是美国需要中国而不是中国需要美国 [美国媒体]

U.S. Needs China More Than China Needs the U.S.

是美国需要中国而不是中国需要美国



To avoid Trump's disastrous trade war, three things need to be addressed.

为了避免特朗普灾难性的贸易战，有三件事需要解决。

Not one to be outdone by any adversary, Donald Trump has upped the ante in a rapidly escalating trade war with China, threatening an additional $100 billion of tariffs on top of the initial round of $50 billion. In doing so, the Trump administration is failing to appreciate a crucial reality: The United States needs China more than China needs the U.S.

唐纳德•特朗普(Donald Trump)在与中国的贸易战中加大了筹码，威胁要在首轮500亿美元的基础上再增加1000亿美元的关税。在这样做的时候，特朗普政府没有意识到一个关键的现实:美国需要中国，而不是中国需要美国。

Yes, China is still an export-led economy, and the American consumer is its largest customer. But China’s export share of its gross domestic product has fallen from 37 percent in 2007 to slightly less than 20 percent today, an important outgrowth of a decade-long rebalancing. By drawing increased support from domestic demand, China is better able to withstand the pressure of tariffs and other actions that are aimed at its exporters.

是的，中国仍然是出口导向型经济，美国消费者是其最大的客户。但中国出口占国内生产总值(gdp)的比重已从2007年的37%降至如今的略低于20%，这是10年来经济再平衡的重要结果。通过增加国内需求的支持，中国能够更好地承受关税和其他针对其出口商的行动的压力。

Not so with the United States. The U.S. depends heavily on China for providing the low-cost goods that enable income-constrained American consumers to make ends meet. The U.S. also depends on China to support its own exports; next to Mexico and Canada, China is America’s third largest and by far its most rapidly growing major export market.

美国则不然。美国在很大程度上依赖中国提供的低成本产品，使收入受限的美国消费者得以维持收支平衡。美国也依赖中国来支持自己的出口;仅次于墨西哥和加拿大，中国是美国的第三大出口市场，也是目前为止增长最快的主要出口市场。

And, of course, the U.S. depends on China to provide funding for its budget deficits. It is the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasury securities — some $1.3 trillion in direct ownership and at least another $250 billion of quasi-government paper. A lack of Chinese buying could turn the next Treasury auction into a rout.

当然，美国依赖中国为其预算赤字提供资金。它是美国国债最大的海外持有者，拥有约1.3万亿美元的直接债券，至少还有2500亿美元的准政府债券。缺乏中国买家可能会使下一次国债拍卖陷入困境。

America depends on China because of a fundamental weakness in the structure of the U.S. economy — a profound and worrisome lack of domestic saving. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the net domestic saving rate (depreciation-adjusted saving of households, businesses and the government sector, combined) was just 1.3 percent of national income.

美国依赖中国，是因为美国经济结构存在根本性的缺陷——国内储蓄金严重缺乏，令人担忧。在2017年第四季度，国内净储蓄率(家庭、企业和政府部门的折旧调整储蓄)仅占国民收入的1.3%。

Lacking in savings at home, and wanting to consume and grow, the U.S. must import surplus foreign saving from abroad – and run massive balance-of-payments and trade deficits to import this capital. In 2017, the United States had merchandise trade deficits with 102 nations!
President Donald Trump continues to single out China as the villain in the great American tragedy, when in fact he should take a careful look in the mirror.

由于国内缺乏储蓄金，而且想要消费和增长，美国必须从国外进口过剩的外国储蓄金，并通过巨额国际收支和贸易逆差来输入资本。2017年，美国与102个国家的商品存在贸易逆差!
美国总统唐纳德•特朗普(Donald Trump)继续把中国列为美国大悲剧中的反面人物，实际上，他应该仔细照照镜子。

First of all, he continues to insist that the U.S.-China trade deficit is $500 billion, fully one-third larger than the actual figure of $375 billion published by the Commerce Department.

首先，他继续坚持美中贸易逆差为5000亿美元，比商务部公布的实际数字3750亿美元足足高出三分之一。

Second, data from the OECD and the World Trade Organization suggests at least 40 percent of this bilateral imbalance reflects supply-chain effects of components and parts that are produced outside of China but assembled inside China. That means, based on the value added of what is  actually produced in China — the essence of the alleged China threat — that the 47 percent share of the U.S. deficit ascribed to China would be reduced to around 28 percent.
Yes, this is still a big number. But it is far below the claims of President Trump and the official figures of the Commerce Department. While the international specialization of comparative advantage explains this portion, that argument doesn’t carry much weight in the political arena.  

其次，经合组织和世界贸易组织的数据表明，至少有40％的这种双边不平衡反映了中国以外生产但在中国组装的零部件的供应链影响。这意味着，基于中国实际产生的增值 - 所谓中国威胁的本质 - - 美国在中国的赤字中的47％份额将减少到28％左右。
是的，这仍然是一个很大的数字。但它远低于特朗普总统的说法和商务部的官方数字。尽管比较优势的国际专业化解释了这一部分，但这一论点在政治舞台上并不占重要地位。 

Third, Trump’s budget deficits will make America’s trade problems worse. A low-saving U.S. economy can’t square the circle without trade deficits. With tax cuts of $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years and another $300 billion in spending increases added in by a reckless Congress in order to avert a government shutdown late last year, the net domestic saving rate is headed toward zero – or even lower – with trade deficits likely to widen sharply in response.  
And that leads to the uncomfortable truth of China bashing: protectionism in the face of widening trade deficits. Courtesy of Trump tariffs, China’s deficit will now be distributed to the other 101 nations that make up America’s multilateral merchandise trade deficit. Relative to China, these are higher-cost producers, meaning the likely response to this retaliation will have the effect of taxing the very families Trump insists he is protecting.

第三，特朗普的预算赤字会使美国的贸易问题变得更糟。如果没有贸易赤字，一个低储蓄的美国经济就无法摆脱这个圈子。在未来10年减税1.5万亿美元，再加上为防止政府在去年晚些时候关闭而增加的3000亿美元支出增加，国内储蓄净额率将走向零或甚至更低 - 贸易逆差可能急剧扩大。  
这导致中国抨击令人不安的真相：面对贸易赤字扩大的保护主义。受惠于特朗普关税，中国的赤字现在将分配给构成美国多边商品贸易逆差的其他101个国家。相对于中国而言，这些都是成本较高的生产商，这意味着对这一报复行为的回应将对特朗普坚称他的关税保护产生影响。

Chinese labor input was just $2.30 an hour while the average for foreign suppliers ranked two through 10 was about $26 per hour. Trump’s tariffs would, in effect, shift U.S. imports toward these higher-cost producers — with huge potential consequences on the purchasing power of beleaguered American consumers. 

中国的劳动力投入仅为每小时2.30美元，而外国供应商的平均工资则为每小时26美元。实际上，特朗普的关税将使美国的进口产品转向这些成本更高的生产商，这将对陷入困境的美国消费者的购买力造成巨大的潜在影响。

Three things need to be addressed to avoid this nightmare:
One, communication: The exchange of views between the U.S. and China is far too episodic — annual gatherings of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade, as well as periodic leader-to-leader summits. A permanent secretariat, staffed by high-level experts from both sides, would be far preferable in tackling the complexity of a challenging relationship.

要避免这种噩梦，需要解决三件事:
第一，沟通: 中美之间的意见交流太过于片面 - 每年一次的战略与经济对话，商务与贸易联合委员会，以及定期领导人峰会。由双方高级专家组成的常设秘书处在解决具有挑战性的关系的复杂性方面会更具有可取性。

Two, market access: Both nations should put a high priority on breaking the 10-year logjam in negotiations of a bilateral investment treaty. For U.S. multinationals, access to China’s rapidly expanding domestic markets is a major growth opportunity. The same is the case for China’s “going out” global investment campaign.

第二，市场准入：两国应高度重视打破双边投资协定谈判10年的僵局。对于美国跨国公司来说，进入中国快速扩张的国内市场是一个重要的增长机会。中国“走出去”全球投资运动的情况也是如此。

Three, intellectual property: The thorny issue of technology transfer — the essence of the battle over intellectual property rights — needs to be resolved. In doing so, an important distinction must be made between contractual sharing of operating systems by partners in commercially negotiated joint ventures and outright theft, coercion and cyberhacking. In today’s knowledge-based world, there can be no tolerance of these latter infractions.

三，知识产权：技术转让的棘手问题 - 知识产权战争的实质 - 需要解决。在此过程中，合作伙伴在商业谈判的合资企业中合同共享操作系统和赤裸裸的盗窃，胁迫和网络黑客时必须作出重要区分。在当今以知识为基础的世界中，不能容忍后者的违法行为。

In the 1930s, protectionist tariffs and a global trade war exacerbated the Great Depression and destabilized the international order. Sadly, one of the most painful lessons of modern history is now at risk of being ignored.

上世纪30年代，保护主义关税和全球贸易战加剧了大萧条，破坏了国际秩序。可悲的是，现代历史上最惨痛的教训之一现在正面临被忽视的危险。


Jaqen H'ghar • 5 hours ago
I have to disagree with the balance of power here - there are plenty of other Asian countries that would be eager to pick up the slack of suddenly American multinationals started looking for alternative low cost manufacturing locations. The last thing China wants is for its neighbors and competitors to rush into a void it willingly leaves, all because they refuse to accept international norms regarding intellectual property. On top of that, don't underestimate how important maintaining full employment is to the Chinese government, which probably equates that to stability.

我不同意这里的力量平衡——其他许多亚洲国家也会急切地想要填补美国跨国公司突然开始寻找低成本制造地的空缺。中国最不愿看到的是，邻国和竞争对手会争先恐后地将其抛弃，这一切都是因为他们拒绝接受有关知识产权的国际准则。最重要的是，不要低估保持充分就业对中国政府的重要性，这可能等同于稳定。

dnjake • 10 hours ago
If China does not need the US, why would China endanger its economic expansion by engaging in some kind of trade war with the United States? If the US does need China and China does not need the US, what kind of future can the US expect from its relationship with China? America's international trade policies have been driven by those who imagined that the US held some perpetual dominant global economic position. They could make big profits from elite top tier services and international business dealings. The working class jobs could be farmed out to second class low wage emerging economies. Perhaps the biggest problem with this vision is the fact that China does not intend to remain a second class nation. It is in the process of developing its own advanced economy with the full range of advanced services and advanced technologies. As it succeeds, it is going to favor Chinese doing business with Chinese. If America intends to remain a major economic power, it needs to maintain a globally competitive manufacturing economy. The Chinese are likely to be much more interested in developing their own advanced economy than they are in a large effort to block the United States from regaining a more competitive industrial economy.

如果中国不需要美国，为什么中国会与美国进行某种贸易战争，危及中国的经济扩张?如果美国确实需要中国，而中国不需要美国，那么美国和中国的关系会有什么样的未来呢?美国的国际贸易政策是由那些认为美国在全球经济中占据主导地位的人推动的。他们可以从精英级的服务和国际商业交易中赚取巨额利润。工人阶级的工作可以外包给第二阶级低工资的新兴经济体。也许，这一愿景最大的问题在于，中国不打算继续成为第二个阶级国家。它是在发展自己的先进经济和全面先进的服务和先进技术的过程中。随着它的成功，它将有利于中国人与中国人做生意。如果美国想要保持一个主要的经济实力，它需要保持一个具有全球竞争力的制造业经济。中国很可能对发展本国的经济更感兴趣，而不是为了阻止美国重新获得更具竞争力的工业经济。

Erik
Well you could have made the same argument about Saudi oil 15 years ago that "we needed it". Look how things have changed. The US does not need China for it's toothbrushes and plastic toys. Given enough innovation and market pressures the US can find someone else to fill that gap. The same can't be said of Chinese flying around in Boeing jets or using American software.

你也可以在15年前就对沙特石油提出同样的观点“我们需要它”。看看情况发生了什么变化。美国不需要中国的牙刷和塑料玩具。如果有足够的创新和市场压力，美国可以找到其他人填补这一空白。同样不能说中国人需要在波音飞机上四处飞行或使用美国软件。

Joe
The article's premise: "low income consumers need low cost goods". The reason we have "low income" here in the USA is that we shipped all our blue collar manufacturing jobs to China and now these workers are at McDonalds working for minimum wage. The idea that saving 50 cents on a pair of socks in exchange for wiping out ALL our textile jobs is just not logical but accepted Dogma for economists & politicians. I don't like Donald for a lot of reasons but I back him fully on this one!

文章的前提是:“低收入消费者需要低成本商品”。我们在美国有“低收入”的原因是我们把所有蓝领制造业的工作都放到了中国，现在这些工人都在麦当劳工作，争取最低工资。一种想法是，用一双袜子来省下50美分，以换取我们所有的纺织业工作，这在经济学家和政治家们看来是不符合逻辑的，但却是公认的教条。我不喜欢唐纳德有很多原因，但我完全支持他!

Klondike Mike
We need China for their cheap stuff. With tariffs it will just make things cheaper from places like Vietnam or Malayasia. Realize most of the stuff exported from China are not from Chinese companies. It's from Apple, Samsung, General Motors. When you look at overall trade, there's an imbalance, meaning they send more here than we send there. What do we need? We need jobs. We need more exports in the US. Tariffs will bring back the balance. It will also stop the trade problems with China.

我们需要中国买便宜的东西。通过征收关税，它只会使越南或马来西亚等地的商品便宜。中国出口的大部分产品都不是中国公司生产的。它来自苹果，三星，通用汽车。当你看整体贸易时，会出现不平衡，这意味着他们比我们输出的更多。我们需要什么?我们需要工作。我们在美国需要更多的出口。关税将恢复平衡。它还将停止与中国的贸易问题。

Who's In Charge Here?
It's common knowledge that China throws up barriers to foreign countries trying to do business there. They also steal trade secrets and IP from those that do. China as a matter of policy, has no scruples. And I'm not anti-China. Just stating the facts. I work for a tech company that sells a lot to China. Once you give them a data sheet for a device, Chinese knock-offs appear within a couple of years.

众所周知，中国对试图在中国做生意的外国公司设置了障碍。他们还窃取商业秘密和知识产权。中国存在一个政策问题，他们毫无顾忌。我不是反华。只是陈述事实。我在一家技术公司工作，这家公司卖给中国很多东西。一旦你给他们一个设备的数据表，中国的仿制品会在几年内出现。

D-1%
We do not depend on Yuan, but they depend on the Dollar!

我们不依赖人民币，但他们依赖美元。

Duy Nguyen
Buy more American made products and less China made.

购买更多美国制造的产品，减少中国制造。

vorg_t
In a trade war, export economy always loses. If anyone think US needs China more, then move to China.
US is a sovereign currency country. US gov't can support affected sectors in many ways.

在贸易战争中，出口经济总是输。如果有人认为我们更需要中国，那就搬到中国去。
美国是一个主权货币国家。美国政府不能在很多方面支持受影响的部门。

MPA
Nobody seem to remember the history. Did we not have tariffs in 1970- 1997 on almost all Chinese imports? US did not have lack of funds for schools, roads, etc, in those days like now! Where are the good journalists who are supposed to expose the facts? China gets over a billion every day in trade above what they buy from US. We should simply have a policy, any time the trade deficit goes over 10% of the total trade, add 10% tariff every year, 10, 20%,etc, until the difference is less than 10% of the total trade. But the corporate lobbyists would not give $ to politicians then. Wasn't there a news article last year, that GM has to build cars in China if they want to sell cars there? We are so

似乎没有人记得那段历史。我们在1970- 1997年没有对几乎所有的中国进口产品征收关税吗?在那些日子里，像现在这样的学校、道路等，我们都没有资金短缺!那些应该揭露事实的好记者在哪里?中国每天的贸易额超过了10亿美元。我们只要有一个政策，任何时候贸易赤字超过贸易总额的10%，每年增加10%的关税，10%，20%等，直到差额不到总额的10%。但是，公司的说客们不会给政客们一分钱。去年有没有一篇新闻报道说，如果通用汽车想在中国销售汽车，就必须在中国生产汽车? 

Stephen
I would not buy anything made in China if I had a choice but when you go to the stores that's about all you can get.

如果我有选择的话，我不会买任何中国制造的东西，但当你去商店的时候，你只能买到中国的东西。

omnis r
So does the customer need the store more or does the store need the customer? How many other countries like Vietnam and India are salivating at the thought of getting US orders that are currently going to Chinese factories? Supply chains are very good at adjusting to find the lowest cost producers. At the same time who will the Chinese factories sell to in a saturated world that can replace the US market? In times of crisis where are the people of the world going to stash their money? US Treasuries. And what does the low US personal savings rate have to do with a trade deficit?

那么，顾客是需要更多的商店呢，还是商店需要顾客?有多少像越南和印度这样的国家想要得到目前中国工厂的订单?供应链非常善于调整以寻找成本最低的生产商。与此同时，在一个可以取代美国市场的饱和世界里，中国的工厂会卖给谁呢?在危机时期，世界上的人们会把钱存起来吗?美国国债。美国的低个人储蓄率与贸易赤字有什么关系?

Gui
This does not make sense and is not logical. We have the biggest consumer market in the world. So they need us more than we need them. We can find substitute for those goods from China.

这没有意义，也不合逻辑。我们拥有全球最大的消费市场。所以他们需要我们比我们需要的更多。我们可以找到来自中国的商品的替代品。

Trang
For the past 2 weeks, so many articles mention that companies in USA will suffer. I did not see one article about any company in China will suffer for the trade war. I assume that China is a haven on earth or may be all the reporters in USA have no idea about China economy or all reporters are working for China' s propaganda.

在过去的两周里，很多文章都提到美国的公司会受到影响。我没有看到有关中国任何一家公司的文章都会因贸易战而受到影响。我认为中国是地球上的避风港，或者可能美国的所有记者都不知道中国经济或所有记者都在为中国的宣传工作。

Toad
China needs us way more than we need them. Without the US consumers buying their goods, their manufacturing goes belly up, and their economy tanks. They also won't be getting the food they buy from us. We on the other hand won't have the cheap goods that Walmart and Amazon sells. Might even big good for our manufacturing. There's always going to be a market for our food.

中国需要我们的比我们需要的更多。如果没有美国消费者购买他们的商品，他们的制造业就会陷入困境，他们的经济坦克就会消失。他们也不会从我们这里购买食物。另一方面，我们不会有沃尔玛和亚马逊销售的廉价商品。对我们的制造业来说甚至可能是一件好事，我们的食物总会有市场。