video
Thư viện
Tài trợ
Tăng thuế: Mỹ-Trung ai thiệt, ai hơn?
16 May, 2019
theo giáo sư tyler cowen thì trung quốc (về lâu dài) sẽ thiệt hơn,
nếu có chỉ trích chính sách của trump thì cần tập trung vào việc đề phòng trung quốc sẽ làm gì khi bị dồn vào chân tường, chứ không phải việc mỹ thiếu sức mạnh đàm phán,
-----
…there are well-done studies showing that the recent tariffs have translated into higher prices for U.S. consumers. I am not contesting that research. The question is whether those studies give sufficient weight to all relevant variables for the longer run.
To see why the full picture is more complicated, let’s say the U.S. slaps tariffs on the industrial inputs (whether materials or labor) it is buying from China. It is easy to see the immediate chain of higher costs for the U.S. businesses translating into higher prices for U.S. consumers, and that is what the afore-mentioned studies are picking up. But keep in mind China won’t be supplying those inputs forever, especially if the tariffs remain. Within a few years, a country such as Vietnam will provide the same products, perhaps at cheaper prices, because Vietnam has lower wages. So the costs to U.S. consumers are temporary (cái thiệt của người tiêu dùng mỹ chỉ là tạm thời, sau đó sẽ được thay bằng hàng hóa việt nam rẻ hơn, ví dụ thế), but the lost business in China will be permanent (còn thiệt hại kinh tế của trung quốc là lâu dài). Furthermore, the medium-term adjustment will have the effect of making China’s main competitors better exporters (về trung hạn, các đối thủ của trung quốc sẽ thành nhà xuất khẩu tốt hơn).
And:
China has an industrial policy whose goal is to be competitive in these [branded goods] and other areas. Tariffs will limit profits for these companies and prevent Chinese products from achieving full economies of scale (thuế khiến cho các sản phẩm (công nghệ cao, thương hiệu) của trung quốc không đạt được tính kinh tế về quy mô). So this preemptive (chặn trước, phủ đầu) tariff strike will hurt the Chinese economy in the future, even if it doesn’t yet show up in the numbers.
Most generally:
In my numerous visits to China, I’ve found that the Chinese think of themselves as much more vulnerable than Americans to a trade war. I think they are basically correct, mostly because China is a much poorer country with more fragile political institutions (định chế chính trí yếu kém/mong manh, dễ vỡ).
...Returning to the bigger picture, to the extent you wish to criticize Trump’s policies, focus on what China may do as a result of its vulnerability, not America’s supposed lack of bargaining power in the struggle.
Bài trước: Liệu có chiến tranh thương mại Mỹ-Hoa?
On your point that the Vietnamese will pick up the slack - maybe but they probably won't have the same economy of scale as the Chinese and won't be so far down the learning curve. I can imagine that if the tariffs were not in place China would have been continuing to innovate and moving further and further down their learning curve, this progress is now lost somewhat and restarted if production is shifted to another country.
Truth is that neither side will win this fight and it is a stupid fight to have.
2) US loses the second most.
3) Everybody else gains in trade.
4) The world's two most innovative countries innovate less.
Given these rather basic facts, I can't help but think we haven't made a clearheaded decision. Literally, cutting our nose to spite our face.
To your point about Vietnam, the Vietnamese don't need to expand their capacity all that much. They just need more rubber stamps to mark 'Made In China' goods to say 'Made in Vietnam' and play middleman. The same with other countries including Mexico. Trump simply doesn't know how to win against China. Even Kudlow couldn't cheerlead this one on.
But, no, no, no. The point of the tariffs is not to bring back those jobs. The tariffs on those goods are simply a means to pressure China to respect the rules and spirit of a fair and open world trading system.
Regardless, I thought it is now generally recognized that the *removal* of protective tariffs in the US over the last few decades induced improved efficiency of US manufacturers. It would seem at best ambiguous whether tariffs on one country's goods leads to improved or worsened efficiencies in other countries' production of non-tariffed goods.
Also, while China aspires to sell more branded goods in the future, most of the branding on Chinese goods today is done by American companies. These American companies have more pricing power than some random supplier in China no one has heard of, so they will end up bearing more of the costs of any tax than their suppliers.
China is vulnerable too, arguably even more vulnerable than America, but the fact that the other guy will be hurt a little more than you is no reason to pick a fight that hurts both sides.