雅思阅读材料盘点：中美经济关系紧张

　　Mr Navarro’s views rely on crude arithmetic that defies the most basic economic logic. In fact, big deficits often accompany fast growth. And it is misleading to focus on bilateral imbalances in an age of global supply chains. Counting the bits and pieces from other countries that go into “made in China” smartphones, fridges and televisions, China’s trade surplus with America is about a third smaller than officially reported.

　　纳瓦罗的观点基于粗略的计算，违背了最基本的经济逻辑。事实上，高逆差往往伴随着高增长而出现，而且在全球供应链的时代紧盯双边贸易失衡问题会有误导性。“中国制造”的智能手机、冰箱和电视机里有很多零部件来自其他国家，如果算上这些的话，中国对美国的贸易顺差比官方公布的结果要少三分之一。

　　Yet the gap ought perhaps to be smaller still. American companies insist that, with a level playing field, they would be able to sell much more to China. Some of the obstacles in their way are obvious. Carmakers, for instance, face 25% import tariffs. More often, barriers are subtler. Medical-device makers cite onerous licensing procedures and seed firms lengthy approvals.

　　然而，这一差距也许本应该更小一些。美国公司坚持认为，在公平竞争的环境下，它们能够向中国出口的产品要多得多。美国公司面临的贸易壁垒有些是显而易见的，例如，汽车制造商需缴纳25%的进口关税。但在更多情况下，贸易壁垒更为隐蔽，比如医疗器械制造商办理进口许可时程序繁琐，种子公司审批时间过长。

　　Indeed, America had been adopting a firmer approach to China on trade long before the election. Barack Obama’s administration stepped up pressure through the WTO. Of America’s 25 formal WTO complaints filed after 2008, 16 were against China. The administration also initiated 99 anti-dumping and countervailing-duty investigations against China, more than against any other country (see chart 2).

　　事实上，美国早在大选很久之前就已在贸易问题上对中国采取更为强硬的做法。奥巴马政府通过世贸组织施加了更多压力。2008年以后美国向世贸组织提出的25项正式投诉中，有16项是针对中国。奥巴马政府还对中国发起了99次反倾销和反补贴调查，多于任何其他国家(见图表2)。

　　China sees a pattern of unfair treatment. For Mei Xinyu, a researcher at the commerce ministry, what is wrong with the bilateral relationship is obvious: “American protectionism”. America has to cure its own ills and building walls won’t help, he says. Most emblematic is America’s decision to withhold “market-economy status” from China, which allows higher duties to be put on Chinese imports.

　　而中国则看到了一种不公平待遇。商务部研究员梅新育认为双边关系的症结显而易见，那就是“美国保护主义”。他说美国必须先解决自己的问题，搭建藩篱并无好处。这种保护主义最具代表性的动作是美国决定不给予中国“市场经济地位”，这样便可对进口自中国的产品征收更高的关税。

　　Chinese officials cite another example of unequal standards—the time-worn American complaint, made especially loudly by Mr Trump, that China fiddles its currency to cheapen its exports. China certainly does manage the yuan, but over the past decade it has let it appreciate by nearly two-fifths against a broad currency basket—more than any other big economy has.

　　中国官员还指出了另一个双重标准的例子——美国一直老生常谈地抱怨中国操纵货币以降低出口产品价格，特朗普喊得尤其大声。中国的确在管理人民币，但是在过去十年里，它已经让人民币对广泛的货币篮子升值了近五分之二，比任何其他大经济体的货币升值幅度都大。

　　Left to its own devices, the trade relationship between China and America should become more balanced in time. As China’s middle class grows, its consumers are buying more from abroad. Chinese demand for American agricultural products, especially soya beans, has boomed. China is already buying more services from America then vice versa. One of America’s biggest exports to China is education. The number of Chinese students in America has reached nearly 330,000—almost a third of all foreign students—and is up more than fivefold over the past decade.

　　顺其自然的话，中美贸易关系最终应该会变得更平衡。随着中国中产阶级的壮大，消费者会购买更多进口产品。中国对美国农产品(尤其是大豆)的需求一直在增长。而中国对美国的服务贸易已经为逆差;教育是美国对华最大的出口产品之一，留美的中国学生人数已接近33万，几乎是外国学生总数的三分之一，而且在过去十年中增加了五倍多。

　　Battle lines 战线

　　But if Mr Trump carries out his most extreme threats and whacks a 45% across-the-board tariff on Chinese goods, trade flows between the two giants—the world’s biggest bilateral trading relationship—would shrivel. Collateral damage to the global economy would be immense. The very survival of the rules-based international trading system would be at stake.

　　但倘若特朗普果真兑现了他最偏激的威吓之言，对中国商品全面征收45%的关税，那么中美两大国之间的贸易往来就会萎缩，这一全球最大的双边贸易关系的倒退会令全球经济连带遭受巨大损害，基于规则的国际贸易体系将岌岌可危。

　　China would, in a conventional analysis, suffer more in a trade war. About a fifth of its exports go to America, equating to nearly 4% of Chinese GDP. Less than a tenth of American exports go to China, worth less than 1% of American GDP. But a fight would also hit America hard. No other country could easily replace China in making many of the products, from toys to textiles, that fill American shops. Consumers would face sharply higher prices. American companies that have used China as a production base would struggle to reconfigure their supply chains. If American firms brought factories back home, prices would rocket. Goldman Sachs, an investment bank, estimates that the cost of producing clothing would increase by 46% and smartphones by 37%.

　　按照传统的分析，中国在贸易战中损失会更大。中国约五分之一的出口流向了美国，相当于中国GDP的近4%;而美国只有不到十分之一的出口流向中国，不到美国GDP的1%。但贸易战也将令美国遭受重创。美国的商场里摆满了中国制造的产品，从玩具到纺织品无不如此，在这一点上没有其他国家可以轻易地取代中国。消费者将面临价格暴涨的局面，以中国为生产基地的美国公司将必须重新配置供应链，困难重重。假如美国公司把工厂迁回本国，价格将会飙升。投资银行高盛估计，服装生产成本将增长46%，智能手机生产成本将增长37%。

　　Moreover, China would retaliate. Even if America as a whole runs a deficit, it has industries and companies that increasingly rely on Chinese demand. Nearly half its fruit and seed exports go to China. China is in some months the world’s biggest market for iPhones. Semiconductor-makers such as Qualcomm and Broadcom derive most of their revenues from China (see chart 3).

　　此外，中国一定会报复。即使美国对中国的贸易整体处于赤字，它的某些行业和企业还是日益依赖中国市场的需求。近一半的美国水果和种子都出口到中国;中国一度是全球最大的iPhone销售市场;高通和博通等半导体制造商的大部分收入都来自中国(见图表3)。