中国：世界新经济模式大军？

Beijing, China. 'Being as large as the US may imply that China needs to accept more global responsibilities than it is ready for'. Photograph: Xiao Lu Chu/Getty Images

中国的北京“（经济规模）如美国一般地庞大，可能意味着中国需要承担比其所准备承担的更多的全球责任”

According to research carried out by the International Comparison Programme for the World Bank, China is moving close to becoming as large an economy as the US. Its research, published last week, is the basis for the purchasing power parity (PPP) estimates that underline most comparisons between the world's economies. The evidence shows that by the end of 2011 China's economy was 87% the size of the US economy – and given the cumulative growth rates since, by the end of this year China might already be bigger. This would have many important consequences beyond the most obvious – that the US, the symbol of post-second world war democracy and western capitalist beliefs, is no longer the world's biggest economy. It would also mean that China had achieved this feat quite some years earlier than some of us were predicting.

世界银行组织开展的跨国比较计划研究指出，中国正逐步成为如美国一般庞大的经济体。这项发表于上周的研究是估算购买力平价指数（PPP）的基础，而后者最常用于世界各经济体之间的比较。研究的证据表明，2011年底中国经济体的规模已达到美国经济体的87%——并且，如果保持累积增长率不变，到今年年底，中国的规模将有可能变得比美国更大。这将产生这么一个最显而易见的事实——即美国，这个二战后民主和西方资本主义信仰的代表，将不再是这个世界上的最大经济体——在这个事实之外将产生很多重要的影响。另外这也意味着，中国已经比我们所预测的更早了很多年达到了这个佳绩。

The world economic growth rate must have been stronger in the past couple of decades than previously estimated. Most, myself included, calculate global GDP growth rates in PPP terms, and if China is now the same size as the US, and is growing by between 7% and 7.5% (as it appears to have been doing for the past 12 months), then it is contributing twice as much to global GDP growth as the US. At some point I would expect the IMF, when it has had time to analyse the data, to revise upwards its estimates of world GDP.

世界经济在过去二十几年的增长率肯定比之前估测的要高。据我所知的大部分估测都是用购买力评价指数来计算全球GDP的增长率。如果现在中国经济的规模如美国一样大，并且正在以7%到7.5%之间的比率增长（正如中国目前在过去的12个月所表现的那样）的话，那么中国对全球GDP增长的贡献将是美国的两倍。某些时候我甚至希望世界货币基金会组织，如果它早该有时间去分析数据，那么它就应当把对世界GDP的估计再往上调一点。

It also follows that in international terms Chinese people are on average wealthier than we previously thought, though of course this tells us nothing about the level of inequality in China, which is currently a major challenge for its authorities.

伴随（中国经济增长）而来的还有一个影响是在国际上中国人平均起来将比我们先前所认为的更富裕，尽管这个（指经济规模）显然不能告诉我们中国的不平等水平如何，而不平等正是现在中国政府当前面临的一个大问题。

According to a Financial Times report, the Chinese statistical authorities do not recognise these new estimates, which is ironic given that many western observers frequently accuse the Chinese of overestimating the strength of their economy. Being as large as the US may imply that China needs to accept more global responsibilities than it is ready for. Another consequence of these revisions is that the value of Chinese consumption and services expenditure is probably considerably higher than previously believed, something I and many other close observers had suspected. If this is the case, then the challenge of so-called Chinese rebalancing may not be quite as tough as many currently think.

根据金融时报报道,中国统计部门不承认这些新的估计，具有讽刺意味的是，许多西方观察家经常指责中国夸大了他们的经济实力。作为和美国一样大的国家,可能意味着中国需要接受比它准备的更多的全球责任。这些修改的另一个结果是中国消费和服务支出的价值可能比以前认为的要很高很多，这令我和身边的其他许多观察家怀疑。如果是这样的话，所谓中国再平衡的挑战可能不想当前想象的那样困难。

If these new estimates become accepted wisdom, then a few things become much more immediate for the running of our world economy and society. First, China's position and weight within all forms of international governance – ranging from the G20 to the IMF, World Bank and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and all the way to the United Nations – must become bigger quicker than previously believed. This has to be accepted by China itself, which might be at the heart of its initial reluctance – it might not feel it is prepared.

如果这些新的估计被广泛认可，一些事情对于世界经济和社会的运行将变得更直接。首先，中国在国际各种组织——从G20到国际货币基金组织（IMF），世界银行，关税及贸易总协定，联合国——中的地位和分量将比先前认为的更大更快。这已经被中国自己所接受，而最初由于中国可能还没有准备好而不愿接受。

It is also the case that the US must be prepared to give up some of its own dominant role. In turn, this leads to a crucial philosophical issue for all western democracies, ourselves included – if the data is accurate it suggests that there is a credible alternative to our preferred western democratic model for success.

同样美国必须放弃它在一些方面上的主导地位。反过来，这会导致对包括我们在内的所有西式民主国家的模式挑战——如果数据真实那么就有新的不同于西式民主的成功方式。 

This said, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that the data also concluded that other large emerging nations might be considerably larger in PPP terms than previously thought – including India, which might be number three. India is the largest populated democracy in the world, and about to get a new government that might be rather more embracing of greater global  recognition  than China.

这表明不能忽视那些新兴国家的数据，这些国家可能比我们当前想象中的更加壮大，包括可能成为世界第三的印度在内。印度是人口最多的民主国家，它组建新政府就可能获得远比中国更多的国际认可。

以下是来自英国网评论：

★You are totally right.

China and the CCP is massive GDP creating resource consuming misallocation machine. It consumes massive amount of resources but provides relatively little utility to the vast numbers of its people when compared to the resources consumed. It can only be sustained with the promise of a better tomorrow and by massive support and funds from the people who control the many 10s of trillions of dollars in offshore tax havens around. The same people who happen to be the very same architects and sustainers of Neoliberalism.

Since the fall of Soviet Communism in the 90s, the West is being destroyed and along with this destruction is the destruction of the Democracies which are so efficient at allocating capital to maximise utility from those limited resources. Instead the West is on a path towards crony capitalism, if it isn't already there.

I argue the only thing China does well and has done really well at least in the past, is as an export machine using its vast population as an a advantage of low cost labour. But even this path is being closed off to other countries because increasingly due to the rise of AI and automation cheap labour is becoming less and less of an advantage in manufacturing all the time. In a few years it won't even be an advantage at all.

你是完全正确的。

中国和中国共产党创造了巨大的GDP也造成资源浪费和分配不平等。相对于消耗的资源来说，它对于大多数中国人民提供的补偿和福利确是极少的。它只能通过美好的承诺、大规模的支持和来源于离岸避税天堂数万亿美元的资金来维持政权。同样的人也是新自由主义的设计师和维护者。

自从90年代前苏联解体以后，西方正在逐渐被摧毁，这种摧毁伴随着有限资源的最大化效用对民主的破坏。反而，西方走上了一条权贵资本主义的道路。

我认为中国只有一件事做得最好，至少是在过去做得很好的，就是利用低成本劳动力的人口红利创造出口。但是由于人工智能和自动化的发展很多国家拒绝了这条道路，廉价劳动力正在变得越来越少，越来越没有优势。在几年以后，廉价劳动力将不再成为一个优势。

★Yes an impressive export machine. But don't forget, that a considereable percentage, some say 25-30 % are owned and created by foreign companies.

是的，一个令人印象深刻的出口机器，但是不要忘了，其中大部分出口，有人说大概25%-30%的出口时被外国公司创造的。

★Exactly, if the American and British leaders hadn't acted with such short sighted stupidity and moved manufacturing over to China then they would not have such great GDP would they?

If they didn't use their security services to bludgeon all forms of protest then criticising China for being undemocratic would not sound so hypocritical and finally if they weren't so deep in the pockets of the vested interests we might care what they think.

This sounds like the scared ramblings of yet another grubbing parasite who knows his free meal is coming to an end.

After all China executes white collar criminals and corrupt government officials (I doubt their state corruption is much worse than what's going on in the UK and US)

事实上，如果美国和英国的领导人没有这样目光短浅的愚蠢行为把制造业转移到中国，那么中国也不会有如此巨大的国内生产总值吧？

如果他们没有动用安保措施打压各种抗议，对中国不民主的批评也不会听上去那么虚伪，最后，如果他们没有深深地沉迷于既得利益，我们也会关心他们在想什么。

这样听起来很像惊恐的寄生虫知道自己的免费午餐已经快要结束了。

毕竟中国会给犯罪白领和腐败官员定罪（我怀疑他们的政府比英美还要腐败）

★Neo-liberalism = palaeo-fascism.

新自由主义=古老的法西斯主义

★Yes your analysis is spot on, as "neoliberal" economics, or anti-state activity in the last 30 years has systematically corroded the political philosophy of a liberal democracy, and where 86 people own more money than 3.4 billion people - nearly 50% of the global population.

This is the true danger to any consideration of democratic states.

是的，你的解释是完全正确的，由于新自由经济或者反政府活动在最近30年以来逐渐侵害了自由民主的政治理念，86个人的财富超过了占地球板书人口约34亿人的财富总额。这是对于民主国家的真正的威胁。

★Neo-liberalism = anti-state and anti-democracy.

新自由主义=反国家和反民主

★...if the American and British leaders hadn't acted with such short sighted stupidity and moved manufacturing over to China then they would not have such great GDP would they?

Good point, but then...

The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them

I can just imagine Deng XiaopIng using this quote from Lenin when building his case to the CCP for reform and opening.

回上文”如果英美的领导人没有如此目光短浅，愚蠢的把制造业迁移到中国，中国也就不会有如此高的GDP了吧？“

说的不错，但是又怎样？

我们想要绞死资本家，他们会卖给我们绳子的。

我只能想到邓小平在给TG开创改革开放的先例的时候，引用列宁的这句话。

★Adding the word neo to liberalism is very clever and makes it sound a bit sinister - like something from a comic book. But unfortunately that's all it is. Liberalised trade and freedom of movement will on average make people wealthier. Pretending that it's somehow fascist is very popular on the Guardian but it's high school political discourse. What's more it has little to do with the article which is about the rise of China.

把neo（新）加到liberalism（自由主义）的前面是个聪明的主意，有点险恶的意味，像是漫画书里的东西。但是也就这样了。自由贸易和自由迁移平均的说来会让人们更富有。而诱导”这有点法西斯“是卫报的老手段了，这也就是高校政治学论述的那点东西。而且这跟这篇关于中国崛起的文章没什么关系吧。

★<Fascism, a "credible alternative"?>

this is the standard of some of the comments and level of nuance here- China is authoritarian, undemocratic and bad on human rights, but it is NOT Fascism.

Also Jim O'Neil was talking obviously about credible in an economic sense not politically.

is there any point in making such mindless remarks ?

针对上文《法西斯，可接受的选择？》

中国属于威权主义，不民主，人权纪录很糟糕，但是他不是法西斯。这中间有着细微的差别，以上是我们辩论的底线。

吉姆奥尼尔明显是在讨论一种经济上的选择而不是政治上的。

这么脑残的评论有什么意义吗？

★China's GDP is still vastly under calculated because most private businesses avoid tax. Especially the small "mum and dad" businesses.

What does this mean?

It means that capitalism is definitely the best model. Privatisation of lucrative businesses and key assets such as communications and postal companies is negligent. However, inequality is a direct consequence of capitalism which requires a drastic solution.

Protectionism in some industries can sometimes be very beneficial. The tech industry is one example. Facebook and Google are blocked, and local companies have taken their place. This means that profits and innovation stay within the country.

A one party system can be successful if the government is interested in economic development. However, a one party system, especially one that is dominated by a single figurehead, is more likely to fail than succeed. Democracy is not a prerequisite for economic development, just look at India. In fact, for a developing country, it is probably inappropriate.

Lion Prey 05 May 2014 6:27am +26

中国的GDP仍然远远低于计算，因为大多的私人企业仍然在避税，特别是那些家庭作坊。

这意味着什么咧？

这意味着资本主义无疑是最好的模式。赚钱企业和一些类似通信行业关键产业的私有化是失误，不过，不平等是一个资本主义的直接后果,需要极端的解决方案。

有时行业的保护主义是非常有益的。科技行业就是一个例子。Facebook和谷歌都被墙了,取而代之的则是当地公司。这意味着利润和创新都被留在国家内。

如果政府对经济发展很感兴趣的话，一党政治是很有效的。但是，一党政治，特别是被当做傀儡的，更有可能的是失败而不是成功，民主对经济发展可不是良药，例子嘛，看看阿三，实际上，民主对于一个发展中国家，大概是不合适的。

★The best model is to be a protectionist country who deals with countries who believe in free trade. At that point, you reap all the benefits of both.

最好的模式就是当一个保护主义国家，然后和相信自由贸易的人交易。这样的话，你就能拿到最高的利益

★look capitalism is tool to buy everything and so a few owners control everythging,as is 1% own or control 98% of everything Thats communism , okay?Can you see ,they ,the

"secret government " of world are the "communist " government.

看起来，资本只是购买一切的工具，而少数人控制着一切，就像是1%的人拿着共产主义的98%。好不好？你看看，他们，世界的“秘密政府”，就是“共产主义”的政府。

★I agree with your post. But lots of income is undeclared. Cash is king, much more so in China than most other countries.

同意你的意见。但是许多收入是未申报的。现金为王，这一点在中国比在其他国家更是如此。

★true, perhaps its needed to get an economy going

的确，

★you don't have to be sorry for telling me the past, China is changing and its got the institutions for a bright future!

说出了过去你并不需要抱歉，中国一直在变化，拥有前途光明的制度。

★No, you get some benefits from both, but the full benefits of free trade would be much greater.

★不，你从双方那里都得到了好处，但是自由贸易的好多更多。

★In the end, the real GDP figures mean little just like other statistics.

最终，真正的GDP数据和其他统计一样意义不大。

★over 70% of the voted mayors are party free

That's why the mayor in any Chinese town/city is always number 2 in seniority...behind the party secretary of the same place. It is the latter who calls the shots. 

China is changing and its got the institutions for a bright future!

China has no institutions. And that's why it has no society. Read Will Hutton's "The Writing on the Wall."

超过70% 的当选市长是无党派的， 这就是为什么在中国任何一个镇/市的市长在资历中排行老二。。。排在地方的党委书记后面。后者才是说了算的人。

“中国一直在变化，拥有前途光明的制度。”

中国没有制度，这就是为什么他们没有社会。读读威尔胡顿的《不祥之兆》。

★thanks, but I lived in China in between all types, law makers and workers, stockbrokers directors and girls who studied on the weekend and worked in faktories during the day,in the North and South in Hong Kong and some Islands etc and think I know better as Will Hutton ;-))))

谢谢，但是在中国生活过，和各种各样的人一起生活过，立法者和工人，董事以及平时在工厂打工、周末学习的女孩子们，在香港和在一些岛屿上生活过，所以我想我比威尔胡顿更了解中国 ：）

★true, that's what some economics who think China overtook the US some time ago(2008-9) said...

对的，这就是那些认为中国在（2008-9）年就超过美国的经济学家们说的..

★what you should know, the CCP manages the INSTITUTION very well and better as all the rest! And in the INTEREST of its PEOPLE!

你应该知道的是，GCD把制度管理得非常好，胜过其他国家！而且是符合中国人民利益的。

★I am telling you the present, no the past.

我和你说的是现在，不是过去

★China's institutions are meaningless unless there is a real rule of law, in which these institutions have genuine rights and duties which are protected by law, and not just because the government feels generous.

And don't just answer with the typical "it's changing" or "it's improving" tropes. There is no real move towards a system like I am describing in China.

中国的制度是毫无意义的，除非他们建立起真正的法治，使得制度中的权利和义务得到法律的保护，而不仅仅是因为政府感觉宽宏大量。

而且不要只是用一些典型的模糊语句类似“正在起效”，“已经提高”。中国现在根本没有在建立这么一套机制。

★The European Union is the largest economic trading area in the world, 

and with this comes great global responsibility.

欧盟是世界最大的经济贸易区，随之而来的是巨大的全球责任。

★Ha! I like the idea that over 70% of mayors are allegedly elected. You don't mention that to be elected you first have to collect enough signatures from the party to stand, meaning that it's a choice of a selection of party officials rather than a true fair and free choice.

That's not to say that the existing laws couldn't accomodate fairer elections which did offer real choice, but in practice unless you're a party man you won't be able to stand.

哈！超过70%的市长据说是由选举产生，我喜欢这种说法。你没有提到的是要想当选，首先得在党中获得一定人数的支持，意味着那是党内官员的选择而不是真正公平和自由的选择。

但这并不是说现有的法律就不能展开公平的选举了，但在现实中，除非你是党员，否则你没有当选的机会。

★China's institutions are meaningless

same as the hegemon power in the west, only China moves in to the right direction after it has been the riches country by culture and wealth for over 2000 years and robbed and destroyed by the west....

“中国的制度毫无意义”

西方霸权同样如此，中国依靠文化和财富成为2000年来富裕的国家，然后被西方抢劫和破坏，现在又步入了正确的轨道。

★true sometimes and for the moment, how else could a country that size of China go from being destroyed to Numero Uno and the party man I have the great fortune to know, don't exist in the west....

的确是这样，中国从一穷二白走向富强，中国党员这种现象在西方并不存在。。。、

★China's GDP is still vastly under calculated because most private businesses avoid tax. Especially the small "mum and dad" businesses.. 

What does this mean? 

It means that capitalism is definitely the best model.

It means you overestimate the clout of mum and dad businesses, and underestimate that of the single-party everything else.

因为大多数私营企业逃税，中国的GDP仍然大大低于统计，特别是家庭作坊..

这意味着什么？

这意味着资本主义无疑是最好的模式。

这意味着你高估了家庭作坊的影响力，而低估了一党执政一切的影响力。