中美贸易战--双输局面时 输得少的就是赢家

            中国就是赢家 要给特朗普一个下台阶的机会

中美贸易战的范围很广， 背景很深， 即使现在国内外有不少专家和主流媒体都在分析， 但没有一个能说得很清楚的， 所以对我们这个层次的人更不能够全面说的清楚。

我就说些我的结论性的话：

1. 中美之间的贸易战打到最后双方都不做生意了， 对中国又咋了？我想没啥了不起， 中国对美出口总金额约5000亿美元， 只占中国GDP11.7万亿美元的4%。 对中国来说小菜一碟。 更何况， 对美国出口的商品我们还有不少可以出口到其它国家。 而美国卖给中国的大豆就得烂在自己的土地上了， 出口到中国的波音飞机占波音总出口金额的将近1/5，难道还有日本印度台湾能帮美国消化掉？

2. 现在中国可能是全世界唯一一个门类齐全的各种自给自足产业的国家，美国高科技虽然世界第一， 但制造业的大多数都是由其它国家分担， 它不买中国的， 难道要高价去买日本欧洲的？

3. 中国每年的国际贸易顺差约为3500亿美元（记忆， 可能有误），中美不贸易了， 在美国获得的约2000亿美元的顺差没了， 但台湾对大陆的贸易顺差是1000亿美元， 我们只要把台湾对我们的这1000亿美元顺差抹掉， 就还是可以保持2500亿美元的国际贸易顺差， 而台湾赚不到我们的钱， 也就没有钱去买美国的货物了，间接也加大了美国贸易逆差的数字。 这个方法还可以用在日本对我国的顺差上。

美国当前的主要问题是他们的产品在国际贸易市场上的竞争力下降， 下降的原因是产品生产成本过高（为的是保持美国人的高薪高生活水平），不得不把很多制造业转移到其它国家。特朗普要改变这个状况是无可非议的， 因为美国总统当然要为美国的利益服务， 但他不去考虑如何提高美国制造业的竞争力， 而是通过用金融， 贸易的手段来压其他国家， 把利润让给美国， 这就做错了， 更何况以当前美国的国力要来压中国让利给他， 可能是做不到的， 因为中国已经不仅不是1949年以前的中国， 也不是当年美国可以上银河号搜查中国船舰和导弹打中国南斯拉夫大使馆时候的中国了。

美国人的思维逻辑是你退一步， 它接着又来下一步紧逼， 去年佛罗里达两国领导会谈后， 中国做了很多让步， 例如答应了未来几年购买美国1000亿美元的商品（包括350亿美元的波音飞机， 和400多亿美元的阿拉斯加的天然气和石油）， 也配合了美国在联合国通过了对朝鲜的制裁， 特朗普高兴得忘怀了， 马上就进一步来了一个对台旅游法（这已经触犯了中国的底线）， 和对中国的征收高关税的进一步蛮横做法。 但他碰到了铁布衫的反击， 中国马上就会见了朝鲜最高领导， 而且在贸易问题上争锋相对。

如今是美国方面认真反省， 调整策略的时候了， 只要美国改变政策， 中国应该给他们一个下台阶的机会， 让特朗普保全一点面子。

我们有些网友对当前中美贸易战有不理解的地方是完全可以理解的， 但要以二毛子的身份来指责中国现在是义和团行为， 那就不是理解问题了。

================

我把摩根斯坦利（亚洲）前董事长, 现在是耶鲁大学高级讲师 Stephen Roach 最近发表的一篇题为 

“U.S. Needs China More Than China Needs the U.S. ”（美国对中国的依赖大于中国对美国的依赖）的文章（发表于4月6日 的 Bluumberg-- 彭博社）摘编译如下， 供各位看官参考

$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.

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 出口在中国GDP中所占份额已由2007年的37%下降到目前的不足20%, 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.

Not so with the United States. The U.S. depends heavily on China for providing the low-cost goods 美国大力依靠中国提供低成本货物，以便让收入拮据消费者维持生计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.

And, of course, the U.S. depends on China to provide funding for its budget deficits.美国依赖中国资金来应对预算赤字 It is the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasury securities中国是美国国债的最大持有者 – 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.

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美国缺少国内储蓄. 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.

Lacking in savings at home, and wanting to consume and grow, the U.S. must import surplus foreign saving from abroad美国不得不进口外国盈余的储蓄 – and run massive balance-of-payments and trade deficits to import this capital. 并承担巨额贸易支付差额和贸易赤字，以便进口资本 In 2017, the United States had merchandise trade deficits with 102 nations美国与102个国家有商品贸易赤字! 

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.

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.

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.至少40%的双边贸易部平衡反映了零部件的供应链效果，这些零部件不是产自中国，只是在中国装配 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国际上根据各自的优势进行分工能解释这种逆差的比例，但在政治舞台上这种说法无足轻重，没人爱听, that argument doesn’t carry much weight in the political arena.

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低储蓄的美国经济做不了什么事，只能承受贸易逆差. 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抨击: protectionism in the face of widening trade deficits. Courtesy of Trump tariffs, China’s deficit will now be distributed to the other 101 nations对华贸易赤字将被转移到其他101个国家，这些国家也造成了美国多变货物贸易的赤字 that make up America’s multilateral merchandise trade deficit. Relative to China, these are higher-cost producers相对与中国来说，这些国家生产成本更高, meaning the likely response to this retaliation will have the effect of taxing the very families Trump insists he is protecting.对中国的报复，其效果可能是：然特朗普要保护的美国家庭承受更大税赋

In my 2014 book, I present estimates of the benefits of low-cost Chinese production低成本中国产品的好处, 对比中国的生产价格与美国进口的其他10个最大进口国的价格comparing its manufacturing compensation with that of the other top-ten sources of US imports. Chinese labor input was just $2.30 an hour 中国的劳动力投入只有2.3美元/小时，而排名2-10的外国供应商是大约26美元/小时 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特朗普的对华关税将事实上将美国的进口转向那些高成本制造商 — with huge potential consequences on the purchasing power of beleaguered围困的American consumers.

Three things need to be addressed to avoid this nightmare:要干的三件事

One, communication对话交流: 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.

Two, market access市场准入: 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.

Three, intellectual property知识产权: 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区分 must be made between contractual sharing合同规定的分享 of operating systems by partners in commercially negotiated joint ventures and outright theft, coercion and cyberhacking公然盗窃、强制、黑客共计. In today’s knowledge-based world, there can be no tolerance of these latter infractions.

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.