網路城邦
回本城市首頁 時事論壇
市長:胡卜凱  副市長:
加入本城市推薦本城市加入我的最愛訂閱最新文章
udn城市政治社會政治時事【時事論壇】城市/討論區/
討論區政治和社會 字體:
看回應文章  上一個討論主題 回文章列表 下一個討論主題
飛龍仍在天只是高度降低 - 林建山
 瀏覽757|回應1推薦1

胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友
文章推薦人 (1)

胡卜凱

中美雙雄誰領風騷系列-飛龍仍在天 只是高度降低

林建山, 08/08/2011

美國債限風波,使全世界對美國的經濟成長及其全球國勢地位,產生極大的疑慮與擔憂,認為已接近二次大戰前後的英國,從一整個世紀的飛龍在天,即將跌落凡塵成為亢龍有悔的相對弱勢國家。美國國力是否真的就此失去領袖國際地位,走向衰落,是很值得各方爭議的大哉問題,今天要論斷美國國力興衰,不能單看財政指標或債信水準就遽然定奪,而必須參照當前美國經濟實力地位的10個面向狀況來予以論證為宜。

超越美 一時難成

第一,經濟動能,即國內生產毛額及人均GDP:依據世界銀行指標,就單一國家看,2010年美國占世界GDP總值的23.4%,日本僅5.46%,歐盟占25.9%,其中德國3.32%,法國2.58%,英國2.25%,中國5.88%;從1980年到2008年的28年中,美國GDP年均成長都略高於其他主要先進國家;人均所得,2010年美國是40,800美元,日本僅相當其83%,德法同為92%。美國相對其他主要先進國家的優勢,在於占世界GDP比重大,經濟成長速度快,富裕程度較高。新興市場國家在經濟規模和富裕程度上,與美國的差距仍然極大,要在規模上趕超美國,需要更長時間。

第二,勞動生產率決定一國企業競爭力及國家競爭力。美國在先進國家中處於領先地位,上世紀60年代日本和歐洲曾有一段勞動生產率飛漲時期,當時日本勞動生產率年均成長8%,歐盟155%,此後卻放慢;同時,在創新上,日歐也趕不上美國;在新興經濟體中,中國勞動生產率只達美國的15%,中國要想趕上美國,還有很長的路要走。

第三,科技能量。其他國家的研發支出、科技團隊都未能顯著超越美國,創新專利的成長也落後於美國,全球技術發明專利中,美國占38%,在被引用最多的出版物中,美國占63%

第四,人力資本。美國是世界上第一個實施義務教育的國家,建立了支撐國家創新的最重要基礎設施。美國大學都有很強的競爭力,尤其研究院和實驗室,培養出大量傑出科技人才。美國大學經費占GDP2.4%,其他OECD國家平均僅31.5%;聯邦政府承擔大學開支的 32%,但只承擔中小學開支的7%,以致美國大學辦得比中小學要好。

第五,財政實力。儘管美國財政收入占GDP比重較低,但每年創造的GDP總值居世界之冠,財力仍然是全世界最雄厚的。

第六,金融實力。美國的金融實力表現在豐沛的資金來源、強大而多樣的金融機構、以及規模龐大、交易活躍的金融市場。海嘯重創美國金融,但也把金融業引向為實物經濟服務的正軌,而且也未根本改變美國金融在全世界的優勢地位。

第七,主權貨幣。美元作為全球主要的儲備貨幣、交易工具和計價基準,繼續對全球象徵經濟擁有最強大的支配力。

海嘯發生後的20099月,美元占國際儲備比重為61.6%,歐元27.7%,日圓3.2%,英鎊4.3%,其他貨幣僅3%左右;美元在國際清算中的地位更高,占62%。美元作為世界儲備貨幣的地位,在短時間內根本不會受到威脅。

第八,多國企業,是美國企業全球化戰略的構成,極大提高了美國的全球競爭力。美國跨國公司的對外直接投資,在全球占有突出地位。1990年世界FDI美國占35%,居先進國家之首,為第二位英國的3倍多;2010年世界金融海嘯重創後,比重雖下降到22.7%,但比起第二位的法國,仍然高出兩倍多。美國跨國公司在全世界更加具有很強的競爭力。

第九,社會動能。美國是人口成長呈上升趨勢的國家,也是經濟能夠持續看好的因素,2010年美國人口3.12億(占全球4.5%),主要來源是移民和移民較高的出生率;同時65歲以上的老年人占人口比重僅12%,全美平均年齡為36歲,高齡化問題在先進國家中是難得少見的不嚴重,這也無疑為美國經濟社會的永續繁榮,創造了有利條件。

第十,自然資源。美國在氣候、水源、土地、礦藏等方面都得天獨厚,自然資源豐富的客觀條件,並未導致「荷蘭病(Dutch Disease)」的發生,益使美國自然資源的優勢,得到較充分發揮。

美國力

這些面向的經濟實力因素,使其他先進國家或新興市場經濟國家,要想在50年之內趕超美國,都還是極其不容易的,現在就談美國國力衰落,恐怕為時猶早。

這次美國債限風波,對於歐巴馬是否能像1958年「斯潑尼克」對甘迺迪產生的大衝擊,刺激美國國政策略回復到造餅優先的路,將振興激勵經濟的資源與努力,不再單放在「金融」籃子裡,轉為大力重振實物經濟的工商企業部門及民生消費部門,以有效強化其實力與活力,則美國國力的再起與復興,應是可以期待的。

只要美元美債繼續是世界基準通貨、美國內需市場還是新興世界最肥沃的蜜奶之地、國際投資的終極站、天災人禍兵燹意外的避風港(儘管破爛,仍是唯一)、科技創新及人才資本持續領先,即使是這條龍的飛航高度漸低,但在可預見的半個世紀之內,飛龍依然在天,有悔的亢龍,恐怕祇在老歐洲。

(作者為財團法人環球經濟社社長兼公共政策研究所所長)

http://news.chinatimes.com/forum/11051404/112011080800365.html



本文於 修改第 2 次

回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘

引用
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=4688274
 回應文章
美國還能當龍頭老大? -- E. J. Dionne Jr.
推薦0


胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友

 

Can America still lead?

E.J. Dionne Jr., 08/08/11

The first week of August 2011 will be remembered as a singularly irrational, wasteful and shameful moment in the political and economic history of the United States. It reflected much of what is wrong with the priorities of our political elites and the obsessions of those who now hold effective veto power over our government.

It began with the world hanging on to every development in the debt-ceiling negotiations as it fretted over whether Washington’s dysfunction would lead to American default and global calamity. Even robustly pro-American commentators and politicians wondered aloud if the United States could still govern itself.

Yet by Thursday, even though default was averted through a deal that largely capitulated to Republican demands, calamity arrived anyway. Around the world, markets imploded. The debt-ceiling crisis artificially created by right-wing American politicians didn’t matter nearly as much as the dangerous fragility of the global economy and Europe’s far more profound debt crisis.

And to complete this portrait of fecklessness, Standard & Poor’s, which once happily and profitably stamped triple-A ratings on rip-off mortgage-backed securities, ended the week by downgrading the federal government’s creditworthiness. S&P once caved to pressure from Goldman Sachs in its rating of private securities, yet it refused even to pause in its dissing of American creditworthiness despite the Obama administration’s successful challenge to some of its numbers. We need to learn far more about what forces pushed S&P to this outlandish and highly politicized decision.

In our fixation with a deeply ideological debate over government spending, we have lost track of what really matters. Washington, acting in concert with other nations, should be focused on creating jobs and restoring growth. It needs to deal with a housing mess and personal debts that have destroyed the balance sheets of millions of households. It needs to increase consumer purchasing power. And it should be expanding public investments in the nation’s future, not cutting them.

Yet the world is looking to the United States to help power a recovery and provide leadership at a time when we are suffocatingly inward-looking — and when ultra-conservatives are so dogmatic about slashing government that they are prepared to boot away our nation’s influence. Default? No problem.

“We weren’t kidding around, either,” Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told The Post. “We would have taken it down.” He said it with pride, yet the “it” involved the American economy and America’s standing around the globe. This is patriotism?

Watching the week that was from abroad has been sobering, and you wonder if President Obama fully grasps how much disappointment there is among the tens of millions around the world once so hopeful that he would restore the United States to a position of responsible global leadership.

America’s friends overseas know that the debt crisis was instigated by Obama’s opponents. Yet they worry now about how strong Obama is, whether he will draw lines and if he can seize back the initiative.

On Friday, I met with a leading British Conservative, a rising member of Prime Minister David Cameron’s cabinet who spoke of his liking for Obama. His take on the politics of the debt fight perfectly captured the ambivalence of those who genuinely wish Obama well.

“As a political strategist, he is often underestimated,” this shrewd politician said of Obama. “He’s playing a longer game.” While “the Republicans have allowed the Tea Party tail to wag the dog ... Obama will be able to say, ‘I believe in spending cuts, but I also believe that the richest in the country should pay a little more.’” Republicans will counter by arguing for steep cuts in Medicare and other popular programs, but he noted that where public opinion is concerned, this will give Obama the high ground.

Then came the downside: that Obama “seems to be a passive figure at a time when the world needs a leader.” Obama and his advisers should pay heed to this quietly devastating observation. Even if they’re right about where Obama is positioned politically, they have to worry whether all the concessions and maneuvering undercut a president’s most important asset: an earned image of strength rooted in principle.

The central question is whether the United States is still capable of leading the world out of economic turmoil. Obama’s response to this challenge will have far more impact on both the country’s future and his own reelection than all the sloganeering, polling and positioning put together.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/can-america-still-lead/2011/08/07/gIQAPeuE1I_story.html



本文於 修改第 2 次
回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=4690431