主题：【原创】土豆与牛肉 -- 晨枫
家园 我还是看不出美国有衰败的迹象 美国人掌握着军工，科技，农业，交通线上的优势～
家园 英国曾经也一样……
家园 英国小可以依附，美国就太大了。 美国要想依附也可以，分裂了先。
美国的致命问题是美元这个循环已经彻底不行了，但是美国还没有那个集团认为要推倒重来。
估计美国后十几年的路就是一个不断寻找美元替代品的路。
家园 英国并不是依附，而是“有序退让” 英国也不是自愿放弃英镑的，美元还没有到必须放弃的地步，美国当然不会自愿放弃。扫帚不到，灰尘不会自己跑掉。扫帚还挥在空中，没有落下来呢。
家园 no matter what the UK did in the past, the key point: global power passes from one Anglo-Saxon nation to another Anglo-Saxon protestant nation. In the end, the same group of WASP elites still control the old global system or determine the new world order. Here I define WASP elites on a cultural basis. Therefore, Eisenhower, a German American and US president, is also a member of this elites.
Americans(or WASPs) beat Europeans, Asians, Arabians, Slavs and Indians in terms of innovation in designing new system to accommodate a changing world. When Europeans were still obsessed with gold standard, America had already switched to the fiat system under FDR new deal and inflated out of depression with massive government fiscal stimulus. In Europe, only Germans did the same thing but out of more militaristic reason.
France single-handedly created the 1931 credit crisis by pushing the Austrian bank Kredit Vienna into bankruptcy. French prime minister ruined Austria and Germany and pushed Hitler into power. France pretty much did nothing innovatively to solve the depression issue during 1930s. Today's France is still asleep under the old dirgiste system with most of its talents into the public service sector. Its banking and stock market regulatory systems are even inferior to those of China.
Emerging out of depression, America established deposit insurance system, medicare/social security system, and more banking and stock market regulatory systems. In Europe, we saw little innovations in comparison.
So long as there are still human beings, new economic or political crises can never be avoided. When we judge one nation over others, we need to focus on its stamina in period of turmoil.
WASP nations, on average, show that they are more open to new ideas and new talents from their former colonial elites. For any people who live in Canada, US or UK before, you can easily understand I mean.
We live in an interesting period in which the fiat currency system and post-1971 Brettonwoods II system are facing serious challenges. What will be the next better system? I do not know. I am sure Obama also has no clue. But through intellectual debates, fusion of contribution from various elite groups, the final new system will be more robust than the current one--and this process will take years, after a major stagflation period.
In the last 300 years, Anglos defeated all challenges to their global economic, cultural and military dominance. First, the Spaniards (17th), then Nederlands (17th), then France (17th and 18th), Germany(WW I and II), Japan (WWII), Russia (cold war). Those are not easy adversaries.
I saw no fundamental change to the WASP social system and its talent pool and I do not think Chinese are ready to undertake the global leadership at all.
My question for all Chinese on this forum: did you see any institutional innovation from China ever since 1978? Did we create international accounting standards, World Bank, International Monetary Funds, United Nations (or International League), NATO, national insurance system, international commmercial code, GATT, WTO, first securities law, first security market regulatory, first international settlement bank, most innovative research universities, most dynamic high-tech firms, administrative system, best management practices...
China still has a long way to go. It is a good student. But before one can take over this global leadership role, one needs to ask himself a simple question: do we have a large enough talent pool which CAN THINK INDEPENDENTLY AND CRITICALLY?
Do not listen to Sarkozy's blah blah talk--Euro has long way to go before it can replace USD. France has been a loser ever since it totally gave up the resourceful North American continent. To pick a loser as partner is definitely not a good formula for future success.
本帖一共被 1 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)家园 del
家园 从这点看只有tg才是大丈夫 只有tg可以做出90年代那种大规模下岗的疯狂举动。这是真正的壮士断腕。美国如果现在有当年tg的疯狂的一半，马上就是可以满局全活，可以二十年后又是一条好汉。
现在美国后面背着美元，前面捧着普世价值，也就是后面的金融集团不能得罪，前面的社会福利要维持，最后只好去跳崖了。如果最后跳崖也不愿意，那就只能粉身碎骨了。
只不过英国的分裂可以是日不落帝国的分裂，美国的分裂就只能在自己国土范围实现了。
家园 大规模下岗的确疯狂！这和壮士断腕有个屁关系 家园 too early to see the end result.
America can use inflation to gradually eliminates its problem.
It used that before against Europeans in 1971-1978 and I do not think the American strategists will be afraid to do that again.
家园 你说得对，中国短期内是不可能做主宰的 但是，你认为央格鲁-萨克森人曾经保有了三百年的世界霸权，现在仍然可能的观点站不住脚。
你的主要理由是央格鲁-萨克森国家对人才的吸引力大，以前确实是！但是这一现象的原因是这些国家的相对富裕能够给人才更多的发财机会，或者即使这些国家最初不是那么富裕的时候也能凭借资源给人才提供发财的机会。现在的央格鲁-萨克森国家还有这些条件吗？有点前瞻意识的人才，都不再认同这里还有机会了。道理就是前面曾网友说的，这些国家高昂的人力成本一定会因为自由竞争的原因导致产业远离央格鲁-萨克森国家。还能有什么样的产业只能由这些国家的产业工人来完成呢？没有任何优势产业，一个国家的财富哪里积累呢？美元的地位能够永远没有真实的价值依托吗？
至于你的问题：
My question for all Chinese on this forum: did you see any institutional innovation from China ever since 1978? Did we create international accounting standards, World Bank, International Monetary Funds, United Nations (or International League), NATO, national insurance system, international commmercial code, GATT, WTO, first securities law, first security market regulatory, first international settlement bank, most innovative research universities, most dynamic high-tech firms, administrative system, best management practices...
我认为值得所有的挑战者思索，答案一定在新一轮产业发展的过程中产生。我目前无法明确回答，但可以预言的一点，这种最后的社会管理格局肯定不是央格鲁-萨克森目前主导的这种格局。
家园 比较优势的另一面是，如果人力比较没有优势的话，资本/技术 应该是比较有优势的。而由于资本和人力之间存在替代性。所以自由贸易的结果将是：世界上各个国家的资本成本和人力成本趋于一致。
所以高昂的人工成本完全不是问题。
家园 高昂的人工成本肯定会是问题。 控制资本和技术的自由流动对目前所有国家政府来说基本无能为力。当然短期控制是可能的，长期基本没戏。
资本具有天生逐利性，这东西可以说无国界，哪里能够产生足够多的利润，就去哪里。而技术这东西永远都是待价而沽的，你不让它的拥有者获取最高的收益，除非你把他杀了。于是，这两者不管在什么监管下，只要在合适的土壤都会开出美丽也许同时邪恶的结果。资本与技术之所以没有流动到某一国家，绝不会是因为外界的限制，只会是因为这个国家没有让他们逐足够利的机会。“只要有百分之一百的利润，资本敢于践踏一切人间法律”。
可以看看台湾在九十年代一直试图禁止台湾的资金和技术流入中国大陆的结果。二战最激烈时美国大企业与希特勒德国的贸易也没有停止。中国市场换技术、市场换管理，直接引进外资的策略能够成功的根本原因就在于此。
美国政客们不是不明白这种道理，但是美国人的移民政策却是选票的大规模杀伤性武器。如果有当选总统敢于让劳动力自由流动，他就等着被枪杀吧。这也是非京籍中国公民在北京只能暂住的根本原因。
在这里，民主一点也帮不上忙，所有人都民主地选择最差的结果。美国既然不能民主地壮士断腕，那就只有慢性自杀了。反正沦落到大英帝国的程度，最好是西班牙的工资水平，主要靠西班牙女郎招揽客人的时候，慢慢会有产业回流的。
家园 没明白您的意思，不明白民主和资本流动如何使高昂的人工 成本肯定成为问题的。
我学到的恰恰相反，正是由于资本自由流动使高昂的人工成本肯定不成为问题。国际贸易有几个比较经典的理论。
第一，国际贸易的基础是比较优势（相对优势），这是相对其他商品来说本种商品在使用某种资源上相对比较有效率。高昂的人工成本使美国的商品具有比较劣势，但是硬币的另一面是，美国的商品在资本使用上具有比较优势，所以……
第二，在资源可以自由流动的基础下，长期的国际贸易交换会缩小不同国家间的比较优势。也就是说，长期（而不是短期）看来如果依据你的想法，资本的自由流动是无法阻止的，那么美国的高昂人工成本是无法维持的。
第三，技术的问题。国际贸易中有这么一个理论，高技术的产品首先在最发达的国家发明生产，然后转移到次发达的国家小规模生产，最后转移到发展中国家大规模生产。在这个路径中发达国家依然能获取很高的收益。你看到的所谓技术转移，更多的是这一过程。
所以，高昂的人工成本不论长期短期对美国来说都不是问题。
还有就是题外话，与中国比较，美国依然拥有很强的科技、制度方面的优势。这个通过比较SSRN和中国期刊网上相关论文的数量和质量就可以看出来。科技和制度才是经济发展的原动力。撇开这两个因素讨论美国是否没落，都是没有意义的。
家园 呵呵，我可没有说民主使高昂的人工成本成为问题 我只说民主制度也不能解决高昂的人工成本问题，并没有说民主制度就会导致高昂的成本。我确实认为资本流动肯定会使高昂人工成本成为问题。
“美国的商品在资本使用上具有比较优势”，不太理解这句话是什么意思？
“国际贸易中有这么一个理论，高技术的产品首先在最发达的国家发明生产，然后转移到次发达的国家小规模生产，最后转移到发展中国家大规模生产。”这一过程我不反对，但是你说收益的是发达国家就不对了，受益的只是技术拥有者和资本，如果从长远来讲还有大规模应用这种技术的国家。我前面已经论述了资本无国界，你的前提也是资本自由流动，因此我们在资本无国界上没有矛盾。而技术拥有者永远是待价而沽，最终卖给资本的知识和技术，也因此不会有国界，因此我怎么也得不出发达国家因此必然受益的结论。
家园 a quick reply 但是，你认为央格鲁-萨克森人曾经保有了三百年的世界霸权，现在仍然可能的观点站不住脚。
--I have no crystal ball, so I do not know future for certain. I just extrapolate from the nondisputed history. I saw challenges from China. But first, China is only strong along the economic dimension. Not powerful enough on all dimensions. Second, Europe-Russia-China can not trust each other and a solid alliance can not be formed.
Therefore, I will say Anglos are still likely to maintain the status quo. A US-China G2 is more likely at least for 10 years.
你的主要理由是央格鲁-萨克森国家对人才的吸引力大，
--Two other key reasons I do not want to put in writing: 尚武精神 and the elite's commitment to their own nations.
"Great empires are not maintained by timidity". Anglos reached their current global dominance through lots of military sacrifice. Americans still keep this kind of militarism in their culture (national hunting passion, regular rehearsal of historical battles, ownership of guns, BBQ life style). You do not see that in the French culture.
Commitment to their own nation. Aristcrat families usually suffer first during the British Imperial expansion. One example is the Churchill family. East coast American elite families still have the similar tradition--check the history of Roosevelt family. Roosevelt Sr. and Roosevelt Jr. all have solid military records before presidency. WASPs truly treat America as their destined homeland. They are very alert at continental Europeans and do not easily trust those Italian/Greek Americans.
You can feel it when you have more friends in that circle. It takes some time to see when you live on the US east coast.
以前确实是！但是这一现象的原因是这些国家的相对富裕能够给人才更多的发财机会，
--money plus tolerance. People move to America not just because of money.
或者即使这些国家最初不是那么富裕的时候也能凭借资源给人才提供发财的机会。现在的央格鲁-萨克森国家还有这些条件吗？有点前瞻意识的人才，都不再认同这里还有机会了。
--hehe. Not all anglo nations. But at least, in America, I still see lots of hope. Asia has growth opportunity, but no advantage in terms of living standards.
道理就是前面曾网友说的，这些国家高昂的人力成本一定会因为自由竞争的原因导致产业远离央格鲁-萨克森国家。
--Key: free trade. Your story holds if America still tolerates free trade--I do not believe free trade will survive much longer in the next 20 years. America can easily shut off its border and refuse to deal with the outside world. It did that before. This nation has a weird history of seclusion. Then on the global arena, you will have several equal-weight players who do not respect each other. A stable global order will not be possible.
还能有什么样的产业只能由这些国家的产业工人来完成呢？
--when there is no free trade, we never know the definite answer.
没有任何优势产业，一个国家的财富哪里积累呢？美元的地位能够永远没有真实的价值依托吗？
--that's a good question--let me tell you, America will bring up lots of regional conflicts and profit from international instability. They are old Liu Mang, offspring of the cunning Britons. Britons kicked ass of European powers not just by military tools. They are not afraid of doing that.
至于你的问题：
My question for all Chinese on this forum: did you see any institutional innovation from China ever since 1978? Did we create international accounting standards, World Bank, International Monetary Funds, United Nations (or International League), NATO, national insurance system, international commmercial code, GATT, WTO, first securities law, first security market regulatory, first international settlement bank, most innovative research universities, most dynamic high-tech firms, administrative system, best management practices...
我认为值得所有的挑战者思索，答案一定在新一轮产业发展的过程中产生。
--hehe. New industries... Will not happen first in China. No social infrastructure for that. VoIP phone service was pioneered by two chinese brothers in Fu Jian in late 1990s. They are still sitting in jail now after persecuted by the China Telecom for national security reason. You can google it yourself.
我目前无法明确回答，但可以预言的一点，这种最后的社会管理格局肯定不是央格鲁-萨克森目前主导的这种格局。
--yes. It will be an unstable compromise. Continental Europe will be muslimized. It has already lost global leadership. China will need another 30 years before a complete takeover.
If I were you, I WOULD WORRY MORE ABOUT THE FORTHCOMING HYPERINFLATION in China and my pension money than the global structure at least 10 years later.
Anyway, China is the nation of the political elites. Why should an average Chinese cares so much. Next time, when you have to pay the North American price for a small apartment in BJ or Shanghai, you will know who really rip you off in your real life. This time, it is not the Anglo people.
We enter a 10-year period of global instability and it is not a funny period in anyone's life.