浪宽
时易乾坤宠辱不惊，闲看庭前花开花落。
美国人哀叹：为何中国比我们还更会搞资本主义？
http://news.wenxuecity.com/messages/201101/news-gb2312-1259119.html
新闻直通车
时代不同了。13年前，江总访美的时候，小克也像今天小奥这样，热情接待过老江，可那时候，美国人是居高临下，把中国当小学生看待，时不时会指点指点、训导训导的。而眼下胡总来访，却让很多美国人心里酸酸的，也说不出是高兴还是难受，反正不太自在吧。按理说，胡总来一趟，就签了四五百亿的商业合同，美国人应当高兴才对。可当他们把美国和中国的现况一比，比出差距了，比得不那么自信了，甚至不只是不自信，而是有点不知所措，有些失落感了。这不，我下面要向大家介绍的这篇文章，作者干脆认输了。连搞资本主义也干不过中国，那美国人还有什么值得骄傲的呢？
（声明，为了方便，这里采用意译加趣译）
Why China Does Capitalism Better than the U.S.
By Tony Karon
始于2008年的全球经济衰退，让我们看到一个最具伟大讽刺意义的事实，即共产党统治的中国，竟然比我们美国的民选政府，更会应负和处理资本主义的危机。中国的经济刺激方案，开支比俺们的还要大，对抗经济衰退的效果也好得多啊。他们的钱大多用在建设基础设施，从而进一步奠定了将来经济发展的基础。你看看他们建了多少楼房和高铁，而我们呢，一直在发补贴给那些没的吃没得住的人。
正当我们西方的这些民主国家苟延残喘之际，中国的经济却咆哮地往前突飞猛进。在过去三十年里，中国让5亿人脱贫，从而迅速创造了世界上最大的中产阶级，为本国提供了长期消费需求的引擎。你当然可以指责说，他们的贫富差距太大，社会不公很严重，可资本主义制度下，不都这样吗？大家是彼此彼此、半斤八两。 美国人的收入不平等，实际上是发达工业国中最严重的。2009年有4300万美国人正式生活在贫困线以下，这是51年来最高的纪录。
中国在为将来经济发展所做的准备，在应付未来的挑战方面，也胜美国一筹。胡总对美国罕见国事访问，是在他们用自己的办法，成功地抵御了金融危机之后，也象征着一个新时代的开启。美国式的自由理念将不再是主导。美国实在没有什么可教给中国人的了。中国模式的核心是政府向国有企业注入庞大的资金，来达到刺激经济的目的。我们的自由经济系统在这方面是一筹莫展。奥总花了那点钱，就已经被“茶党”们骂的狗血喷头了。
中国领导人现在终于有资格骂美国人了，我们的债务接近一万亿美元。民调显示，更多的中国人相信他们的国家正朝着正确的方向发展，而这样看自己国家的美国人就少了。中国应对经济危机的成功，一个重要的原因就是，中央集权的制度，让政府有能力快速做出重大而复杂的经济决策，不像我们，国会天天为怎样花钱打架，钱不能到位，等钱到了，问题也更严重了。
真是“三十年河东，三十年河西”啊。19年前，当苏联的解体之际，谁也想不到会出现现在的局面。我们那时以为，历史将以西方自由民主的全球化而告终呢。
承认这样的认知错误，不仅需要良好的风度，也需要智慧和诚实。我们不是为中国专制辩护，它的弊端和腐败也是无可争辩的。没有民主，最终还是会阻碍中国的进步。不过，令人不解的是，虽然中国共产党领导人不是选举出来的，但他们也会顺应民意。也许是不这样做不行吧，一个通过农民起义发家掌权的党，一定比谁都更明白广大劳动人民愤怒的潜在破坏力。
美国的现行制度，似乎对国家的长期的危机束手无策。中国人能够快速地适应新形势，作出困难的决定，并加以有效的实施。而美国人引以为豪的三权分立、互相制衡的宪法和政治生态，则基于对中央集权政府的不信任感。我们的政治系统本来是为了确保个人自由和充满活力的私营企业。但这个系统现在出了问题了，它现在已走向两极化，已经搞得思想僵化。目前的情形非常清楚地显示，美国人根本没有勇气来着手处理他们所面对的长期的财政挑战。的确，美国的民主体系可能有一种内在的合法性，是中国的体系所缺乏的，但如果一个政府，因为自身的分裂和两极分化，以至于无法正常运作，那它绝对不会是别人学习的模式。
在美国，钱已经成为的政治选举的王牌。最高法院认可任何企业有权使用他们的财力来支持自己的候选人，抵制和封杀对自己不利的候选人。所以，无论是医疗改革，还是经济刺激计划，由于特殊利益集团的参与，要么不能落实，要么最后搞出一个只能取悦某些利益集团的折衷方案，而不太可能按照全社会的整体利益来立法。这样一来，就不可能出现高效而合理的决策，更不可能有解决长远问题的能力。
中国的情况恰恰相反，政府可以凌驾在公民之上。例如，要建一个大坝，150万人搬迁，想不搬迁也不行，不会有什么有效的管道让你可以抗议。但是，中国的系统不会让任何个别的企业，有权否决或左右政府的决策。中国政府的决策，不会为了某部分人的利益，而牺牲国家的整体利益。
一句话，目前看来，中国的社会制度，可能比美国的自由制度更具有适应能力和生命力。
Why China Does Capitalism Better than the U.S.
By Tony Karon
One of the great ironies revealed by the global recession that began in 2008 is that Communist Party-ruled China may be doing a better job managing capitalism's crisis than the democratically elected U.S. government. Beijing's stimulus spending was larger, infinitely more effective at overcoming the slowdown, and directed at laying the infrastructural tracks for further economic expansion.
As Western democracies shuffle wheezily forward, China's economy roars along at a steady clip, having lifted some half a billion people out of poverty over the past three decades and rapidly creating the world's largest middle class to provide an engine for long-term domestic consumer demand. Sure, there's massive social inequality, but there always is in a capitalist system. (Income inequality rates in the U.S. are some of the worst in the industrialized world, and here more people are falling into poverty than are being raised out of it — the 43 million Americans officially designated as living in poverty in 2009 was the highest number in the 51 years that records have been kept.) (See TIME's photoessay "The Rise of Hu Jintao.")
Beijing is also doing a far more effective job than Washington is of tooling its economy to meet future challenges — at least according to historian Francis Fukuyama, erstwhile neoconservative intellectual heavyweight. "President Hu Jintao's rare state visit to Washington this week comes at a time when many Chinese see their weathering of the financial crisis as a vindication of their own system, and the beginning of an era in which U.S.-style liberal ideas will no longer be dominant," wrote Fukukyama in Tuesday's Financial Times under a headline stating that the U.S. had nothing to teach China. "State-owned enterprises are back in vogue, and were the chosen mechanism through which Beijing administered its massive stimulus."
Chinese leaders are more inclined today to scold the U.S. — its debtor to the tune of close to a trillion dollars — than to emulate it, and Fukuyama notes that polls show a larger percentage of Chinese people believing their country is headed in the right direction compared to Americans. China's success in navigating the economic crisis, says Fukuyama, was based on the ability of its authoritarian political system to "make large, complex decisions quickly, and ... make them relatively well, at least in economic policy."
These are startling observations from a writer who, 19 years ago, famously proclaimed that the collapse of the Soviet Union heralded "the end of history as such... That is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government." (See "TimeFrames: An Eye on China, Old and New.")
Fukuyama has had the good grace and intellectual honesty to admit he was wrong. And he's no apologist for Chinese authoritarianism, calling out its abuses and corruption, and making clear that he believes the absence of democracy will eventually hobble China's progress. Still, he notes, while they don't hold elections, China's Communist leaders are nonetheless responsive to public opinion. (Of course they are! A Party brought to power by a peasant rebellion knows full well the destructive potential of the rage of working people.) But the regime claims solid support from the Chinese middle class, and hedges against social explosion by directing resources and investment to more marginal parts of the country.
China's leaders, of course, never subscribed to Fukuyama's "end of history" maxim; the Marxism on which they were reared would have taught them that there is no contingent relationship between capitalism and democracy, and they only had to look at neighbors such as Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore to see economic success stories under authoritarian rule — although the prosperity thus achieved played a major role in transforming Taiwan and South Korea into the noisy democracies they are today. Nor were Beijing's leaders under any illusions that the free market could take care of such basic needs as education, health care and infrastructure necessary to keep the system as a whole growing.
But Fukuyama is also making a point about the comparative inability of the U.S. system to respond decisively to a long-term crisis. "China adapts quickly, making difficult decisions and implementing them effectively," Fukuyama writes. "Americans pride themselves on constitutional checks and balances, based on a political culture that distrusts centralised government. This system has ensured individual liberty and a vibrant private sector, but it has now become polarised and ideologically rigid. At present it shows little appetite for dealing with the long-term fiscal challenges the U.S. faces. Democracy in America may have an inherent legitimacy that the Chinese system lacks, but it will not be much of a model to anyone if the government is divided against itself and cannot govern." (See "China's High-Speed Rail.")
Money has emerged as the electoral trump card in the U.S. political system, and corporations have a Supreme Court-recognized right to use their considerable financial muscle to promote candidates and policies favorable to their business operations and to resist policies and shut out candidates deemed inimical to their business interests. So, whether it's health reform or the stimulus package, the power of special interests in the U.S. system invariably produces either gridlock, or mish-mash legislation crafted to please the narrow interests of a variety of competing interests rather than the aggregated interests of the economy and society as a whole. Efficient and rational decision-making it's not. Nor does it appear capable of tackling long-term problems. (Comment on this story.)
China is the extreme opposite, of course: It can ride roughshod over the lives of its citizens. For example, building a dam that requires the forced relocation of 1.5 million people who have no channels through which to protest. But China's system is unlikely to give individual corporations the power to veto or shape government decision making to suit their own bottom line at the expense of the needs of the system as a whole in the way that, to choose but one example, U.S. pharmaceutical companies are able to wield political influence to deny the government the right to negotiate drug prices for the public health system. Fukuyama seems to be warning that in Darwinian terms, the Chinese system may currently be more adaptive than the Land of the Free.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2043235,00.html?hpt=T2
===================
呵呵 有一群人 无色无相
看到自己的国家强大后的嘴脸用四个字来形容-----如丧考妣！！！ 用八个字形容-----数典忘祖，酸不拉唧！！！
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
有时想想世界警察（不管为人为己）的美国还真不能倒 现眼
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
以前在犯文革错误时，中国不能自我用常规方法纠正， kai2002
需等到领导者死掉， 用发动政变的形式来解决。假设现在执政党的犯错，有什么制约的力量去避免或纠正吗？所以我说一犯错会很可怕。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"中国“强大”是建立在绝大部分老百姓贫困的基础上的" mystrip
有没有看到原文里说:"在过去三十年，中国让5亿人脱贫"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why.U.S Does Socialism idforyou
Better Than China?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
我王老五从来没见过这么多钱， 都到我家喝酒去！ bigwhale
但他妈的--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
不是中国比美国会搞资本主义，是成本比美国低 任由之
中国搞的是原始的血淋淋的资本主义，保留了社会主义的领导体制，这样的体制如果是为多数人服务的无可非议，为少数精英先富甚至时代永富就糟透了。而不计工农福利的低成本高利润的资本主义经济方式，是中国经济火爆的根由。有人说这是带血的GDP，一语中的。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
两个月没来，没想到文学城的习惯变了，我在自己的博客 浪宽
里已经看不到这些跟帖了，真是不方便啊。我也就不必一一回复了。谢谢各位高论。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
不是中国会搞，而是美国不敢再搞资本主义了 大眼贼
一大群被宠坏了的，懒惰的，自大的，无知的，又被民主了的选民，能选出什么样的领导人呢？ 伟大导师列宁同志教导过我们，忘记过去意味着背叛。他们已经忘记了他们先辈们为了这个国家是如何奋斗的。freedom is not free
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
这话说得挺对的。 心水
"中央集权的制度，让政府有能力快速做出重大而复杂的经济决策，不像我们，国会天天为怎样花钱打架，钱不能到位，等钱到了，问题也更严重了。" 美国的各级政府只会向企业收钱收钱，一旦企业遇到什么危机，连伸手带一把的能力都没。比韩国都差。 要不帮了忙，也管不住。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
还好没说为何中国比我们还更会搞帝国主义 uknow
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
楼下有人说，“中国政府不把老百姓当人”， ozoz
只有不是人的东西，才会说这种话
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
that is because alley
one of the reasons is that, the people from Fujian, Guangzhou and Shanghai work for cash while collecting social assistance and send the money back to China, or they do business but never pay tax while still collect social assistance; also they are small and cheap so they spend little money in the US. And the people from Hong Kong do drugs and prostitution to make a huge amount of money. They are like the Jews who are suckers and nobody can change them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
重新审视‘中国制度’ 基多山人
正值制度存亡危急之秋，邓小平横空出世，力挽狂澜，创造了中华文明史乃至世界文明史上的奇迹！令全世界的政治理论家重新审视‘中国制度’。当今世界唯一能和‘中国制度’对垒的就是美国的民主制度。不过美国的一批笨伯还在相信民主制度是‘放诸四海而皆准的真理’-这就是美国人的天真了。 其实，‘制’是在天时、地理、人和的特定条件下的产物，勉强不来。民主或专制都有一个‘选贤与能’的问题。美国有两个成熟的政党，所以美国的民选政府稳定健康。‘中国制’目前还是用传统方法产生领袖，因为中国还有一批‘九袋老革命’健在。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
答案在这里 海豹
因为中国政府可以不把老百姓当人， 美国可以吗？
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
其实是知不知道羞耻的问题 海豹
所谓的中国“强大”是建立在绝大部分老百姓贫困的基础上的， 在中国他们绝对没有说话的权利， 就像农村人在共产党的残酷压制下，沦为三等公民一样， 有人还大骂西方种族歧视， 有点羞耻感的话， 就会知道先看看自己吧！再说别人！
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
楼下 、
你出的这方子会立马让美国的物价百分之几百的增长，到时美国人民也会像你希望中国似的起来推翻政府了，不要忘了美国人民可是几乎人手一支枪的。。。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
美国的出路很简单-贸易保护 kobe001
对外包的企业，外来的产品加重税，什么赤字，失业，汇率，国防。。一切问题迎刃而解。所谓的全球化只是富人们用来骗中产阶级的局，全球化十几年来，美国人生活不进反退，不只美国人什么时候看得出
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
当心啊 唐铁嘴
当对手夸你的时候,千万不能洋洋得意.中国真要好好地发展,就得多看人家的优点,时常想着自己的缺点.中国是有很大的成绩,但远没有太多自夸的本钱.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
美国不犯大错误，凭这家底，也不会到今天这地步。哈哈哈 直说好话
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
西方十字军为表演政治歌剧发明了无数个主义式政治歌剧主题 凡哥笑笑
西方十字军部落为表演歌唱他们的政治歌剧，发明了无数个主义式政治歌剧主题，最终都证明是空气中虚构的上帝和耶稣。歌唱上帝耶稣还在这些愚蠢的部落里流行，西方十字军祸水带给世界的只是政党意识部落和利益部落的部落斗争，集体腐败做婊子，部落酋长决定下属命运的祸水制度。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
作者提的问题是很好，但是是无解的， kai2002
利益集团还是会控制一切，不会有改变。中国的问题是领导的决定一切。对了，发展迅速，错了，万劫不复（如文革）。 西方选择民主时，是看到民主时的缺陷的：慢，看起来浪费时间，但同时杜绝犯大错的可能。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
中国人的勤劳，吃苦，与追求财富的精神在世界上没人能比！ 勇气号
这是中国成功的主因。中国政府只是充分的调动了这一巨大的能量，放手让人民干他们最擅长干的事。同时中国的成功也取决于共产党的务实，谦虚与善于学习的精神。数次悬崖勒马，使自己度过危机。俗话说‘骄兵必败“。邓小平从来不认为自己有带领中国走向光明之路的真理，只是小心的”摸着石头过河“，不断地学习，调整。 少说，多做。少自以为是，多聆听学习才能使自己走向强盛，对国家对个人都一样。中国，加油！
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
redondobonito is day dreaming EnoughIsEnough
What you said is what you wish to be true, but unfortunately most of what you said is not true. Yes, there are some negative side effects of fast growing, the next thing China is going to do is to fix those problems and that will bring even more opportunities and growth, just stay tuned.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
饮鸠止渴 redondobonito
I do not think American have to learn some from Chinese. Different countries are running in different situation. American can not act as Chinese to spend more money on infrastructures, because the infrastructural facilities have become mature already. There is no much more lucrative thing for American capitalist to invest on within the country. Chinese thriving economy is based on the sacrifices of destroying living and natural environment, damaging citizen health, wiping out natural resources, and creating a few of rich persons by corruption, illegal, and violence. Although Chinese economy is growing faster and bigger today, for the long run, it will definitely shrink because of the above. That is why more and more rich people have decided to immigrate to American or other developed countries. Right now, China economy is running under stripping offspring’s benefit. In a Chinese phrase, it is 饮鸠止渴！
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article is from TIME(CNN) peasant
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2043235,00.html#ixzz1Bb02pQbz
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
大致上说，中国入世后，以廉价劳动力优势赢得了快速经济增长 英台
这很像中国的农民工可以在城市合法打工后，原来的城市工人很难与农民工的廉价劳动力竞争一样，造成农民收入增长速度快于原城市工人的收入增长速度。中国经济高速增长表明，中国的改革开放政策是正确的，赞成邓小平“摸着石头过河”的方法，相信中国会进一步在探索中前进，逐步找到适合国情的发展道路。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
但愿美国人在用进步的眼光看中国. 八方人
与此不同的是那些duyunlun丧心病狂的辱骂, 到死也不愿看到中国的崛起. 他们这辈子是只有悲哀致死了. 我笑, 大笑.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
中国制度一钱不值，我们的制度天生优越。一回头，干嘛原来跟 直说好话
我们差不多的现在都比我们活得好。不用洗碗，花钱还更大方，这世界真是乱套了。难道耶稣保护异教徒，欺负自己人？哈哈哈
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
这就是毛主席说的那句话 京A18569
修正主义是最坏的资本主义，而且比资本主义还要坏！
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
这篇文章真好笑！ 请和咖啡好吧拉？
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
奴隸制加獨裁制再加資本主義,美國人怎能學得會?笑話. x723
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
如果一个国的层面上玩不转了，老百姓就跟着吃亏了。 truck123
就现在看，这边的利益集团们损害了美国整体国家利益，把国家、社会和全世界拖进经济危机的泥潭，不仅损害了美国国家利益还损害了普通美国人民的利益。The Founding Fathers 原来的想法和措施是有益的，但后代领导人思想不够开放，没有对条条框框进行改革优化，并将美国不断地改革开放，所以退步了。一句话，美国也要搞改革开放，搞活经济，修正所有不利发展的因素。原来是老师，现在当学生，也不丢人；况且，中国有5000年以上的历史，从这个角度来看，作为200多年历史的学生向老师学习也说得过去。 当然每个国家都有各自的长处和短处，互相学习本来就是应该的，这样才会促进社会的进步。美国的利益集团们如此对政治和国家的影响，原来的Founding Fathers 没有意识到如此严重，积了这么多年，搞出那么多的条条框框，所以，她也需要一个能好好清理三角债的人，有魄力的人，为美国老百姓负责和无私奉献的人，而不是整天纠缠在两党小圈子利益里面。这个人在那里？
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
俺发现“注什么注阿”同志发言特有水准及深度 、
特别是一句“成功的人，找原因，找自己的不足。失败的人，找借口，找别人的不足。”立马给了一楼一有力的耳光
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The land of free is a flop youwire
美國人需要認識到這一點： 美國其實在實行的是假民主。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
哎 注什么注阿
美国还是有聪明和务实之人的。俗话说，成功的人，找原因，找自己的不足。失败的人，找借口，找别人的不足。这句话，用于国家之间，也合适。希望美国政界的有识之士，不要总找中国的茬，要发现并改正自己的错误，才能再次振兴美国。GOD BLESS AMERICA。老天保佑中国。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
笨蛋，那是因为中国有社会主义的大买办和奴隶制下的工奴。 男人梦中