0 GP
[克魯曼專欄]中國新年 (原文載於10/01/01)
作者:首領八奇│2010-01-12 16:09:42│巴幣:0│人氣:515
Chinese New Year
中國新年
It’s the season when pundits traditionally make predictions about the year ahead.
Mine concerns international economics: I predict that 2010 will be the year of China.
And not in a good way.
現在是專家們預測新年走勢的時季,而我的焦點放在國際經濟上:
我預測2010年會是屬於中國的一年,不過不是好的方面。
Actually, the biggest problems with China involve climate change.
But today I want to focus on currency policy.
事實上跟中國有關的最大問題還包括氣候變遷,不過今天我想專注於貨幣政策。
China has become a major financial and trade power.
But it doesn’t act like other big economies.
Instead, it follows a mercantilist policy, keeping its trade surplus artificially high.
And in today’s depressed world, that policy is, to put it bluntly, predatory.
中國已成為經濟與貿易的主要強權之一,可是她並未採行和其他大經濟體一樣的行動,
取而代之的是採用重商主義政策,刻意讓貿易順差維持極高水準。
追根究底的說,在現在深陷衰退的世界裡,他們的政策就是掠奪他人。
Here’s how it works: Unlike the dollar, the euro or the yen, whose values fluctuate freely,
China’s currency is pegged by official policy at about 6.8 yuan to the dollar.
At this exchange rate, Chinese manufacturing has a large cost advantage over its rivals,
leading to huge trade surpluses.
介紹一下這政策運作的方式:不同於美元、歐元、日圓等讓貨幣價格自由波動,
人民幣是由官方的政策限制價格的,大約維持在6.8人民幣兌1美元。
這種匯率下,中國製造業比對手擁有巨大成本優勢,也擁有大量貿易順差。
Under normal circumstances, the inflow of dollars from those surpluses would push up the
value of China’s currency, unless it was offset by private investors heading the other way.
And private investors are trying to get into China, not out of it.
But China’s government restricts capital inflows, even as it buys up dollars and parks them
abroad, adding to a $2 trillion-plus hoard of foreign exchange reserves.
一般情形下,貿易順差所流進的美元會推升人民幣價格,除非被私人投資戶轉往他處投資,
不過現在私人投資戶是試著進入而非逃離中國。
但是中國嚴格限制資本流入,甚至買進美元再存於海外,增加了2億的外匯存底。
This policy is good for China’s export-oriented state-industrial complex, not so good for Chinese consumers.
But what about the rest of us?
中國這項政策,對懷有出口導向與國有產業的情結有利,對中國消費者則有害。那麼對我們呢?
In the past, China’s accumulation of foreign reserves, many of which were invested in American
bonds, was arguably doing us a favor by keeping interest rates low
— although what we did with those low interest rates was mainly to inflate a housing bubble.
But right now the world is awash in cheap money, looking for someplace to go.
Short-term interest rates are close to zero; long-term interest rates are higher, but only
because investors expect the zero-rate policy to end some day.
China’s bond purchases make little or no difference.
過去中國累積的外匯存底多用於買下美國公債,此舉應會幫忙我們維持低利率
──雖然我們把低利率的好處都拿去吹房市泡沫了。
但現在全世界滿是便宜資金,正等著拿去投資。
短期利率趨近於零,長期利率高一點,但只不過是因為投資人預期零利率政策終有結束之日。
中國買不買公債根本無足輕重。
Meanwhile, that trade surplus drains much-needed demand away from a depressed world
economy.
My back-of the-envelope calculations suggest that for the next couple of years Chinese
mercantilism may end up reducing U.S. employment by around 1.4 million jobs.
與此同時,中國的貿易順差排擠了蕭條全球的急切需求。
根據我粗略的估算,中國的重商主義在接下來數年會導致減少約140萬名美國員工的工作機會。
The Chinese refuse to acknowledge the problem.
Recently Wen Jiabao, the prime minister, dismissed foreign complaints:
“On one hand, you are asking for the yuan to appreciate, and on the other hand, you are
taking all kinds of protectionist measures.”
Indeed: other countries are taking (modest) protectionist measures precisely because
China refuses to let its currency rise.
And more such measures are entirely appropriate.
中國堅決否認有這問題,最近國務院總理溫家寶駁斥了外界的抱怨,他說
「一方面要我們升值人民幣,一方面自己卻採用了一大堆保護主義手段。」
確實如此,其他國家採用了(溫和的)保護手段,因為中國拒絕升值人民幣。
在這情形下,就算他國採用更多的保護手段也是十分適當的。
Or are they? I usually hear two reasons for not confronting China over its policies.
Neither holds water.
真是如此嗎?我常聽到兩個不要對抗中國政策的理由,但兩個都說不通。
First, there’s the claim that we can’t confront the Chinese because they would wreak havoc
with the U.S. economy by dumping their hoard of dollars.
This is all wrong, and not just because in so doing the Chinese would inflict large losses on
themselves.
The larger point is that the same forces that make Chinese mercantilism so damaging right
now also mean that China has little or no financial leverage.
第一個理由聲稱若我們對抗中國,中國就會大賣特賣美元,導致美國經濟的巨大浩劫。
這大錯特錯,不單是因為這會同樣對中國造成巨大損失,而且中國的重商主義傷害力相當大,
意味著幾乎沒有財務槓桿可以操作。
Again, right now the world is awash in cheap money.
So if China were to start selling dollars, there’s no reason to think it would significantly raise
U.S. interest rates.
It would probably weaken the dollar against other currencies — but that would be good, not
bad, for U.S. competitiveness and employment.
So if the Chinese do dump dollars, we should send them a thank-you note.
再說一次,現在全世界滿是便宜資金,所以若中國開始拋售美元,沒理由認為這會顯著的推高
美國利率。拋售美元也許會讓美元面對他國貨幣轉為弱勢,但這對美國的競爭力和就業而言只
有好沒有壞。因此中國真的這麼做,我們應該贈與他們感謝狀才對。
Second, there’s the claim that protectionism is always a bad thing, in any circumstances.
If that’s what you believe, however, you learned Econ 101 from the wrong people — because
when unemployment is high and the government can’t restore full employment, the usual rules
don’t apply.
第二個理由宣稱保護主義不管在什麼情況下,都絕對是惡的。如果你如此深信,
表示你讀經濟學時跟錯老師了,因為在失業率極高而政府無法恢復全面就業時,
一般的規則就無法適用。
Let me quote from a classic paper by the late Paul Samuelson, who more or less created
modern economics:
“With employment less than full ... all the debunked mercantilistic arguments” — that is, claims
that nations who subsidize their exports effectively steal jobs from other countries
— “turn out to be valid.” He then went on to argue that persistently misaligned exchange rates
create “genuine problems for free-trade apologetics.”
The best answer to these problems is getting exchange rates back to where they ought to be.
But that’s exactly what China is refusing to let happen.
我引一段保羅薩謬森的經典論文,此君或多或少創造了現代經濟理論。
「當就業率低於完全就業水準時,唯有卸下重商主義假面具的理論,才具有可信度。」
也就是說,大力資助出口的國家,就是從他國竊取工作機會。
薩謬森又主張頻繁操縱匯率,「會對自由貿易產生大問題。」這問題的最佳解答,就是
讓匯率順其自然波動,但這正是中國極力避免的。
The bottom line is that Chinese mercantilism is a growing problem, and the victims of that
mercantilism have little to lose from a trade confrontation.
So I’d urge China’s government to reconsider its stubbornness.
Otherwise, the very mild protectionism it’s currently complaining about will be the start of
something much bigger.
中國的重商主義是日益嚴重的課題,而重商主義的受害者在這場貿易衝突裡也已再無可失,
因此我敦請中國政府再三思量這份固執。否則中國所抱怨的溫和保護主義,只是更大風暴的
開端而已。
引用網址:https://home.gamer.com.tw/TrackBack.php?sn=979100
Some rights reserved. 姓名標示-非商業性 2.5 台灣