Those who spread the “loss of loss” miscalculated the abacus. The Chinese economy has great resilience and potential. It is fully capable and confident to promote higher economic development through the implementation of a higher level of opening up and domestic demand, to hedge the impact of Sino-US trade frictions, and to achieve a stable and far-reaching Chinese economy.
There are always some people in the United States who are worried about the so-called “huge trade deficit” between China and the United States. They are arguing that “the United States loses 500 billion US dollars every year” and “the United States has lost millions of manufacturing jobs.” On the side, and therefore claimed that the United States is a victim of Sino-US trade. Over the past year, this “deficiency theory” has repeatedly become one of the so-called basis for the United States to repeatedly oppose China’s sincerity and frequently impose extreme pressure on China.
The United States is the world’s number one economic power and the maker of world trade rules. If the United States is a “lower loser”, does it mean that the rules set by the rule makers are harmful to others? If so, it would not be a strange thing. Whether in global trade or in Sino-US bilateral trade, the United States is not only a victim, but a very cheap one. This point is clear to the relevant American industry, consumers and economists.
The huge US trade deficit is not born in China, nor will it end in China. On the one hand, excessive consumption, insufficient savings, and huge fiscal deficits are the root causes of the US trade deficit. On the other hand, the United States also uses the US dollar as the main means of payment for international trade and the status of the reserve currency, and through the growing trade deficit, through the US dollar. Returning to purchase US Treasury bonds to obtain a large amount of cheap capital for investment in high-tech fields and become the biggest beneficiary of economic globalization. Carmen Reinhart, a professor of international finance at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, believes that the United States has no reason to accuse those countries with trade surpluses. His views represent the views of international mainstream economists.
The trade deficit with China is only an appearance and does not reflect the truth of the US commercial interests in China. The world economy has already entered the era of global value chains. From the perspective of production, the United States is at the high end of the global industrial chain and value chain, controlling patents, core components, R&D design, marketing and other high value-added links, making huge profits. The example of an Apple phone is widely known. If all the surpluses are counted in the exporting countries of the terminal products, it is obviously impossible to objectively reflect the value distribution in the trade. In fact, since 2011, in order to show the true profitability of a country in the value chain, the WTO and the OECD advocated the international production from the perspective of “global manufacturing” and introduced the “trade value added accounting” method. It is a pity that the United States has always adopted the attitude of “co-ordination, non-conformity and abandonment” to multilateral institutions such as the WTO. Even if it is a scientific method, it will not be possible to support it.
At present, US-funded enterprises have annual sales revenue of 700 billion US dollars and profits of more than 50 billion US dollars. This is the embodiment of American companies sharing the opportunities and achievements brought about by China’s development. American prices are cheap and well known. Over the years, when many central banks were busy suppressing inflation levels, the US inflation level has remained below the target of 2%. It is the Sino-US trade that allows Chinese goods of high quality and low price to enter the United States, increasing the well-being of consumers.
As Robert Wright, a well-known American writer of Time magazine, pointed out in his book The Non-Zero and the Ages – The Logic of Human Destiny, the prosperity of human destiny must be understood from the “zero sum” era to the “non- Zero and “age.” In the past 40 years, the scale of Sino-US trade has grown by more than 230 times. If it is not a win-win situation, but a “zero sum” of one party’s victimization, how can such a change be made?
China has always been a big importer, and China has opened its doors to the world. Today China has become the largest trading partner of more than 120 countries and regions. China has never pursued a trade surplus and sincerely hopes to expand the import of competitive products from the United States. US agencies have analyzed that if the export restrictions on civilian high-tech products are relaxed, the US trade deficit with China can be reduced by about 35%. Can you blame someone for refusing to export products that have advantages?
The trade deficit with China has caused the loss of jobs in the US, and it is also ignorant. For many years, the mainstream explanation in the American academic community is that the loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States stems from the adjustment of its own economic structure. As a result of increased production automation and robotic investment, manufacturing productivity has increased. Foreign trade will cause the elimination and transfer of inferior industries, but it will also bring about the expansion of advantageous industries, thus realizing the upgrading of industrial structure. Research by scholars such as the University of California found that instead of losing employment in foreign trade, the United States has gained more high-paying jobs.
These simple facts and logics have long proved that the trade deficit and the loss of manufacturing jobs can not support the “loss of loss” argument. Sticking to the “loss theory” of the United States may temporarily shift domestic contradictions, but over time, it will make the American people a real victim. In April this year, a survey conducted by the National Association of Business Economics on the US business environment found that three-quarters of the commodity production companies surveyed were negatively affected by recent tariffs, increasing costs and urging half of them to improve. selling price. American consumers, farmers, and businesses have become victims of trade frictions provoked by the United States, not victims of China’s “unfair competition”.
Anyone with a discerning eye can see that the so-called “loss of loss” is far from being as simple as playing sad cards and having a mouthful of addiction. Behind the United States “strongly speaking for the new words” is another famous. Only those who spread this wrong argument mistyped the abacus. The Chinese economy has great resilience and potential. It is fully capable and confident to promote higher economic development through the implementation of a higher level of opening up and domestic demand, to hedge the impact of Sino-US trade frictions, and to achieve a stable and far-reaching Chinese economy.
The point of disagreement with the facts, untenable, and detrimental to others is repeated over and over again. People who are said are not tired, and those who listen are tired.
This article Source: People’s Daily, the original title “Who is in the “new words for the new words” (the bell) – “the United States suffers from loss” can rest
Charity In China Reported
Scan Alipay QR Code
And we also accept the donation of Bitcoin.
Our Bitcoin address : 16ih3dGgfNf3TtrwgKzMnYbtixrQqEFk14
Scan QR Code
Thank you for your love