————————

That's why the US is going after China's IP theft. Because if China gets to the point where it can duplicate every American company, the US global tech monopoly and all the good times it brings is over. And that's also why China is not going to buckle. If you have the scale to literally be another American economy, why would you settle for playing second fiddle and selling bicycles while America sells jet engines, or licensing from American companies and letting take all the profit while you do all the manufacturing? No, China's going to willingly sacrifice the US market if it means it can have a competitor to every US product in the global market.

这就是为什么美国要追查中国的知识产权盗窃行为。因为如果中国能够复制每一家美国公司，那么美国的全球科技垄断地位以及它所带来的所有美好时光就要宣告结束了。这也是中国不会让步的原因。如果你真的拥有成为另一个美国经济的规模，你为什么要屈居二线，卖自行车，而美国却在卖喷气发动机，或者从美国公司获得许可证，你负责所有制造流程，而所有的利润都归美国所有？不，如果中国愿意牺牲美国市场，那就意味着它可以在全球市场上与所有美国产品一争高下了。

——————————————

And that's when it gets ugly. That's when you get trade blocs as the US and China try to convince other countries to only buy from them. When they start slipping agreements into trade deals not to trade with the other side, when you have price wars and low interest loans to non-aligned countries, and when you might actually start getting real wars over who a smaller country trades with. It'll be 19th century mercantilism all over again. Because you have two behemoths that can't share the global tech monopoly. China will demand a slice proportionate to the size of their eventual economy, which will end up surpassing the US. The US will demand a slice based on precedent and their current share, which a growing China won't accept. You can't have two tigers on the same mountain, and since these two tigers won't go to nuclear war, you'll only have the mountain split in two.

而这就是它变得丑陋的时候。当美国和中国试图说服其他国家只从它们那里购买商品时，就会出现一个贸易集团。当他们开始将贸易协定演变为不得与另一方贸易的贸易协定时，当你开打价格战，并向非结盟国家提供低息贷款时，当你可能真正开始谁该成为一个小国的贸易对象而真正开打时，这将是19世纪重商主义的重演。因为届时将有两个无法共享全球科技行业的垄断地位的庞然大物。中国的需求将与最终经济规模成正比，最终将超过美国。美国将根据先例和目前的份额要求分一杯羹，而不断增长的中国不会接受这一点。一山不容二虎，而且因为这两只老虎之间不会爆发核战争，你只能将这座山一分为二。

——————————————

dr3amboy3657
This is the best explanation on this topic I’ve read. it’s not even about trade and IP theft; it’s about a rising China that might surpass the US and the the uncertainty it will bring.
I have no idea whether a rising China will be good or bad. However, throughout its history, it has never invaded another country. We just don’t know what will happen and I believe that is why the US is afraid. I don’t think they are afraid of China per say; just afraid of the uncertainty when they become a major power.
It’s similar to Japan I’m the 80s. The US were scared of being surpassed. The US government and citizens have always been on top so when I legit contender comes; they get scared of being topple.

这是我读过的关于这个话题最好的解释了。它甚至与贸易或知识产权盗窃无关；它是关于一个崛起中的中国，这个国家可能会超过美国，以及它将带来的不确定性。
我不知道崛起的中国是好是坏。然而，在其历史上，它从未入侵过其他国家。我们不知道会发生什么，我相信这就是美国害怕的原因。我不认为他们害怕中国；只是害怕当中国成为一个大国时所带来的不确定性。
这和80年代的日本很相似。美国害怕被超越。美国政府和公民一直处于领先地位，所以当我成为合法的竞争者时；他们会害怕被颠覆。

——————————————

RefrigerRaider
yup, of all countries, india and china possess the potential to become economic giants. They were were in the past. For most of the past two millennia, both civilizations alone accounted for most of the historical economic output during their times since 1st century AD. It is not the first time china has been an economic and military hegemon. Examples of peaks of chinese civilizations were the Han and Tang dynasties. Also very powerful ones included the Ming and Qing dynasties.

是的，在所有国家中，印度和中国都有成为经济大国的潜力。他们过去就是如此。在过去两千年的大部分时间里，这两个文明在公元1世纪以来的历史经济产出中占据了绝大部分。这不是中国第一次成为经济和军事上的霸主了。中国文明的高峰出现在汉唐时期，但也包括明清两代。

——————————————

RUShittingInMyMouth
Most of the time China isn't stealing the info, they are requiring it be given to them to sell in their market. US companies want to sell their product in China because it is big market. China says to the US company, you can't sell here unless you tell us everything about it (IP info). US companies think that by the time China figures out how to actually make the stuff, they will have a new product or process anyways.

大多数时候，中国并不是在窃取信息，他们是在要求把信息交给他们，这样才能让它们在自己的市场上销售商品。美国公司希望在中国销售产品，因为中国市场很大。中国对美国公司说，你不能在这里销售，除非你告诉我们关于它的一切(知识产权信息)。美国公司认为，到中国真正搞清楚应该如何制造这些东西的时候，它们无论如何都会拥有一个新产品或新工艺了。