| Home |
| China |
| News |
| Finance |
| Technology&Science; |
| Travel |
| Entertainment |
| Comment |
| Special |
| US |
| News |
| Finance&Technology; |
| Entertainment |
| Comment |
| World |
| News |
| Life |
| Comment |
| Video |
| News |
| Life |
|
| Search |
All Rights Reserved
Userful Links
[UPI Asia]
[Reuters]
[Washington Post]
[CNN]
[China Free Press]
[CPJ]
[RSF]
[WPFC ]
[CECC]
[China Digital Times]
[EastSouth..Blog]
[France24]
Userful Links
[UPI Asia]
[Reuters]
[Washington Post]
[CNN]
[China Free Press]
[CPJ]
[RSF]
[WPFC ]
[CECC]
[China Digital Times]
[EastSouth..Blog]
[France24]
by Liang Jing 3月15日《纽约时报》克鲁格曼专栏文章的题目是“跟中国对着干”（Taking on China），矛头直指中国操纵人民币汇率，建议美国对中国商品实行高达25%的惩罚性关税，展开全面贸易战。 Paul Krugman’s column in the New York Times on 15 March was entitled “Taking on China.” taking aim at China’s currency manipulation, it recommended the United States implement punitive tariffs on Chinese goods of up to 25%, initiating a full scale trade war. 克鲁格曼自己对这个主张认真到什么程度，我们无从知道，但有一点是清楚的，这种煽动性的评论，在美国颇有市场，因此至少对他自己是有好处的。我没有想到的是，大摩亚洲主席罗奇，对克鲁格曼的轻率言论竟然十分认真，19日在接受美国电视媒体采访时，对克鲁格曼有关人民币汇率严重低估的观点给予了言辞激烈的反驳，并称美方在人民币汇率问题上的立场有双重标准之嫌。罗奇强调，美国“现在该做的是做好本分，提高储蓄率，而不是抨击中国”。他指出，“美国的贸易赤字关键在于储蓄不足，如果美国人继续挥霍无度，那么任何试图缩减中美贸易平衡的举措都不会收效，充其量只会将顺差转移到其他国家”。 How serious Krugman was about this idea of his we don’t know, but what is clear is that such provocative comments have quite a market in the US and that at least is good for him. What I hadn’t expected was that Morgan Stanley Asia Chairman Stephen Roach, would treat Krugman's thoughtless remarks very seriously, and during an interview on American TV on 19 March rebutted Krugman’s opinion that the yuan was seriously undervalued in fierce terms, saying the US position on the issue of the RMB exchange rate was guilty of double standards. Roach stressed that the US “Now to do is to do their best to increase the savings rate, rather than criticizing China.” He pointed out that “the key to the US trade deficit is its shortage of savings, if Americans continue to spend, then no attempt to reduce the US trade balance initiatives will be effective, and at best will only transfer surplus to other countries.”[1] 罗奇这个观点是对的，不过他回避了国际上对中国的一个新指责，那就是中国利用金融危机和人民币低估，扩大了自己在整个世界贸易的份额，因此压制了全球经济增长。按照这个逻辑，即使不是为了美国一国之利，而是为了全球经济更均衡的复苏，也应该压人民币升值。 This view of Roach’s is correct, but he avoided a new accusation against China on the part of the international community, namely that China is using the financial crisis and its undervalued yuan to expand its share of total world trade, and is thus suppressing global economic growth. According to this logic, even if it is beneficial to a more balanced global economic recovery rather than to the US alone, pressure should be applied to appreciate the yuan. [2] ,[3] 克鲁格曼发表煽动性言论，一个可能的原因是他被温家宝的讲话激怒了。温家宝在会见中外记者时，干脆就不承认人民币低估这个事实，彻底关上了人民币升值的大门。 克鲁格曼可能认为温家宝此举十分无理，美国除了对抗已别无选择。 One possible reason for Krugman making his inflammatory remarks, is that he was angered by Wen Jiabao’s speech. Wen, in a meeting with Chinese and foreign journalists, simply did not admit the fact that the yuan is undervalued, and completely closed the door on yuan appreciation. Krugman may argue that this move of Wen Jiabao’s is very unreasonable, and the US has no choice apart from confrontation. 克鲁格曼的看法有什么错呢？他的第一个错误就在于，对人民币升值，温家宝非不愿也，实不敢也。深知中国的罗奇对此心中有数，而傲慢的克鲁格曼好像全然无知。 叶檀在最近的两篇评论中表达了这样一个判断: 人民币升值的“时间窗口已过。现在升值，自取其辱，还自取灭亡。” 这代表了我的想法。 Where did Krugman go wrong? His first mistake was that Wen, far from being reluctant to appreciate the yuan, simply does not dare. Roach, who has a good understanding of China, grasps this, but the arrogant Krugman seems totally ignorant. In a recent two op-eds, Ye Tan expressed it as follows: the “window of opportunity” of RMB appreciation has passed. Appreciating would be both humiliating and self-defeating.” This represents my views as well. [4], [5] 中国现在的经济失衡和财富分配不公达到什么程度，是一般外人难以想象的。在这种情况下，大幅度升值会导致什么后果？叶檀认为“先是资产泡沫崩溃，而后是银行呆坏帐大幅攀升。就像1990年代的日本和1997年以后的亚洲四小龙一样”。我要补充的一点是，中国还有比四小龙更可怕的致命弱点，就是穷人太多，贫富太悬殊。 The extent of China’s current economic imbalance and inequitable distribution of wealth is difficult for most outsiders to imagine. Under such circumstances, what would be the consequences of a significant appreciation? Ye Tan argues that “First, the collapse of asset bubbles, and then a sharp rise in bad bank debts. Just like Japan in the 1990s, and the four little Asian dragons post 1997.” I would add that China still has an Achilles more terrible than that of the four little dragons, that is, too many poor people, and too great a gap between rich and poor. 叶檀在另外一篇评论中报告，“清华大学教授白重恩公布自己的研究发现，中国五项社会保险法定缴费之和相当于工资水平的40%，有的地区甚至达50%，这个比例超过了世界上绝大多数国家，在181个国家中排名第一，约为‘金砖四国’其他三国平均水平的2倍，是北欧五国的3倍，是G7国家的2.8倍，是东亚邻国和邻近地区(中国香港和中国台湾)的 4.6倍”。简单的说，就是中国政府以社会福利的名义征税最多，而人民得到的福利却最少。尽管如此，中国“社保基金缺口达到10万亿元人民币”，农民工缴了税费，仍然没有希望享受福利，政府官员挥霍无度，把钱都糟蹋了。 In a separate op-ed Ye Tan reports that “Tsinghua University Professor Bai Chongen published his research findings that the sum of China’s five statutory social insurance contributions is equal to 40% of wages, and in some areas even up to 50%, a proportion exceeding that of most countries in the world, ranking the highest of 181 countries, and about double the average for the three other “BRIC” countries some 3 times the five Nordic countries, 2.8 times the G7 countries, and 4.6 times neighboring East Asian countries and regions (China, Hong Kong and China Taiwan).” Simply put, in China, the taxes collected by the Government in the name of social welfare are the most, while the welfare the people receive is the least. Nevertheless, China’s “social security funding gap is reaching 10 trillion yuan,” rural migrant workers pay tax, with no hope of enjoying any welfare, while government officials are extravagant, squandering money. [6] 在这样一种财富分配结构和社会保障安排下，人民币大幅升值，意味着中国政府和富人的资产大幅升值，而穷人，特别是农民的资产，包括劳动力，大幅贬值，因为为出口服务的就业会大幅下降。 中国社会将极不稳定，极可能引发大规模的资本外逃。 Given this wealth distribution structure and such social security arrangements, sharply appreciating the yuan would mean sharply appreciating the assets of the Chinese government and of the rich; while for the poor, especially the peasants, their assets including their labour, would be substantially devalued, because their employment in exports and services would be substantially reduced. Chinese society would be extremely unstable and large-scale capital flight would be likely to be triggered. 因此，克鲁格曼的另外一个错误，就是他对中国发生全面危机可能对美国和世界带来的后果完全没有概念，而且也不在乎。 Thus, the other error made by Krugman is neither to knowing nor care what the consequences of an overall crisis in China may be to the US and the world. 克鲁格曼的想法可能基于这样一个信念，不论中国出现什么样的危机和动乱，美国都能挺过来，而垮台的一定是专制中国。问题是，克鲁格曼能用这个逻辑说服奥巴马吗？ His thinking may be based on his faith that regardless of what kind of crisis and unrest happens in China, the US can cope with it, and it will of course be authoritarian China that would collapse. The issue is, can Krugman persuade Barack Obama with this logic? 那么，罗奇的逻辑是否就没问题了呢？我认为也有问题，那就是他相信中国有能力实现经济结构的转型，有能力扩大内需。我认为相当充分的迹象表明，中国现在的政治领导人是一群机会主义者，他们不可能完成这一艰巨使命，中国将不可避免爆发一场严重的经济和社会危机。美国帮不了中国人的忙，但美国现在必须认真地为中国各种可能的急剧转变，包括全面向左转的可能性，进行评估，未雨绸缪。 Well, is there any problem with Roach’s logic? I think there is—he believes China is capable of achieving an economic structural transformation, of expanding domestic demand. I would argue that some pretty strong indications are that China’s current political leaders are a bunch of opportunists, who cannot accomplish this difficult mission, and a serious economic and social crisis will inevitably erupt in China. The US can’t help the Chinese people, but it must now seriously assess and plan ahead for possible rapid changes in China, including the possibility of full turn to the left. * Liang Jing, “Kelugeman cuo zai hechu” [Where did Krugman get it wrong?], Xin shiji, 22 March 2010 [梁京：“克鲁格曼错在何处？”，新世纪，2010年3月 22日 (<http://www.newcenturynews.com/Article/gd/201003/20100324112104.html>here).]. [1] Zhu Zhouliang, “Luoqi tongpi Kelugeman: renminbi digu dacuotecuo” [Roach upbraids Krugman: theory of undervalued of yuan completely wrong], Shanghai zhengjuan bao, 22 March 2010 [朱周良：“罗奇痛批克鲁格曼：人民币低估论大错特错”，上海证券报，2010年3月 22日 (<http://finance.qq.com/a/20100320/000710.htm>here).]. [2] Martin Wolf, “Zhong De lianshou xiaoruo quanqiu jingji?” [China and Germany unite to weaken the world economy?], 22 March 2010 [马丁•沃尔夫： “中德联手削弱全球经济？”, Financial Times (Chinese ed.,) ，2010年3月 22日 (<http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001031809>here).]. [3] Martin Wolf, “China and Germany unite to weaken the world economy,” Financial Times, 22 March 2010 [<http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001031809/en>here]. [4] Ye Tan, “Jiaxi yu shengzhi: ziben shichang beigongsheying” [Interest rates and appreciation: false alarm in capital markets], Meiri jingji xinwen, 16 March 2010 [叶檀： “加息与升值：资本市场杯弓蛇影”，每日经济新闻，2010年3月 16日 (<http://yetanyetan.blog.sohu.com/146133737.html>here).]. [5] Ye Tan, “Meiguo ba paomo tuigei Zhongguo” [US pushes it bubbles on to China], Nanfang renwu zhoukan, 26 February 2010 [叶檀： “美国把泡沫推给中国”，南方人物周刊，2010年2月 26日 (<http://yetanyetan.blog.sohu.com/146310525.html>here).]. [6] Ye Tan, “Gao shuishou di fuli jidai gaibian” [High taxes and low welfare must be changed], Nanfang dushi bao, 13 March 2010 [叶檀：“高税收低福利亟待改变”，南方都市报，2010年3月 13日 (<http://yetanyetan.blog.sohu.com/146133577.html>here).]. © Copyright 2010 by Boxun News Top of Page |
|
|