專題評論
首頁  >  專題評論
2018/10/26
川普該如何解決與中國的不公平貿易?

How Trump Should Address Unfair Trade With China

Robert E. Scott是經濟政策研究所的高級經濟學家和貿易與製造政策研究主任。

 

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump cited my research prominently when making the case that unfair trade with China had grievously hurt workers in the United States. It wasn’t the first time my research had been referenced during a political campaign; Hillary Clinton cited it in a similar manner in 2007. But it was the first time my data informed a subsequent executive branch policy that I view with dismay: namely, the Trump administration’s heavy-handed approach to trade, which has involved imposing $250 billion worth of tariffs on Chinese goods.

在2016年總統競選期間,唐納德·川普強調與中國的不公平貿易嚴重傷害美國工人時,顯眼地引用了我的研究。這不是我的研究第一次在政治競選期間被引用;2007年,希拉蕊·柯林頓(Hillary Clinton)也曾以類似的方式引用它。但這是第一次,我的數據所帶來的後續行政部門政策令我感到沮喪,也就是川普政府在貿易問題上採取的嚴厲手段,其中涉及對中國商品徵收的價值2500億美元關稅。

 

The president’s tariff approach ignores a more significant problem — the currency misalignment of the dollar and the Chinese yuan — and so could end up doing more harm than good.

總統的關稅方法忽視了一個更為重要的問題——美元和人民幣之間的貨幣偏差——因此可能最終造成弊大於利。

 

Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign sought to channel the anger of many Americans over unfair trade. I understand this anger, having documented in my research the millions of manufacturing jobs lost in the United States as a result of flawed trading relationships with China and Mexico. But rhetoric doesn’t always equal insight, and the president’s approach ignores two key facts.

川普的總統競選極力引發許多美國人對不公平貿易的憤怒。我理解這種憤怒,在我的研究中記錄了由於同中國和墨西哥的貿易關係存在缺陷,導致美國失去數百萬製造業工作崗位。但說辭並不總是等同於洞察力,總統的做法忽略了兩個關鍵事實。

 

First, trade deals on their own don’t have much potential to help America’s workers. Contemporary trade agreements may be nominally concerned with rules and tariffs, but their primary outcome has been to tilt the playing field in favor of foreign investors, which merely continues a cycle of outsourced production. Tinkering at the margins, as evidenced by recent rewrites of the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement and the North American Free Trade Agreement, alters mostly just the optics of trade policy. It sends a message that the president is “being tough.” But it’s unlikely to have a meaningful impact.

首先,貿易協議本身在幫助美國工人方面並沒有太大潛力。當代貿易協定可能在名義上與規則和關稅有關,但它們的主要結果是讓競爭環境有利於外國投資者,這只是延續了一個外包生產的循環。最近的美韓自由貿易協定和北美自由貿易協定的重新簽訂證明,對條款進行修改,主要只是對貿易政策外表看上去的樣子做出了改動。它發出一個信號:總統「很強硬」。但它不太可能產生有意義的影響。

 

The second fact is that currency misalignment — not trade deals — is the single most important driver of growing United States trade deficits. From 1997 to 2014, China purchased $4 trillion in United States Treasury bills and other assets to bid up the value of the dollar relative to the Chinese yuan. (China sold some of its reserves in 2015 and 2016 to stabilize the yuan, but this year it again bought foreign assets to keep the yuan from rising.) This has made China’s currency artificially cheap, creating what is effectively a huge subsidy for Chinese exports to the United States. It also imposes a de facto tax on all United States exports to China.

第二個事實是,貨幣偏差——而不是貿易協議——是美國貿易逆差增長的最重要因素。從1997年到2014年,中國購買了4萬億美元的美國國債和其他資產,以提高美元相對於人民幣的價值。(中國在2015年和2016年出售了部分儲備來穩定人民幣,但今年它再次購買外國資產以防止人民幣升值。)這使得人民幣人為地貶值,相當於在對中國向美國的出口做出巨額補貼。它在事實上還等於對美國出口到中國的所有產品徵稅。

 

China is not the only country doing this. Between 2006 and 2013, central banks in roughly 20 nations including China financed virtually all of America’s trade deficit. Growing United States trade deficits with these countries now account for most of the five million manufacturing jobs — and nearly 90,000 factories — lost in the United States in the past two decades. As my latest research demonstrates, trade with China alone has eliminated 3.4 million jobs in the United States since 2001, affecting every state and congressional district. Notably, the hardest-hit industry was not toys or apparel, but computers and electronic parts — long thought to be a source of America’s competitive advantage. It lost 1.2 million jobs.

中國不是唯一這樣做的國家。2006年至2013年間,包括中國在內的約20個國家的中央銀行的出資幾乎造成了美國的所有貿易逆差。對於過去20年美國流失的500萬個製造業工作崗位,以及將近9萬家工廠,大部分要歸咎於美國對這些國家的貿易逆差增長。正如我最新的研究表明,自2001年以來,僅與中國的貿易已經令美國減少了340萬個工作崗位,影響到每個州和國會區。值得注意的是,受影響最嚴重的行業不是玩具或服裝,而是計算機和電子零件——它們長期以來被認為是美國競爭優勢的源泉。這個領域內失去了120萬個工作崗位。

 

Growing trade with low-wage countries like China has decimated the earnings of 100 million non-college-educated workers in the United States — two-thirds of the work force.

與中國這樣的低工資國家的貿易增長大大削弱了美國一億非大學畢業工人的收入——他們占勞動力的三分之二。

 

And job losses have devastated entire regions of America’s industrial heartland, especially in the upper Midwest. Not surprisingly, this includes some of the once reliably Democratic states that President Trump carried in the last election.

失業摧毀了美國工業中心地帶的大片區域,特別是中西部的北部。上次選舉中,這個地帶一些曾經忠於民主黨的州毫不意外地轉向了川普總統。

 

Although China is no longer officially manipulating the value of its currency, the dollar remains significantly overvalued — in part because China is sitting on more than $3 trillion in foreign assets. The dollar is now overvalued by at least 25 to 30 percent against not just the Chinese yuan but also the Japanese yen and the euro. Notably, the dollar has risen further since Mr. Trump was elected, increasing roughly 6 percent in trade-weighted value since January 2018 alone, which further encumbers domestic manufacturers.

雖然中國不再正式操縱其貨幣的價值,但美元仍然被嚴重高估——部分原因是中國擁有的外國資產超過3萬億美元。美元現在被高估了至少25%至30%,不僅是對人民幣,還有對日元和歐元。值得注意的是,自川普當選以來,美元進一步上漲,僅僅是自2018年1月以來,貿易加權價值就增加了約6%,這進一步阻礙了國內製造商。

 

Unfortunately, currency misalignment can’t be fixed by updating trade deals. It’s a global problem driven largely by continuing foreign demand for United States securities and financial assets. Since 2014, private foreign investment in American financial assets has increased the dollar’s real, trade-weighted value by 20 percent. The dollar must be realigned against not just the Chinese yuan but also against the currencies of countries that have been running chronic trade surpluses for many years.

不幸的是,貨幣偏差無法通過更新貿易協議來解決。這是一個全球問題,主要是由於外國對美國證券和金融資產的持續需求。自2014年以來,對美國金融資產的私人外國投資使美元的實際貿易加權價值增加了20%。美元必須不僅對人民幣調整匯率,還要同那些多年來與美國存在長期貿易順差的國家的貨幣調整匯率。

 

Previous Republican presidents have taken steps to tackle an overvalued dollar. (In 1971, for example, Richard Nixon imposed a temporary import surcharge on all imports; it led to an agreement four months later to lower the dollar’s value.) What’s required is the political will to stand up to powerful actors like Walmart and Apple that benefit from continued currency misalignment. The president should apply leverage on America’s trading partners — a fee on incoming foreign capital, tariff threats or coordinated currency intervention — to realign the dollar.

以前的共和黨總統也曾採取措施解決美元高估的問題。(例如,1971年,理查德·尼克森對所有進口產品徵收臨時進口附加稅;導致四個月後達成協議,降低美元價值。)這需要與沃爾瑪和蘋果等受益於持續貨幣偏差的大公司對抗的政治意志。總統應該對美國的貿易夥伴施加影響力——對湧入的外國資本收費、關稅威脅或協調一致的貨幣干預——以調整美元價值。

 

Congress could try to force the president’s hand, threatening to impose significant taxes on capital inflows to reduce demand for United States financial assets. But the authority to negotiate on currency rests in the hands of the executive.

國會可能會試圖迫使總統採取行動,威脅要對資本流入徵收重稅,以減少對美國金融資產的需求。但貨幣談判的權力掌握在行政部門手中。

 

And until President Trump grasps the severity of the dollar problem, making a “great deal” on trade agreements will matter little for United States manufacturers.

在川普總統理解美元問題的嚴重性之前,就貿易協定達成「大買賣」對美國製造商來說幾乎沒什麼意義。

 

文章連結:https://cn.nytimes.com/opinion/20181026/trump-unfair-trade-china/zh-hant/dual/

 

評論
TOP