中美最新貿(mào)易協(xié)議將讓誰(shuí)獲益？

The events of the last week have crowded out reflection on economic policy. But things have been happening. Wilbur Ross, the US commerce secretary, described the trade deal reached with China earlier this month as “pretty much a Herculean accomplishment….This is more than has been done in the history of US-China relations on trade.”

上周的各種事件沖淡了有關(guān)經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的反思。但事情還是在發(fā)生。美國(guó)商務(wù)部長(zhǎng)威爾伯•羅斯(Wilbur Ross)將本月早些時(shí)候美國(guó)與中國(guó)達(dá)成的貿(mào)易協(xié)議稱為“一項(xiàng)非常偉大的成就...超過(guò)美中貿(mào)易關(guān)系史上所有成果”。

Past a certain point, exaggeration and hype become dishonesty and deception. In economic policy, as in almost everything else, the Trump Administration is way past that point. The trade deal is a “nothing burger” that a serious administration committed to helping American workers would likely not have accepted, and surely would not have hyped.

超過(guò)一定限度，夸大和炒作就會(huì)變成不誠(chéng)實(shí)和欺騙。在經(jīng)濟(jì)政策領(lǐng)域，就像在幾乎其他任何問(wèn)題上一樣，特朗普政府已遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)這一限度。這項(xiàng)貿(mào)易協(xié)議“空有其表”，一個(gè)致力于幫助美國(guó)勞動(dòng)者的嚴(yán)肅政府可能不會(huì)接受這項(xiàng)協(xié)議，也肯定不會(huì)炒作它。

On agriculture, China reiterated a promise that it has broken in the past to let in more beef. Previously, the US, as reciprocity, had been withholding publication of a permissive rule on Chinese poultry. Now we have relented. Advantage: China.

在農(nóng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域，中國(guó)重申了其過(guò)去曾食言的進(jìn)口更多美國(guó)牛肉的承諾。此前，按照對(duì)等原則，美國(guó)一直未發(fā)布讓中國(guó)禽肉得以進(jìn)入美國(guó)的規(guī)定。如今，我們松動(dòng)了。受益者：中國(guó)。

Nothing else “achieved” has any meaningful nexus with US jobs. China will review product applications for eight biotech products. It promises to offer increased scope for US credit rating agencies, and electronic payment platforms. But it is far from clear that US firms will in fact be able to compete in China — and it is clear that if they do, it will be by hiring Chinese workers in China, not American workers in America. And finally, two US firms will get some enhanced ability to do bond and stock underwriting — again a benefit to shareholders and local staff rather than to US employment.

“已達(dá)成”的其他所有成果都與美國(guó)就業(yè)沒(méi)有實(shí)質(zhì)關(guān)系。中國(guó)將對(duì)8種生物科技產(chǎn)品的產(chǎn)品申請(qǐng)進(jìn)行審核。中國(guó)承諾擴(kuò)大美國(guó)信用評(píng)級(jí)機(jī)構(gòu)以及電子支付平臺(tái)的準(zhǔn)入。但目前還遠(yuǎn)不清楚，美國(guó)公司是否真正能夠在中國(guó)展開(kāi)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，顯然，如果要在華展開(kāi)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，它們就要在中國(guó)聘用中國(guó)勞動(dòng)者，而非在美國(guó)聘用美國(guó)勞動(dòng)者。最后，有兩家美國(guó)公司將獲得在華開(kāi)展債券和股票承銷業(yè)務(wù)的更大自由，這將有利于股東和中國(guó)當(dāng)?shù)貑T工，但對(duì)美國(guó)就業(yè)毫無(wú)幫助。

What was given up? In addition to the leverage sacrificed by committing to issue the poultry rule, other meaningful concessions were made. First, the US has agreed to allow exports of liquefied natural gas to China. To at least a small extent, that would mean higher heating costs for US consumers and higher energy costs for US producers.

我們放棄了什么?除了因承諾發(fā)布禽肉規(guī)定而犧牲的籌碼之外， 美國(guó)還做出了其他重大讓步。首先，美國(guó)同意允許向中國(guó)出口液化天然氣。這將意味著美國(guó)消費(fèi)者的供暖成本以及美國(guó)生產(chǎn)商的能源成本將至少小幅提高。

Second, in the context of a trade negotiation, concessions were made on how US commodities regulators would view derivatives traded in Shanghai and how US bank regulators would treat Chinese banks doing business in the US. While I suspect the concessions were not major, this is reinforcing the valid concern that trade agreements may undercut the ability of regulators to protect American financial stability and more generally challenge regulatory sovereignty.

其次，在貿(mào)易談判的背景下，在美國(guó)大宗商品監(jiān)管者如何看待在上海交易的衍生品以及美國(guó)銀行監(jiān)管者將如何對(duì)待在美國(guó)開(kāi)展業(yè)務(wù)的中資銀行方面，美國(guó)做出了讓步。盡管我推測(cè)這些讓步并不大，但這鞏固了以下合理?yè)?dān)憂：貿(mào)易協(xié)議可能會(huì)削弱監(jiān)管者保護(hù)美國(guó)金融穩(wěn)定的能力，并在更普遍意義上挑戰(zhàn)美國(guó)監(jiān)管獨(dú)立性。

Third, we agreed to embrace – by sending high level representatives – China’s One Belt One Road initiative. It is almost certainly better to be in than out of this tent, but we should be getting something in return for the legitimacy we are conferring.

第三，我們同意(通過(guò)派出高級(jí)代表)接納中國(guó)的“一帶一路”計(jì)劃。加入其中幾乎肯定要好于被排除在外，但我們的認(rèn)可應(yīng)得到某些回報(bào)。

Now it is true that a ludicrously hyped squib of a deal is much better than a trade war. So perhaps we should be pleased that President Trump and Mr Ross are so easily manipulated. Perhaps our officials know how bad a deal they got and are just hyping for political reasons. It is an irony of our times that those who most frequently denounce “fake news” seem to most frequently purvey it.

一項(xiàng)被過(guò)分炒作、令人失望的貿(mào)易協(xié)議確實(shí)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)好于打貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)。因此，我們或許應(yīng)該為特朗普和羅斯如此輕易地就被操縱感到高興?；蛟S，我們的官員知道他們獲得的是一項(xiàng)多么糟糕的協(xié)議，炒作僅僅是出于政治原因。這是我們這個(gè)時(shí)代的諷刺：那些最頻繁譴責(zé)“虛假消息”的人，似乎是虛假消息最頻繁的散布者。