James Galbraith 中国衰落 美国新叙事

中国衰落？美国新叙事面向 2024 年大选

https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3231483/china-decline-new-us-narrative-geared-towards-2024-election

James K. Galbraith 2023 年 8 月 18 日

白宫和美国新闻媒体对中国经济放缓感到忧心忡忡，认为这构成了威胁

中国应该专注于消费而不是投资的说法现在和 30 年前一样荒谬，并且有助于增强西方的优越感

《纽约时报》最近发表的三篇文章表明了关于中国的“新”叙事。中国曾经因其不可阻挡的崛起而构成威胁，现在它构成威胁是因为它正在衰落。

美国总统乔·拜登为这一新叙事设定了条件。正如《纽约时报》的迈克尔·D·谢尔 (Michael D. Shear) 报道的那样，白宫现在担心“中国高失业率和劳动力老龄化的困境，使该国成为世界经济核心的‘定时炸弹’”。拜登警告说，“当坏人遇到问题时，他们会做坏事”，但他没有解释失业和人口老龄化究竟是如何将中国变成威胁的。
谢尔给出了中国新近衰落的另一个原因：“总统已采取积极行动遏制中国崛起，并限制其从使用美国开发的技术中获益的能力”。考虑到拜登新的半导体限制的范围，他可能会加上“以及非军事方面”。

与此同时，经济记者彼得·S·古德曼 (Peter S. Goodman) 指出了一系列支持新说法的发展。这些因素包括中国进出口下降、“从食品到公寓等一系列商品”价格下跌、房地产市场低迷以及房地产违约，后者造成了 76 亿美元的损失（这是一个相当大的事件，但远不及典型的美国银行救助）。古德曼在回应中写道：“鉴于中国债务不断增加，目前估计占国民产出的 282%，中国当局的选择有限。”
古德曼认为，中国的困难源于更深层次的问题，例如高储蓄率、银行体系的巨额存款、对房地产的新警惕，以及因此日益增长的“刺激国内需求”的需求。他和他的消息来源一致认为，正确的解决办法是刺激——即增加消费，减少投资。
此外，古德曼引用了麻省理工学院经济学家黄亚生的话，他指出，中国的出口和进口总额占国内生产总值的 40%，其中大部分是进口零部件的最终组装和再出口。然而，尽管黄似乎给古德曼留下了减少这种“转嫁”贸易将产生巨大影响的印象，但事实上，这种影响相当小，因为进口是 GDP 的减项。中国损失的只是附加值，只是整体产品价值的一小部分。

7 月 21 日，一艘集装箱船停靠在上海洋山深水港。中国进出口额的下降引起了一些方面的担忧。照片：NurPhoto / Getty Images

最后，诺贝尔奖得主保罗·克鲁格曼以经济学家的“系统性”观点完善了该报对中国“跌倒”的报道。克鲁格曼认为，中国此前的增长“主要是通过追赶西方技术”，但现在它面临着储蓄过多、投资过多、消费过少的问题。因此，它需要“根本性改革”，以“让家庭拥有更多收入，这样不断增长的消费就可以取代不可持续的投资”。

克鲁格曼关于储蓄的关键观点并不新鲜。30年前，当我成为中国国家计划委员会宏观经济改革首席技术顾问时，西方经济学家就已经开始推行这一路线。“少投资！多消费！”——当时，我完全不理解这个口号，现在仍然不理解。

中国应该有更多的汽车，但道路状况更差，加油站更少吗？它需要更多的电视机，但可以容纳电视机的公寓更少吗？尽管三十年前，中国人民已经基本吃得饱饱的，穿得体面，但人民是否需要更多的食物和衣服？

的确，中国家庭为教育、医疗和养老储蓄了大量资金。但他们之所以能这样做，是因为他们有收入，而这些收入大部分来自公共和私人投资部门的工作。
中国工人的工资来自建造工厂、房屋、铁路、道路和其他公共工程。典型的（统计平均）中国家庭不受收入限制。如果是这样，他们就无法像现在这样储蓄。

此外，如果中国的投资项目耗尽，收入就会下降，储蓄就会放缓，消费占收入的比例必然会上升。但储蓄的下降会让中国家庭的安全感下降，从而加剧如今的经济放缓。
难怪政府不遗余力地通过“一带一路”等重大项目保持投资流动

主动性。即使中国自身已经完全建成（或过度建设），它仍然会在中亚、非洲和拉丁美洲做很多事情。

中国宣布在中亚投资 38 亿美元进行“一带一路”扩张

是的，中国经济正在放缓。很难将任何事物的规模扩大到与已经存在的城市和交通网络相匹配，或与消除极端贫困的运动相匹配。中国现在的主要任务在于其他方面：教育和医疗保健、技能与工作相匹配、养老和控制二氧化碳排放。这些任务将以中国的方式实现：一步一步，随着时间的推移。

那么，新的叙事到底是关于什么的呢？它不是关于中国，而是关于西方。它是关于我们在技术方面的领先地位、我们的自由市场体系，以及我们行使权力和阻止所有挑战者的能力。它是关于强化西方人喜欢相信的东西：资本主义和民主的必然胜利。

最重要的是，它是关于我们的美国领导人战胜可能做“坏事”的“坏人”。这是为 2024 年竞选活动量身定制的叙述。

China in decline? New US narrative is geared towards 2024 election

https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3231483/china-decline-new-us-narrative-geared-towards-2024-election

•   James K. Galbraith  18 Aug 2023

• The White House and American news media are wringing their hands over China’s economic slowdown, which is construed as posing a threat
• The argument that China should focus on consumption instead of investment is as fallacious now as it was 30 years ago, and serves to bolster a Western sense of superiority

Three recent articles in The New York Times have signalled a “new” narrative about China. Once a threat by dint of its inexorable rise, now it poses a threat because it is in decline.

US President Joe Biden set the terms of this new narrative. As The New York Times’ Michael D. Shear reports, the White House now worries that “China’s struggles with high unemployment and an aging workforce make the country ‘a ticking time bomb’ at the heart of the world economy”. Biden warned, “When bad folks have problems, they do bad things”, but he did not explain how, exactly, unemployment and an ageing population turn China into a threat.

Shear gives another reason for China’s new-found decline: “the president has moved aggressively to contain China’s rise and to restrict its ability to benefit militarily from the use of technologies developed in the United States”. Given the scope of Biden’s new semiconductor restrictions, he might have added “and non-militarily as well”.

 

Meanwhile, Peter S. Goodman, an economics reporter, points to a “slew of developments” supporting the new narrative. These include declining Chinese exports and imports, falling prices “on a range of goods, from food to apartments,” a housing slump, and a real-estate default that has produced losses of US$7.6 billion (a sizeable event, but nothing close to the typical US bank bailout). In responding, Goodman writes, “Chinese authorities are limited in their options … given mounting debts now estimated at 282 percent of national output”.

According to Goodman, China’s difficulties stem from deeper problems such as a high savings rate, vast deposits in the banking system, a new wariness about real estate, and, consequently, a growing need “to boost domestic demand”. He and his sources agree that the proper cure is stimulus – meaning more consumption and less investment.

Moreover, Goodman cites MIT economist Yasheng Huang, who notes that exports plus imports in China total 40 per cent of gross domestic product, much of which comprises final assembly and re-exports of imported components. But while Huang appears to have left Goodman with the impression that reducing this “pass-through” trade would have a big effect, the fact is that the effect would be quite small, since imports are a subtraction from GDP. China is losing merely the value-added, a fraction of the overall product value.

A container ship at Yangshan deep water port in Shanghai on July 21. China’s declining imports and exports have elicited concern in some quarters. Photo: NurPhoto / Getty Images

Finally, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman rounds out the paper’s coverage of China’s “stumble” by offering an economist’s “systemic” view. According to Krugman, China previously grew “largely by catching up to Western technology”, but now it faces the problem of too much saving, too much investment, and too little consumption. It therefore needs “fundamental reforms” to “put more income in the hands of families, so that rising consumption can take the place of unsustainable investment”.

 

here is nothing new about Krugman’s key point about savings. Western economists were already pushing that line 30 years ago, when I became chief technical adviser for macroeconomic reform to China’s State Planning Commission. “Invest less! Consume more!” – the mantra made no sense to me then, and it still doesn’t today.

Should China have more cars but worse roads and fewer gas stations? Does it need more televisions, but fewer apartments to put them in? Does the population need more food and clothing, even though it was already mostly well-fed and decently dressed three decades ago?

True, Chinese families save prodigiously for education, healthcare and old age. But they can do that because they have incomes, which come in large part from jobs in the public and private investment sectors.

Chinese workers are paid for building factories, homes, rail lines, roads and other public works. The typical (statistically average) Chinese family is not income-constrained. If it were, it would not be able to save as much as it does.

Moreover, if China were to run out of investment projects, incomes would fall, savings would slow, and consumption as a share of income would necessarily rise. But this decline of savings would make Chinese families less secure, deepening today’s slowdown.

No wonder the government has taken pains to keep investment flowing through major programmes like the Belt and Road Initiative. Even after China itself is fully built (or overbuilt), it still will have plenty to do in Central Asia, Africa and Latin America.

 

China announces US$3.8 billion Belt and Road expansion in Central Asia

Yes, China’s economy is slowing. It will be hard to scale anything to match the cities and transport networks that are already in place, or the campaign to eliminate extreme poverty. China’s main tasks now lie elsewhere: in education and healthcare, in matching skills to jobs, in providing for the elderly, and in curbing carbon dioxide emissions. They will be pursued in Chinese fashion: step by step, over time.

So, what is the new narrative really about? It is not so much about China as it is about the West. It is about our lead in technologies, our free-market system, and our ability to wield power and to keep all challengers at bay. It is about reinforcing what Westerners like to believe: the inevitable triumph of capitalism and democracy.

Above all, it is about our American leaders winning out against “bad folks” who may do “bad things”. It’s a narrative that’s made-to-measure for the 2024 election campaign.