会谈结束，中国警告称，如果美国征收关税，贸易利益将受到影响 [美国媒体]

-------------译者：lingtianqi-审核者：周天寰宇2------------

One--Among--Many Score hidden·10 hours ago·edited 9 hours ago
SS: Following the end of trade talks between US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He China's state news agency Xinhua released a statement warning that any agreement will be void if Washington implements tariffs and other trade measures. Following the increasing tension between Washington and its allies over similar trade disagreements China no doubt seeks to secure its position and avoid any further headaches with regards to trade with the US. Nonetheless it looks like this issue will drag on for quite a while before it's fully resolved not helped by other sources of tension including the future of Taiwan and the Spratly Islands dispute.

在美国商务部长威尔伯·罗斯和中国国务院副总理刘鹤的贸易谈判结束后，中国官方通讯社新华社发表声明警告说，如果华盛顿实施（增加）关税或是其他贸易措施，（两国之间就商业贸易达成的）任何协议都将宣告无效。在华盛顿及其盟友的关系因类似的贸易分歧而日益紧张的情况下，中国无疑试图坚持自己的立场同时避免在与美国的贸易问题上出现进一步的摩擦。尽管如此，在没有其它紧张局势的影响下，包括台湾的未来和南沙群岛的争端，这一问题仍将持续相当长一段时间才能彻底解决。



EDIT: included other sources of tension between US and China that may complicate trade negotiations.

另注：包括美国和中国之间的其它紧张局势，这可能会使贸易谈判复杂化。

-------------译者：willdemon-审核者：周天寰宇2------------

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·9 hours ago·edited 9 hours ago
Doesn’t China have far more tariffs bans and trade protections against the US than the US does against China? With a going on $400 billion trade surplus with the US the US has a lot of bargaining power in the event of a real trade war.

比起美国对中国采取的措施，中国不是已经实施了多得多的关税禁令以及贸易保护措施吗？由于中国对美国的贸易存在4千亿美元顺差，在真正的贸易战中，美国具有更多讨价还价的优势。

But if what China said on May 19th was true then I don’t see why the US would tariff their goods. The US wants to export more relative to their imports and countries that work with them on this goal won’t need to be hit with tariffs.

但是，如果中国在5月19日的声明是真的，我不明白为什么美国还要对中国商品追加关税。美国需要的是，对比其进口额度大幅提高其出口额度，任何与其合作以达成此目的的国家，不应该再受到关税惩罚了啊。

In my opinion China will end up working with the US to reduce the deficit by buying more US goods but will stay firm against moves that would threaten its blossoming technology industries. Both countries will be content.

我认为，中国最终会同意购买更多的美国产品，以削减美国的贸易逆差，但是中国仍然会强烈反对，任何对其科技行业发展造成威胁的行动。双方最终都会满意。

 Vinar   Score hidden·7 hours ago·edited 7 hours ago
“Doesn’t China have far more tariffs bans and trade protections”
More Tariffs: True but probably not to the extent that people imagines.
China's weighted tariff is 3.5%. USA is 1.6%. Other developing economy like India has 6.3% as under WTO they are allow to have higher tariff to protect emerging markets and allow domestic industry to grow. After all emerging industries often can not compete with well funded multi-national corporations developing economies did not want to join WTO without allowing some degree of protection.

“中国不是已经实施了多得多的关税禁令以及贸易保护措施吗？”
更多的关税：没错，但是并没有大家想象的那么多。中国实施的加权关税为 3.5%， 美国则是1.6%。 其他发展中国家如印度的关税为6.3%，因为根据世贸组织（协定），允许他们实施相对较高的关税以保护其新兴市场并允许其国内产业发展。毕竟，所有的新兴经济体常常无法与资金充裕的国际化企业集团进行竞争。如果不给予一定程度的保护措施的话，发展中经济体是不会愿意加入世贸组织的。
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TM.TAX.MRCH.WM.AR.ZS （链接：世界各国关税1988-2016年变化趋势）

More trade protections: No true.
Credit Suisse a Swiss investment bank have released a report in 2015 using the protectionist policy deemed by Global Trade alert to count the number of protectionist policy in 7 economies.
Out of the 7 economies the most protectionist is USA. With EU Japan and China being the three least protectionist economies in that order.

更多的贸易保护措施：假的。
瑞士一家投资银行瑞士信贷，其2015年发出的一份报告中，使用了国际贸易预警组织所认定的贸易保护政策，计算了7个经济体的贸易保护措施数量。在七个经济体中，美国的贸易保护措施最多。而欧盟、日本和中国是七个经济体中贸易保护措施最少的三家。
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-is-the-most-protectionist-nation-2015-9 （链接）
http://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/index.cfm?fileid=EE7A6A5D-D9D5-6204-E9E6BB426B47D054 （链接）



[国家从左往右依次为：美国、俄罗斯、印度、英国、巴西、德国、法国、西班牙、中国、日本、土耳其、沙特阿拉伯、澳大利亚、南非、瑞士、阿联酋]

For the 2017 report it noted: 

在2017年的报告中，其指出：

“Interestingly it is the USA that appears to implement the greatest number of trade protectionist measures (these outnumber trade liberalizing measures by a factor of nearly nine to one) followed by Russia and India (India and Brazil have implemented the greatest number of trade liberalizing measures). It is also worth commenting that the UK Spain Germany and France have each implemented more traditional trade protection measures than China.”

”有趣的是，实施了数量巨大的贸易保护措施的正是美国（数量远远大于其推出的贸易自由化措施，比例高达9比1）。 排在美国之后的是俄罗斯和印度（印度和巴西也是实施贸易自由化措施最多的国家）。同样值得评价的是，英国、西班牙、德国及法国，其各自实施的贸易保护措施数量均超过中国。”
http://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/index.cfm?fileid=BCD82CF0-CF9D-A6CB-BF7ED9C29DD02CB1 （链接）

-------------译者：willdemon-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

“against the US than the US does against China?”
This is hard to measure but it could be true.
USA protective measure tends to focus on industries with significant voting base and lobbying group. For example the agriculture subsidies US government gives out.
As a result US protective measures tend to attract the ire of both developing nations and developed nations. With China only attracts ire from developed nations.

“比起美国，中国采取了更多针对美国的措施？“
这一结论很难测量但很可能确实如此。美国的贸易保护措施主要集中在与重大票仓或游说团体相关的产业领域。比如，美国政府提供的农业补贴。因此，美国的贸易保护措施常常同时招致发展中国家和发达国家的批评。而中国只会招致发达国家的批评。

This is partly why China has 40 complaints at WTO (with 22 by USA) while USA has 141 cases with only 12 bought in by China.

这也部分解释了为什么中国在世贸组织被诉的44件诉讼案中，有22件来自美国。而涉及美国的141件诉讼中，只有12件由中国提交。
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_maps_e.htm?country_sexted=USA&sense=e （链接）
[从上往下依次为：Member-成员国、Non-member-非成员国、
Member concerned-有关事宜成员国：As complainant-原告国、As respondent-被告国]

As you can see both developing and developed nation files complaints against USA.

你可以看到，不仅是发展中国家，发达国家也在投诉美国。
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_maps_e.htm?country_sexted=CHN&sense=e （链接）

Complaints against China are almost all from developed nations.

针对中国的诉讼基本都来自发达国家。
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_by_country_e.htm  （链接）
[控诉中国的国家为：加拿大（3件）、美国（22件）、墨西哥（4件）、欧盟（9件）、日本（2件）、危地马拉（1件）]

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·7 hours ago·edited 6 hours ago Thank you for the informative response! I really only had one question regarding:
“Out of the 7 economies the most protectionist is USA. With EU Japan and China being the three least protectionist economies in that order.”

我只有一个问题：”在七个经济体中，美国的贸易保护措施最多。而欧盟、日本和中国是七个经济体中贸易保护措施最少的三家。“

Is this metric only using tariffs and bans on foreign products? Or is it including the plague of problems the US music movie game medical and tech industries have in preventing piracy and other forms of intellectual theft?  

关于这个论断的衡量标准，是否只计算了针对外国商品的关税和禁令的数量？还是它也包含了，由于广泛存在的针对美国音乐、电影、游戏、医疗及科技产业的山寨及剽窃知识产权行为，美国所采取的保护措施的数量？

Vazsera   Score hidden·6 hours ago
“Or is it including the plague of problems the US music movie game medical and tech industries have in preventing piracy and other forms of intellectual theft”
Why would it include that? They are 2 separate issues that Trump is trying to conflate. 
 
“还是它也包含了，由于广泛存在的针对美国音乐、电影、游戏、医疗及科技产业的山寨及剽窃知识产权行为，美国所采取的保护措施的数量？”
为什么要包含这些措施的数量？产权保护和贸易保护是两个完全不同的课题，而特朗普正故意将两者混为一谈。

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·5 hours ago
Why are the issues so separate? Those are still US goods being traded (or pirated) to foreigners as well as Americans.
 
为什么它们是两个不同的问题？这些知识产权也是美国人被用来贸易（或被山寨）给外国人的产品啊。

Vazsera   Score hidden·5 hours ago
They aren't US goods being traded. They are goods being manufactured in a foreign country mostly for consumption there.

这些知识产权不在美国进出口商品的贸易中。这些贸易产权所涉及的产品通常都是在海外生产并在当地销售的。

-------------译者：willdemon-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Vinar   Score hidden·6 hours ago
“Is this metric only using tariffs and bans on foreign products?”

“关于这个论断的衡量标准，是否只计算了针对外国商品的关税和禁令的数量？”

No it includes everything deemed protectionist/liberalising by Global Trade alx.

不止，它包含了国际贸易预警组织所认定的全部贸易保护措施/贸易自由化措施。
https://www.globaltradealx.org/ （链接）

It includes subsidies bailouts (e.g. Wall Street auto) bans etc.
I am not sure about preventing piracy and other forms of intellectual theft. But it doesn't seems to be counted.

它包含了各种补贴、救助措施（如华尔街汽车）和禁令等。我不确定它是否包含着作权保护或者其他防止知识产权盗窃的措施。但看起来好像没有把这些措施算进去。

You can see what is policy is deemed protectionist at bottom of each countries page

你可以在每个国家的页面最下面查找该国哪些政策被认为是贸易保护措施。
USA:美国参考如下链接
https://www.globaltradealx.org/country/222 （链接）
China:中国参考如下链接
https://www.globaltradealx.org/country/42 （链接）

POCZHO   Score hidden·5 hours ago
The Credit Suisse just counted the amount of each protectionist action instead of its impact.
Thus in the Credit Suisee report China having a blanket law that all tech companies have to joint-venture is of the same value as the US subsidizing corn farmers
Keep that in mind.

 （回复之前评论）瑞士信贷只计算了各国贸易保护措施的数量，而不是措施的影响程度。所以在瑞士信贷的报告中，中国实施一揽子法规要求高科技企业必须以合资形式进入中国市场，和美国对玉米种植者的补贴一样，都算作一条措施。要记住这一点。

Vazsera   Score hidden·8 hours ago
“With a going on $400 billion trade surplus with the US the US has a lot of bargaining power in the event of a real trade war.”

（回复之前评论）“由于中国对美国的贸易存在4000亿美元顺差，在真正的贸易战中，美国具有更多讨价还价的优势”

No it doesn't. America has a huge trade surplus since American companies export goods from China. For every dollar spent on an iphone China keeps 8 cents while Apple keeps 40 cents.  

不，不是这样的。美国才是赚取了大量的贸易顺差，因为从中国进口的商品都是由美国公司生产的。为购买Iphone花的每一块钱，中国只赚了8分，而苹果公司则赚了4毛（40分）。

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·8 hours ago
See I’ve heard this sentiment elsewhere but I don’t see data that supports or shows this calculation anywhere. Does China report that the US has a huge surplus? I believe that the current trade calculations take this sort of thing into account and everything I’ve seen still shows the US with a massive deficit.

（回复楼上）看吧，我在别处也听到过这种说法，但是没有数据能够证实。中国有指出美国赚取了大额贸易顺差吗？我认为目前的贸易数据已经把这种情况算进去了，但是数据仍然表明美国遭受了严重的贸易逆差。

Vinar   Score hidden·7 hours ago
“I believe that the current trade calculations take this sort of thing into account”

（回复楼上）“我认为目前的贸易数据已经把这种情况算进去了。”

No it doesn't. What you are looking for is export in value added.
http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb-bmdi/document/1401_D14_T9_V1-eng.htm （链接）
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/trade/data/oecd-wto-statistics-on-trade-in-value-added_data-00648-en （链接）

不，并没有把这种情况计算进去。这种情况都算在出口附加值里。

POCZHO   Score hidden·7 hours ago
Even with value added China still has a surplus with the United States

即便是算入出口附加值，中国仍然对美国存在贸易顺差。

 -------------译者：willdemon-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Vazsera   Score hidden·8 hours ago
The 40 cents is apple's profit margin on the iPhone. The 8 cents is the manufacturing cost.
I don't think you understand how a trade is calculated. When apple imports the iphone into the US it is billed as a $650 dollar import.

苹果在（每台）iPhone上的净利润率是40美分，制造成本是8美分。我认为你不理解贸易的计算方式，当苹果进口iphone到美国的时候，会产生650美元的进口账单。

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·8 hours ago·edited 7 hours ago
Right but unless I’m mistaken that doesn’t create a trade surplus for America because it’s an American company and product that is ultimately kicking 8% to China for their part. The US desires Chinese products companies etc. to find reasons to put some of their money toward American producers or services so that the flow of money between countries becomes more balanced.

你说的是对的。除非我在这方面犯了错误，即：因为它是一个美国公司，并且产品最终利益的8%被中国拿走，所以不会为美国创造贸易顺差。美国期望中国的产品制造公司找到这个问题存在的原因，并向美国的产品或服务提供一部分资金，以使两国之间的资金流动变的更平衡。

Vazsera   Score hidden·8 hours ago·edited 7 hours ago
I never said America had a trade surplus. I'm saying that the trade deficit doesn't give Trump leverage since powerful multinational US corporations benefit greatly from it. Reducing the trade deficit hurts Apple and other companies greatly.

我从未说过美国有贸易顺差，我的意思是，美国强大的跨国公司极大受益于贸易逆差，贸易逆差并没有给特朗普带来影响。减少贸易逆差（贸易赤字）则会大大伤害苹果和其他公司。

“The US desires Chinese products companies etc. to find reasons to put some of their money toward American producers or services so that the flow of money between countries becomes more balanced.”
The flow of money is balanced. China takes most of the surplus and buys houses or US T-bills since they are forbidden from buying many types of US companies The US does not desire that; Trump does. A trade deficit isn't bad.

“美国期望中国的产品制造公司找到这个问题存在的原因，并向美国的产品或服务提供一部分资金，以使两国之间的资金流动变的更平衡。”
资金的流动是平衡的。中国获得了大部分贸易顺差，由于他们禁止买很多类型的美国公司，因此买了很多房产和美国国债，这并不是美国所希望看到的，这是特朗普希望看到的。因此，贸易赤字并不是坏事。

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·7 hours ago·edited 7 hours ago
“I never said America had a trade surplus. I'm saying that the trade deficit doesn't give Trump leverage since powerful multinational US corporations benefit greatly from it. Reducing the trade deficit hurts Apple and other companies greatly.”
It looks to me like that’s exactly what you said a few posts up but no worries. It’s true that iPhones and other products will be more expensive but millions of Chinese will have to find different work so I think it’s still ultimately leverage. The US would also presumably bring those industries back home with the tariffs and have more high-paying employment which may help sell more expensive products.

“我从未说过美国有贸易顺差，我的意思是，美国强大的跨国公司极大受益于贸易逆差，贸易逆差并没有给特朗普带来影响。”
在我看来，你之前回复的几段话说的完全就是这个意思，但是你不用担心。iPhone和其他产品会越来越贵确是事实，但是数以百万计的中国人将不得不另寻工作，因此我认为基本上还是有优势的。美国可能也会通过关税的调整，让这些工业重回美国，也会为了卖更贵的产品卖，而向雇员支付更高的薪水。

“The flow of money is balanced. China takes most of the surplus and buys houses or US T-bills since they are forbidden from buying many types of US companies The US does not desire that; Trump does. A trade deficit isn't bad.”
I don’t understand why buying US assets is supposed to be seen as a balancer. If it were then China could drop all their tariffs and protections without concern and it would be fine because then the US would just buy Chinese land and debt with the then US trade surplus. They don’t want that though for the same reason the US doesn’t want that.

“资金的流动是平衡的。中国获得了大部分贸易顺差，由于他们禁止买很多类型的美国公司，因此买了很多房产和美国国债，这并不是美国所希望看到的，这是特朗普希望看到的。因此，贸易赤字并不是坏事。”
我不理解为什么购买美国资产好像变成了一种平衡手段。如果是的话，中国就会毫无顾虑地降低他们所有的关税和保护措施，因为美国将会通过贸易顺差购买中国的土地和债券。他们不希望这样的原因同美国不希望如此的原因是一样的。

-------------译者：willdemon-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Vazsera   Score hidden·7 hours ago
“It’s true that iPhones will be more expensive but millions of Chinese will have to find different work so I think it’s still ultimately leverage.”
No Apple will make less money employee less people and so will hundreds of other companies through out the US that rely on Chinese imports. The economy will shrink and the US unemployment will go up because of it.

“事实上iPhone转到（美）国内生产是会更贵，但是数以百万计的中国人将不得不另寻工作，因此我认为基本上还是有优势的。”
不是的，苹果会因此丧失利润并削减雇员，而美国国内数百家依赖中国进口的企业也会面临同样问题。因此，美国的经济规模会萎缩而失业率会上升。

“I don’t understand why buying US assets is supposed to be seen as a balancer.”
Its a balance for the flow of money not the trade deficit. A trade deficit must be met with capital inflows. Here is a quora post on the subject.

“我不理解为什么购买美国资产好像变成了一种平衡手段。”
这项手段可以平衡资金流动，但不能平衡贸易逆差。只有在资金回流的时候贸易逆差才能被消除。这是Quora（美国知乎）上关于此话题的一篇帖子。

Why do you think Chinese tariffs and protections are the reason for the trade deficit? It exists because Americans want to buy Chinese goods more than Chinese want to buy American goods.

 你为什么认为中国的关税和贸易保护措施造成了当前的贸易逆差？有贸易逆差是因为，比起中国人愿意购买美国产品，美国人更愿意买中国产品。

Muh_Comrade   Score hidden·7 hours ago·edited 7 hours ago
“Why do you think Chinese tariffs and protections are the reason for the trade deficit? It exists because Americans want to buy Chinese goods.”

“你为什么认为中国的关税和贸易保护措施造成了当前的贸易逆差？有贸易逆差是因为，比起中国人愿意购买美国产品，美国人更愿意买中国产品。”

Tariffs limit the amount of foreign goods sold and purchased in domestic markets by raising their prices with a tax. Chinese tariffs prevent Chinese people from buying American foreign goods not vice versa.

通过加税以提高价格，关税限制了外国产品在国内市场上销售的数量。中国通过实施关税限制了中国人购买美国产品，但美国没有这样做。

America counterbalances this with tariffs of their own but China has more of these protections in place and the US doesn’t have enough due to the deficit.  

美国通过实施自己的关税抵消这些影响，但是中国还有更多此类的贸易保护措施，而美国没有，因为贸易逆差。

POCZHO   Score hidden·8 hours ago·edited 8 hours ago
China is very protectionist with high tariffs forced IP transfer and joint-venturing.

中国贸易保护非常严重，它们实施高关税，强迫移交知识产权，并要求合资运营。

The US doesn't want China to develop its tech industries because it is the only way to break middle-income and ultimately challenges US dominance in all realms. If China's economy is larger than the US China will be able to fund massive military buildups military R&D civilian scientific/space exploration to further cement its dominance while providing well funded health care education poverty alleviation veterans administration benefits to its citizens and have its SOEs dominate international markets instead of US S&P 500 companies.

美国不想中国发展自己的高科技产业，因为高科技产业是脱离中等收入陷阱并能全方面挑战美国霸权的唯一手段。如果中国的经济规模大于美国，它就能够大量投入军事发展、军用科技研发、民用科技/太空探索，为其未来的全球霸权奠定基础，它还能够在医疗卫生、教育、扶贫、退伍兵抚恤等方面大量投资以使其国民受益，并使其国有企业替代美国标准普尔500企业支配全球市场。

I'm fully supportive of US efforts in this realm as I wish to continue to see the United States be the continued hegemon in the world instead of China for no other reason than that my passport is blue instead of red.

在这一方面我全力支持美国，因为我希望美国能维持其全球霸权，而不被中国替代。原因就是，我的护照表皮是蓝色的，不是红色的。
（注：如下为世界各国的护照颜色分布图）

This_Is_The_End   Score hidden·6 hours ago
f China's economy is larger than the US China will be able to fund massive military buildups military R&D civilian scientific/space exploration to further cement its dominance
Where is the problem in this for you? Until now the ships of the US Navy are at the coast of China while China has no Navy ships at the coast of California. And science is good for us all but for some cringe climate change deniers and creationists. Your critique is quite weird.

“如果中国的经济规模大于美国，它就能够大量投入军事发展、军用科技研发、民用科技/太空探索，为其未来的全球霸权奠定基础......”
你对这有什么问题么？ 一直以来都是美国的军舰在中国沿海徘徊，中国可没有派军舰去加利福尼亚沿海。而且科技发展对全人类都是有益的，但不包括那些猥琐的反气候变化者和鼓吹神创者。（指特朗普？）你的批评其实挺奇怪的。

Btw. the US has a awful expensive health care which can't be afforded by huge parts of the population. The reason is simply protectionism. The US has not even a paid maternity leave which make the US to a 3rd world country.

顺便说一下，美国的医疗收费太贵了，贵到大部分美国人都消费不起，究其原因，就是保护主义。美国甚至都没有带薪产假，让人感觉就像一个第三世界国家。

-------------译者：668-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

POCZHO   Score hidden·6 hours ago·edited 6 hours ago
Simple I want the US to remain dominant not China. I am familiar with US ships in Subic Bay Sasbeso Yokosuka Busan Guam Palau Micronesia the Marshall Islands and Honolulu which maybe if China was stronger China would have its own "Cuban Missile Crisis" but since the US is stronger China can suck it. I do realize that China might feel uncomfortable about such placements but better them than us if China has carrier placements in Tijuana Vancouver Nassau Havana Cozumel Kiribati (Hawaii) and Halifax.

很简单，我希望是美国而不是中国占主导地位。我知道苏比克湾、佐世保、横须贺、釜山、关岛、帕劳群岛、密克罗尼西亚群岛、马绍尔群岛和火奴鲁鲁有美国的船只，如果中国更强大，中国可能会有自己的“古巴导弹危机”。但既然美国更强大，中国就得巴结它。我确实意识到，中国可能会对这样的部署感到不舒服，但是，如果中国在提华纳、温哥华、拿索、哈瓦那、科苏梅尔、基里巴斯（夏威夷）和哈利法克斯都有航母，他们会比我们更好。

Science is good for us call but it is better for the country that does the research. The US is dominant in semiconductors biotech/pharmaceuticals aerospace enterprise software instrumentation electrical generation and metallurgy because we expended money on DARPA/NSF/NIH/DoE Office of Science/ARS among others. I don't want China to have those same comparative advantages because that would mean weakened US power and the harshness of US sanctions would similarly be weakened 

科学有益于我们，但对那些有做研究的国家来说更好，由于我们在美国国防部高级研究计划局（DARPA）/美国国家科学基金会（NSF）/国立卫生研究所（NIH）/美国能源部科学办公室（DoE Office of Science）/美国农业研究局（ARS）等方面投入了资金，因此美国在半导体生物技术/制药、航天企业、软件植入、发电和冶金领域占主导地位。我不希望中国拥有与美国相匹敌的优势，因为这意味着美国实力减弱，而美国严厉的制裁同样会被削弱。

This_Is_The_End   Score hidden·6 hours ago
The less the US is able to blackmail other it's better for the rest of the world. Otherwise concepts of religious extremism dued care for families and children and mass illiteracy would grow. Ali Wong made the point when she demanded paid maternity leave. It isn't gonna happen because of the political divide in the US. It's better for us all we avoid such issues.

美国敲诈他人的能力越弱，对世界其他国家的好处就越大。否则宗教极端主义观念会摧毁家庭和儿童，导致大量文盲增加。黄阿丽（Ali Wong）在要求带薪产假时提出了这一观点。这不会因为美国的政治分歧而发生。避免这样的问题发生对我们大家都好。

POCZHO   Score hidden·6 hours ago
“The less the US is able to blackmail other it's better for the rest of the world. Otherwise concepts of religious extremism dued care for families and children and mass illiteracy would grow”
I'm not sure how that logical jump was made. Religious extremism and illiteracy have been the lowest its ever been and that is when the US has had the greatest ability to blackmail everyone. Further how does US domestic politics (paid maternity leave) have anything to deal with the US being able to blackmail other countries? The US doesn't have a looming demographic crisis and the US is conservative so paid maternity leave doesn't exist in the US. Further if you are working a low-end job that doesn't have maternity leave you should be reconsidering whether to have a baby or not. Paid maternity leave exits in the US in high skill information/technical work.  

“美国敲诈他人的能力越弱，对世界其他国家的好处就越大。否则宗教极端主义观念会摧毁家庭和儿童，导致大量文盲增加。”
我不知道你这逻辑是怎么跳跃的。美国最有能力敲诈每个国家的时候，宗教极端主义和文盲是历史上最低的。此外，美国国内政治（带薪产假）跟美国能够敲诈其他国家有半毛钱关系吗？美国没有迫在眉睫的人口危机，美国也很保守，所以美国不存在带薪产假。此外，如果你正在从事一份没有产假的低端工作，你应该重新考虑是否要生孩子。在美国的高技能信息/技术工作中也没有带薪产假。

This_Is_The_End   Score hidden·4 hours ago
The blackmailing is a result of domestic mindsets and spreading of religious extreme concepts like capital punishment for homosexual in Africa is horrible. In cities like Detroit the functional illiteracy rate is over 30%. The illiteracy of rate in the US is 15% which is terrible for a first world country.
The rest of the developed world is valuing families by supporting them without looking at the income which would be a horrific duation of family values.

这种敲诈勒索是国内心态和宗教极端主义传播的结果，像在非洲对同性恋者判死刑一样令人恐怖。在底特律这样的城市，功能性文盲率超过30％。在美国的文盲率是15%，对一个第一世界的国家来说这是非常可怕的。其他发达国家正在通过支持家庭来评价家庭，而不看收入，这将是家庭价值观的可怕影响。

-------------译者：lingtianqi-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------
   
Strongbow85   Score hidden·1 hour ago
“The less the US is able to blackmail other it's better for the rest of the world. Otherwise concepts of religious extremism dued care for families and children and mass illiteracy would grow”
The blackmailing is a result of domestic mindsets and spreading of religious extreme concepts like capital punishment for homosexual in Africa is horrible
Are you suggesting that the United States is responsible for encouraging capital punishment for homosexuals in Africa? These are the policies of Boko Haram and al-Shabaab targets of U.S. counter-terror operations such extreme religious concepts are not endemic to the United States.

“美国敲诈他人的能力越弱，对世界其他国家的好处就越大。否则宗教极端主义观念会摧毁家庭和儿童，导致大量文盲增加。”“这种敲诈勒索是国内心态和宗教极端主义传播的结果，像在非洲对同性恋者判死刑一样令人恐怖。”
你是说美国应该为鼓吹非洲判同性恋者死刑负责吗?这些都是博科圣地和索马里青年党针对美国反恐行动的政策，这种极端的宗教观念并不是美国特有的。

Mitleser1987   Score hidden·5 hours ago
China is no adversary ... most Americans think.
Don't be so worried.

中国不是对手…大多数美国人认为。别那么担心。

Vazsera   Score hidden·7 hours ago
What do you think will happen if Americans can't buy an iPhone?

 如果美国人买不到苹果手机，你认为会发生什么？

POCZHO   Score hidden·7 hours ago
Apple will switch assembly lines to Vietnam

苹果公司会把生产线转移到越南。

Vinar   Score hidden·6 hours ago
Vietnam doesn't have the capacity. In a full blown trade war all other US companies would be affect as well.

 越南没有这个生产能力。在一场全面的贸易战中，所有其他的美国公司也会受到影响。

Assembly plants needs capital skilled worker infrastructure logistic etc. That is a multi-year effort. To replace the whole manufacture capacity of China would probably require a decade if not more. After all it took China that long to built up as well.
It simply takes a lot of time to expend manufacture capacity that much.

装配工厂需要资金、熟练工人、基础设施和物流等，这是（需要）多年的努力。要取代中国的整体生产能力，可能需要10年甚至更长时间。毕竟，中国也花了那么长时间才建立起来。它只是需要大量的时间去扩大生产能力。

POCZHO   Score hidden·6 hours ago
I'm not saying that US companies won't be affected I'm saying that China will be irrecoverably ruined while US companies will face 1-2 quarters of uncertanity

 我不是说美国公司不会受到影响，我是说中国将被彻底摧毁，而美国公司将面临1-2个季度的不确定性。

Vazsera   Score hidden·6 hours ago
You are severely underestimating the damage that a trade war can cause for the US.

你严重低估了贸易战会对美国造成的损害。

POCZHO   Score hidden·6 hours ago
Wow 5% of US GDP is sooo much to lose

 哇哦，美国GDP的5%，损失真是太大了。

Vazsera   Score hidden·4 hours ago
It is.

损失是很大。

svrav   Score hidden·3 hours ago
“It is.” 
But you're right in the sense that the Americans have a lot more leverage. China cannot compete tit for tat on this. They'll come around eventually.

“损失是很大。”
但你说的没错，美国人有更大的优势。中国不能就此以牙还牙。他们最终会慢慢接受的。