?。ㄋ模鴥?nèi)問題國際化、經(jīng)貿(mào)問題政治化

　　現(xiàn)任美國政府基于國內(nèi)政治需要，將國內(nèi)問題國際化、經(jīng)貿(mào)問題政治化，通過指責他國轉(zhuǎn)嫁國內(nèi)矛盾。

　　美國將國內(nèi)政策失誤和制度缺陷導致的失業(yè)問題錯誤歸因于國際貿(mào)易。美國政府認為他國通過不公平貿(mào)易的方式搶奪了本國就業(yè)崗位，作為美國貿(mào)易逆差最大來源國，中國首當其沖成為主要的被指責對象。事實是，根據(jù)聯(lián)合國數(shù)據(jù)，2001-2017年，中美貿(mào)易額增長了4.4倍，但美國失業(yè)率則從5.7%下降到4.1%。尤其是2009年以來，美國從中國進口快速增長，同期美國失業(yè)率反而呈現(xiàn)出持續(xù)下降的態(tài)勢，美國政府指責的貨物進口和失業(yè)率之間的替代關(guān)系并不存在（圖12）。2017年美國國會研究中心報告顯示，2010-2015年，盡管美國制造業(yè)從中國進口整體增加32.4%，美國制造業(yè)的工作機會反而增加了6.8%。

　　圖表：圖12：美國自中國貨物進口額與美國失業(yè)率變化 新華社發(fā)

4. Internationalizing domestic issues and politicizing economic and trade issues

The current US administration, in response to domestic political issues, is choosing to internationalize domestic issues and politicize economic and trade issues, and blaming other countries for its own problems.

It has erroneously attributed unemployment caused by domestic policy and institutional flaws to international trade. The US administration has accused other countries of “stealing US jobs through unfair trade”. China, as the biggest source of the US trade deficit, is a convenient primary target. However, statistics from the United Nations show that between 2001 and 2017, China-US trade expanded by a factor of 4.4, and yet unemployment in the US dropped from 5.7 percent to 4.1 percent. In particular, while US imports from China surged from 2009 onward, unemployment in the US saw a steady decline during the same period. The causal relationship between imports of goods and job losses, as claimed by the US administration, does not exist (see Chart 12). A report from the US Congressional Research Service in 2017 reveals that between 2010 and 2015, the number of US manufacturing jobs rose by 6.8 percent even though US imports from China in that sector increased by 32.4 percent. 

Chart 12: US Imports of Goods from China and US Unemployment

Source: the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor of the United States

　　事實上，美國部分社會群體失業(yè)問題，主要是技術(shù)進步和經(jīng)濟結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整背景下，國內(nèi)經(jīng)濟政策失誤和再分配、再就業(yè)機制缺失引起的。根據(jù)美國印第安納州波爾州立大學的研究，2000-2010年期間，美國制造業(yè)工作機會減少560萬個，88%是由于生產(chǎn)率提高導致的。在市場經(jīng)濟條件下，一切要素都在流動變化之中，沒有永遠不變的工作崗位。隨著美國比較優(yōu)勢變化，不同行業(yè)就業(yè)情況出現(xiàn)差異，傳統(tǒng)制造業(yè)等行業(yè)出現(xiàn)就業(yè)崗位減少，這本是經(jīng)濟發(fā)展和結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整的正常現(xiàn)象。美國政府本應順應經(jīng)濟結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整大趨勢，采取積極有效的再分配和再就業(yè)支持措施，幫助失業(yè)人員轉(zhuǎn)移到新興行業(yè)就業(yè)。但是，受制于傳統(tǒng)的分配機制和利益格局，美國政府沒有及時建立合理的再分配和再就業(yè)支持機制，導致部分社會群體的失業(yè)問題長期積累、積重難返，為政治上的民粹主義和孤立主義提供了土壤。

　　現(xiàn)任美國政府把失業(yè)問題歸咎于國際貿(mào)易和出口國不符合事實，是在國內(nèi)政治矛盾難以解決的情況下試圖向外轉(zhuǎn)嫁矛盾。美國如不真正解決自身的深層次結(jié)構(gòu)性問題，而是通過貿(mào)易保護措施引導制造業(yè)回流，這種本末倒置、以鄰為壑、逆經(jīng)濟規(guī)律而動的行為，只會降低全球經(jīng)濟效率，引發(fā)世界各國反對，損人而不利己。

In fact, unemployment of some social groups in the US is caused by flaws in domestic economic policy and the absence of proper redistribution and reemployment mechanisms against the backdrop of technological advances and economic restructuring. A study by Ball State University in the State of Indiana finds out that almost 88 percent of the 5.6 million jobs lost in manufacturing in the US between 2000 and 2010 can be attributed to productivity growth.  In a market economy where all production factors are in flux, no job lasts forever. The evolution of comparative advantages of the US has had different impacts on job creation in different industries. Decrease of jobs in some industries such as traditional manufacturing is a normal phenomenon in the course of economic development and structural adjustment. The US government should have adapted to the overall trend of economic structural adjustment, taking proactive and effective measures to improve redistribution and reemployment and to help the unemployed find jobs in emerging industries. However, constrained by its traditional distribution mechanism and vested interests, the US government has failed to establish appropriate redistribution and reemployment mechanisms in time. The result has been the build-up of long-standing unemployment among some social groups. This has provided the breeding ground for political populism and isolationism.

The current US administration’s attempt to blame international trade and exporting countries for domestic unemployment is not supported by facts; it aims to deflect public attention in the face of intractable domestic political problems. Without truly resolving its own deep-seated structural problems, the US attempt to bring the manufacturing sector back home through protectionist measures is a completely counter-productive move. This beggar-thy-neighbor and lose-lose approach runs counter to economic rules and will only make the world economy less efficient and trigger opposition from countries around the globe. The US will do as much damage to itself as it will to others.