China has the ultimate weapon in trade war with US
在与我们的贸易战中，中国拥有“终极武器”
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said something the other day that was either right on the mark or profoundly stupid.
前几天，美国商务部长威尔伯·罗斯(Wilbur Ross)说了一些话，要么说对了，要么就大错特错了。
Only time will tell which it is.
只有时间能告诉我们它是什么。
Ross said that China was “out of bullets” in the trade war that the Trump administration escalated this week by placing another $200 billion in tariffs — basically taxes — on Chinese goods entering the US.
What Ross meant was that, since China sends more of its goods to the US than we send to China, a tit-for-tat trade battle would ultimately be won by the US. We can tax more of their goods than they can of ours.
Put in Ross’ words, we can fire more tariff bullets at them than they can at us.
罗斯表示，在特朗普政府本周升级的贸易战中，中国已经“弹尽粮绝”，特朗普政府对进入美国的中国商品征收了2000亿美元的关税——基本上就是关税。
罗斯的意思是，由于中国向美国出口的商品比我们向中国出口的多，美国最终将赢得一场针锋相对的贸易战。我们可以向他们征收比我们更多的税。
用罗斯的话来说，我们向他们发射的关税子弹比他们向我们发射的还要多。
President Trump’s strategy isn’t a secret: Squeeze China until it is willing to negotiate a fairer deal that will reduce the $375 billion trade deficit that the US had with China last year and play fairer when it comes to intellectual property.
特朗普总统的战略并非秘密:对中国施压，直到中国愿意达成一项更公平的协议，以减少去年美国与中国之间的3750亿美元贸易逆差，并在知识产权问题上更加公平。
Bravo! How can you argue with the intent of that if you are an American?
万岁!如果你是一个美国人，你怎么能反驳这样的意图呢?
If the US can alter the trade imbalance with China (and the other countries Trump is fighting with), it will mean more jobs for Americans, more business for our companies and another star on the report card of the Trump White House that already is acing — for the time being, at least — economics even if it is failing in the area of conduct.
如果美国可以改变美国与中国的贸易不平衡(与特朗普和其他国家),对美国人来说这将意味着更多的就业机会,更多的业务对我们公司和另一颗恒星的成绩单已经间隔的特朗普白宫——目前,至少——即使是经济学领域的失败行为。
But there’s a bigger issue here that I would be careless in ignoring.
If Ross is right on the bullets issue of the trade war, does that mean China will have to resort to using its financial missiles to combat what Trump is doing?
但这里有一个更大的问题我不小心忽略了。
如果罗斯在贸易战争的子弹问题上是正确的，这是否意味着中国将不得不使用其金融导弹来打击特朗普的所作所为?
And by that I mean the $1.171 trillion in US securities that Beijing owned as of July.
What if the Chinese decided to sharply reduce their holdings in US debt? What if Beijing decided to launch a few financial missiles by either selling down their holdings of US Treasuries — or simply not buying any more? A little missile that could still do a lot of damage would be China simply threatening publicly to sell US debt, something that has been hinted at before.
我指的是截至7月份北京持有的1.171万亿美元美国证券。
如果中国决定大幅减持美国国债怎么办?如果中国政府决定通过减持美国国债或干脆不再购买美国国债来发射几枚金融导弹，结果会怎样?中国只要公开威胁要向美国出售债务，就会成为一枚仍可能造成巨大破坏的小型导弹，这一点此前已经有人暗示过。
That would certainly get Wall Street’s attention.
First, let me say that there is a school of thought that believes this will never happen. Why? Because by just threatening to sell US securities in a large amount — or by actually doing so — the Chinese would cause the value of US bonds to fall and interest rates to climb here and throughout the world.
这肯定会引起华尔街的注意。
首先，我想说，有一种学派认为这永远不会发生。为什么?因为只要威胁要大量出售美国证券——或者实际上这么做——中国就会导致美国债券的价值下跌，利率在美国乃至全球范围内攀升。
And the Chinese, who hold so much of that US debt, would take heavy losses. Plus, the higher interest rates would make it harder for the Chinese to finance their own country’s deficit.
In other words, the optimists in this trade war say that the Chinese may have financial missiles — but that they can’t launch them at the US.
而持有大量美国债务的中国，将蒙受巨大损失。此外，更高的利率将使中国更难为本国的赤字融资。
换句话说，这场贸易战的乐观派表示，中国可能拥有金融导弹，但他们不能向美国发射导弹。
So what happens if today the Chinese decide to become irrational because they are out of bullets? What if they start selling loads of US government bonds?
If that happens, Washington will have to either (a) severely cut back its spending so that we don’t need the money the Chinese are giving us through bond purchases, or (b) find other buyers of our debt.
那么，如果今天中国人因为没有子弹而变得不理智，会发生什么呢?如果他们开始大量抛售美国国债怎么办?
如果发生这种情况，美国政府将不得不(a)大幅削减支出，以便我们不需要中国人通过购买债券给我们的钱，或者(b)为我们的债务找到其他买家。
Since Washington never cuts spending, the second choice is probably the better option. But where can other customers be found?
Japan is the second-biggest buyer of US debt, but Tokyo owns only a little more than $1 trillion worth. And Japan’s economy isn’t in great shape, so it can’t afford to send more capital abroad.
既然华盛顿从不削减开支，第二种选择可能是更好的选择。但在哪里可以找到其他客户呢?
日本是美国债务的第二大买家，但东京仅拥有略多于1万亿美元的资产。而且日本的经济状况不佳，因此它无法将更多的资本投入海外。
The next-biggest US government-bond holder, if you can believe it, is Ireland with only $300 billion worth. OPEC nations are small-time investors in our bonds: Saudi Arabia has $167 billion, the United Arab Emirates $60 billion and Kuwait $43 billion. So oil money from abroad isn’t going to do the trick.
And if the US is going to lure other countries to invest in our debt, the bonds will have to be made more attractive. That’s another way of saying that interest rates will have to rise.
You’ve already heard that the Federal Reserve is raising interest rates, but what might be needed to entice additional buyers is a course of a different color — a rate increase on top of the Fed-fueled increase.
如果美国打算吸引其他国家投资我们的债务，这些债券就必须变得更具吸引力。这是另一种说利率必须上升的说法。
你已经听说过美联储(fed)正在加息，但要吸引更多买家，可能需要采取另一种方式——在美联储推动的加息基础上加息。
But that will translate into higher costs for anyone who is borrowing money — from Uncle Sam, already running a nearly $1 trillion-a-year deficit, all the way down to your Aunt Tilly looking to buy a house.
To be sure, there’s another option — but it would be controversial.
但对于任何借钱的人来说，这将意味着更高的成本——从山姆大叔那里，已经有每年近1万亿美元的赤字，一直到你的蒂莉阿姨想买房子。
可以肯定的是，还有另一种选择——但这可能会引发争议。
The Fed could begin another quantitative easing program, which in the past has easily created new money to buy bonds. The intention when QE was done in the late aughts was to make interest rates extraordinarily low.
The next QE might be launched to make up for the lack of interest in US government bonds. QE, in this case, would be the same as Washington printing money so that it can again act as a shill buyer at Treasury bond auctions.
他可能会启动另一项量化宽松计划，该计划过去曾轻松创造新资金购买债券。量化宽松政策在上世纪后期实施时的意图是使利率处于极低水平。
下一轮量化宽松可能会推出，以弥补投资者对美国政府债券缺乏兴趣的局面。在这种情况下，量化宽松与美国政府印钞是一样的，这样它就可以在美国国债拍卖中再次充当托运人的角色。
It would be a fraud and it would raise big questions about the health of the US currency and put our country in a poor light.
People laughed when Trump is alleged to have said that the solution to America’s financial problems is printing more money. If the Fed has to QE our way out of bond-market trouble, it’ll be as hilarious — and frightening — as what Trump is said to have proposed.
这将是一场骗局，它将引发有关美元健康状况的重大问题，并让我们的国家陷入困境。
当特朗普声称解决美国金融问题的办法是印更多的钞票时，人们笑了。如果美联储(Fed)不得不以量化宽松的方式摆脱债券市场的困境，那将会像特朗普所说的那样，既滑稽又可怕。
Which brings us back to my original question: Are the Chinese really out of bullets, or is there just a lull in the fighting before the big guns come out?
这又让我们回到了我最初的问题:中国真的没有子弹了吗?还是在枪炮声响起之前，战斗暂时停止了?
本文来源：https://nypost.com/2018/09/19/china-has-the-ultimate-weapon-in-trade-war-with-us/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral
