CNN重磅文章：中國(guó)不是敵人  美國(guó)政府正為愚蠢買單
On May 27, CNN published an opinion article written by American economist and public policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs titled China is not the source of our economic problems — corporate greed is.
 
In it, the author elaborated on the falsehood of blaming China as the "enemy", sharply pointed out how the trade tension was created out of the greed of Washington polices, and that "there will be no winners in such a conflict".
 
In a word, he said the US should find its own way out, using homegrown solutions, rather than finding scapegoat. 
 
Let's take a look at the article ↓↓
 
1
中國(guó)不是敵人
 
China is not an enemy. It is a nation trying to raise its living standards through education, international trade, infrastructure investment, and improved technologies. In short, it is doing what any country should do when confronted with the historical reality of being poor and far behind more powerful countries. Yet the Trump administration is now aiming to stop China's development, which could prove to be disastrous for both the United States and the entire world.
 
中國(guó)不是敵人。這是一個(gè)努力通過(guò)教育、國(guó)際貿(mào)易、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施投資和技術(shù)改進(jìn)來(lái)提高國(guó)民生活水平的國(guó)家。面對(duì)貧窮和落后于強(qiáng)國(guó)的歷史現(xiàn)實(shí)，中國(guó)在做任何國(guó)家都會(huì)做的事。但美國(guó)政府試圖阻止中國(guó)發(fā)展，這對(duì)美國(guó)和全球都可能是災(zāi)難性的。
 
 
China is being made a scapegoat for rising inequality in the United States. While US trade relations with China have been mutually beneficial over the years, some US workers have been left behind, notably Midwestern factory workers facing competition due to rising productivity and comparatively low (though rising) labor costs in China. Instead of blaming China for this normal phenomenon of market competition, we should be taxing the soaring corporate profits of our own multinational corporations and using the revenues to help working-class households, rebuild crumbling infrastructure, promote new job skills and invest in cutting-edge science and technology.
 
中國(guó)被迫成為了美國(guó)不平等發(fā)展的替罪羊。多年來(lái)美中貿(mào)易關(guān)系一直互惠互利，但由于中國(guó)生產(chǎn)效率提高、勞動(dòng)力成本較低，一些美國(guó)工人競(jìng)爭(zhēng)不過(guò)。這是市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)正?，F(xiàn)象，我們不應(yīng)為此指責(zé)中國(guó)，而應(yīng)對(duì)利潤(rùn)飆升的美國(guó)跨國(guó)公司征稅，用這些錢去幫助工薪家庭、重建破舊基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施、培訓(xùn)新就業(yè)技能并向高新技術(shù)科技領(lǐng)域投資。
 
 
We should understand that China is merely trying to make up for lost time after a very long period of geopolitical setbacks and related economic failures. While China has seen incredible growth in the past four decades, the legacy of more than a century of poverty, instability, invasion and foreign threats still looms large. Chinese leaders would like to get things right this time, and that means they are unwilling to bow to the United States or other Western powers again.
 
我們應(yīng)該認(rèn)識(shí)到，中國(guó)遭遇了太久的地緣政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)挫折，如今只是在努力彌補(bǔ)。過(guò)去40年里中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)高速增長(zhǎng)，但曾經(jīng)一個(gè)多世紀(jì)的貧困、動(dòng)蕩、入侵和外部勢(shì)力所遺留的問(wèn)題仍在。這一次，中國(guó)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人想把事情做好，這意味著他們不愿再屈從于美國(guó)或其他西方國(guó)家。
 
 
China is now the second-largest economy in the world, when GDP is measured at market prices. Yet it is a country still in the process of catching up from poverty. In 1980, according to IMF data, China's GDP per capita was a mere 2.5 percent of the United States, and by 2018 had reached only 15.3 percent of the US level. 
 
如果按市場(chǎng)價(jià)格計(jì)算國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值，中國(guó)如今是第二大經(jīng)濟(jì)體，但它仍處于擺脫貧困、向前追趕的過(guò)程中。1980年時(shí)中國(guó)人均GDP僅為美國(guó)的2.5%，到2018年也只上升到美國(guó)的15.3%。


2
中國(guó)“竊取”技術(shù)？想法太簡(jiǎn)單
 
China has roughly followed the same development strategy as Japan, Korea and Singapore before it. From an economic standpoint, it is not doing anything particularly unusual for a country that is playing catch up. The constant US refrain that China "steals" technologies is highly simplistic.
 
中國(guó)的發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略與之前的日本、韓國(guó)、新加坡等差不多。從經(jīng)濟(jì)視角看，中國(guó)目前所做的與任何處于追趕中的國(guó)家并無(wú)不同。美國(guó)總說(shuō)中國(guó)“竊取”技術(shù)，這種看法過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單化。
 
Countries that are lagging behind upgrade their technologies in many ways, through study, imitation, purchases, mergers, foreign investments, extensive use of off-patent knowledge and, yes, copying. And with any fast-changing technologies, there are always running battles over intellectual property. That's true even among US companies today — this kind of competition is simply a part of the global economic system. Technology leaders know they shouldn't count on keeping their lead through protection, but through continued innovation.
 
落后國(guó)家會(huì)通過(guò)多種方式升級(jí)技術(shù)，比如學(xué)習(xí)、模仿、購(gòu)買、并購(gòu)、投資、大量使用專利保護(hù)到期的知識(shí)甚至借鑒。對(duì)于高速發(fā)展的科學(xué)技術(shù)來(lái)說(shuō)，圍繞知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的爭(zhēng)奪總是不可避免，美國(guó)公司之間也是如此——這種競(jìng)爭(zhēng)只是全球經(jīng)濟(jì)體系的一部分。任何行家都知道不能靠保護(hù)來(lái)保持技術(shù)領(lǐng)先，而是要依靠持續(xù)創(chuàng)新。


The United States relentlessly adopted British technologies in the early 19th century. And when any country wants to close a technology gap, it recruits know-how from abroad. The US ballistic missile program, as it is well known, was built with the help of former Nazi rocket scientists recruited to the United States after World War II.
 
19世紀(jì)早期，美國(guó)不斷地采用英國(guó)技術(shù)。一旦有國(guó)家想縮小技術(shù)差距，美國(guó)就從海外招募相關(guān)專家。二戰(zhàn)后美國(guó)招聘了前納粹火箭科學(xué)家?guī)椭M建了有名的彈道導(dǎo)彈項(xiàng)目。
 
 
If China were a less populous Asian country, say like South Korea, with a little more than 50 million people, it would simply be hailed by the United States as a great development success story — which it is. But because it is so big, China refutes America's pretensions to run the world. The United States, after all, is a mere 4.2 percent of the world's population, less than a fourth of China's. The truth is that neither country is in a position to dominate the world today, as technologies and know-how are spreading more quickly across the globe than ever before.
 
如果中國(guó)是一個(gè)人口較少的亞洲國(guó)家，比如說(shuō)韓國(guó)，人口只有五千萬(wàn)多一點(diǎn)，那么它將被美國(guó)譽(yù)為一個(gè)發(fā)展成功的案例（當(dāng)然中國(guó)也確實(shí)成功）。但中國(guó)的規(guī)模如此之大，何況它還駁斥了美國(guó)妄想統(tǒng)治世界的要求。畢竟，美國(guó)僅占世界人口的4.2%，不到中國(guó)人口的四分之一。實(shí)際上，由于技術(shù)和人才在全球的傳播速度比以往任何時(shí)候都快，沒有一個(gè)國(guó)家可以稱霸當(dāng)今世界。
 
3
單方面挑起貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)是錯(cuò)誤的
 
Trade with China provides the United States with low-cost consumer goods and increasingly high-quality products. It also causes job losses in sectors such as manufacturing that compete directly with China. That is how trade works. To accuse China of unfairness in this is wrong — plenty of American companies have reaped the benefits of manufacturing in China or exporting goods there. And US consumers enjoy higher living standards as a result of China's low-cost goods. The US and China should continue to negotiate and develop improved rules for bilateral and multilateral trade instead of stoking a trade war with one-sided threats and over-the-top accusations.
 
與中國(guó)的貿(mào)易為美國(guó)提供了低成本的消費(fèi)品和越來(lái)越高質(zhì)量的產(chǎn)品。這也會(huì)導(dǎo)致美國(guó)制造業(yè)工作機(jī)會(huì)的流失，因?yàn)橹圃鞓I(yè)直接面臨和中國(guó)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。但貿(mào)易就是這樣運(yùn)作的。指責(zé)中國(guó)在這方面不公平是錯(cuò)誤的——許多美國(guó)公司已經(jīng)從中國(guó)制造業(yè)或出口到那邊的商品中獲益。由于中國(guó)的低成本產(chǎn)品，美國(guó)消費(fèi)者享受著更高的生活水平。中美兩國(guó)應(yīng)繼續(xù)雙邊和多邊貿(mào)易談判，并制定完善的規(guī)則，而不是以單方面威脅和無(wú)端指責(zé)來(lái)挑起貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)。

 
The most basic lesson of trade theory, practice and policy is not to stop trade — which would lead to falling living standards, economic crisis and conflict. Instead, we should share the benefits of economic growth so that the winners who benefit compensate the losers.
 
貿(mào)易理論、實(shí)踐和政策的最基本的教訓(xùn)是不要停止貿(mào)易——這將導(dǎo)致生活水平下降、經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)和沖突。相反，我們應(yīng)該分享經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的好處，共同發(fā)展。
 
Yet under American capitalism, which has long strayed from the cooperative spirit of the New Deal era, today's winners flat-out reject sharing their winnings. As a result of this lack of sharing, American politics are fraught with conflicts over trade. Greed comprehensively dominates Washington policies.
 
然而，在長(zhǎng)期背離新政時(shí)代合作精神的美國(guó)資本主義下，今天的贏家堅(jiān)決拒絕分享他們的利益。由于缺乏共享，美國(guó)的貿(mào)易政策充滿了爭(zhēng)議。貪婪全面支配著華盛頓的政策。
 
4
美國(guó)真正的敵人是自己的大公司
 
The real battle is not with China but with America's own giant companies, many of which are raking in fortunes while failing to pay their own workers' decent wages. America's business leaders and the mega-rich push for tax cuts, more monopoly power and offshoring — anything to make a bigger profit — while rejecting any policies to make American society fairer.
 
美國(guó)真正的敵人不是中國(guó)，而是它自己的大公司。這些大公司中的許多人沒有給自己的工人支付體面的工資，反而在攫取財(cái)富。美國(guó)的商界領(lǐng)袖和超級(jí)富豪們都在鼓吹減稅、擴(kuò)大壟斷、離岸外包等任何能獲取更大利潤(rùn)的事，同時(shí)拒絕任何使美國(guó)社會(huì)更加公平的政策。
 
Trump is lashing out against China, ostensibly believing that it will once again bow to a Western power. It is willfully trying to crush successful companies like Huawei by changing the rules of international trade abruptly and unilaterally. China has been playing by Western rules for the past 40 years, gradually catching up the way that America's Asian allies did in the past. Now the United States is trying to pull the rug out from under China by launching a new Cold War.
 
美國(guó)政府正在猛烈抨擊中國(guó)，一廂情愿地認(rèn)為中國(guó)將再次向西方國(guó)家低頭。它試圖通過(guò)突然單方面地改變國(guó)際貿(mào)易規(guī)則來(lái)打壓像華為這樣成功的公司。在過(guò)去的40年里，中國(guó)一直按照西方的規(guī)則行事，逐漸像美國(guó)的亞洲盟友一樣趕超了上來(lái)?，F(xiàn)在，美國(guó)卻想釜底抽薪，發(fā)動(dòng)一場(chǎng)新的冷戰(zhàn)。
 
Unless some greater wisdom prevails, we could spin toward conflict with China, first economically, then geopolitically and militarily, with utter disaster for all. There will be no winners in such a conflict. Yet such is the profound shallowness and corruption of US politics today that we are on such a path.
 
除非有更明智的呼聲占上風(fēng)，否則我們很可能就這樣轉(zhuǎn)向和中國(guó)的沖突。先是經(jīng)濟(jì)上，接著是政治和軍事上，給所有人帶去徹底的災(zāi)難。在這樣的沖突中不會(huì)有贏家。然而，導(dǎo)致我們走上這樣一條道路的原因正是今天美國(guó)政治的膚淺和腐敗。



A trade war with China won't solve our economic problems. Instead we need homegrown solutions: affordable health care, better schools, modernized infrastructure, higher minimum wages and a crackdown on corporate greed. In the process, we would also learn that we have far more to gain through cooperation with China rather than reckless and unfair provocation.
 
與中國(guó)的貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)不能解決我們的經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題。相反，我們應(yīng)該尋求國(guó)內(nèi)解決方案：讓人們負(fù)擔(dān)得起醫(yī)保、上更好的學(xué)校、提供現(xiàn)代化的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施、提高最低工資和打擊企業(yè)的貪婪。在這一過(guò)程中，我們也應(yīng)認(rèn)識(shí)到，相比魯莽和不公平的挑釁，從與中國(guó)的合作中我們獲益要大得多。
 

Jeffrey David Sachs  is an American economist, public policy analyst and former director of The Earth Institute at Columbia University. He is known as one of the world's leading experts on economic development and the fight against poverty.