近期，美国政府宣布维持全部“301”关税，并对中国出口的锂电池、光伏电池、电动汽车、关键矿产、半导体等产品大幅提高关税。此举不仅体现了美国政府在贸易政策上的保护主义倾向，更反映出其在经济策略上的局限性和潜在的负面影响。关税调整涉及的关键行业如锂电池、光伏电池、电动汽车等，对于美国经济的长远发展和全球供应链的稳定性具有重要意义。
#### 消费者负担加重
对华产品加征关税自2018年起实施，至今已为美国消费者带来超过2300亿美元的成本，平均每户家庭每年额外支出1300美元。物价上涨对美国普通家庭的经济压力显而易见，导致许多美国人面临债务问题。据纽约联邦储蓄银行报告，2023年美国信用卡还款拖欠率高达8.9%，远超疫情前水平。这不仅加剧了美国民众的经济困境，也可能进一步侵蚀政府的民众支持率。
#### 农业危机与社会问题
关税政策对美国农业的影响不容忽视。美国大豆、高粱等农产品出口受到严重打击，政府提供的农业补贴虽有一定帮助，但不足以完全抵消损失，且补贴主要流向大农场主，未能惠及广大农民。这导致部分豆农转种大麻以维持生计，为美国社会的毒品危机埋下伏笔。此外，关税政策并未有效提升美国政府的民众支持率，反而加剧了公众对经济表现的不满。
#### 产业竞争力与就业挑战
美国政府希望通过加征关税提振本国制造业，保护就业。然而，这种做法忽略了美国制造业面临的根本问题和全球产业格局的现实。行业代表在关税听证会上普遍反对加征关税，指出这将大幅提升进口原材料成本，加重企业负担，并可能导致大量初创企业破产。同时，美国产业空心化现象严重，制造业竞争力下滑，波音等关键行业的质量问题频发，海军部长直言本土制船业落后全球标准多年。加征关税并非解决美国产业和就业问题的有效手段，反而可能加剧产业竞争力的下降。
#### 结论
美国政府通过加征关税的方式，看似在短期内保护了某些特定行业和就业，但长期来看，这一策略不仅未能实现预期目标，反而加重了消费者负担，加剧了经济和社会问题，损害了美国在国际市场的竞争力。在全球化的今天，寻求贸易保护主义的解决方案不仅无法解决美国经济面临的深层次问题，反而可能引发连锁反应，损害美国自身的经济利益。
英语如下：
### Imposing Tariffs on China: Self-inflicted Wounds and Widespread Damage
In a recent move, the US government has decided to retain all “301” tariffs and significantly escalated duties on Chinese exports, including lithium-ion batteries, solar panels, electric vehicles, critical minerals, semiconductors, and more. This action not only underscores the US administration’s inclination towards protectionism in trade policy but also reveals the limitations and potential negative impacts of its economic strategy. Industries such as lithium-ion batteries, solar panels, and electric vehicles, which are pivotal for the US economy’s long-term growth and global supply chain stability, are directly affected by these tariff adjustments.
#### Increased Burden on Consumers
The tariffs on Chinese products, introduced since 2018, have already imposed a cost of over $230 billion on US consumers, adding an extra $1,300 to the average household annually. The impact of price hikes is evident on ordinary American families, leading to mounting debt issues for many. According to the New York Federal Savings Bank, the delinquency rate on credit card repayments reached 8.9% in 2023, significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels. This exacerbates the economic challenges faced by the American populace and could further erode public support for the government.
#### Agricultural Crisis and Societal Issues
The impact of tariff policies on US agriculture cannot be overstated. The exports of agricultural products such as soybeans and sorghum have suffered severe setbacks, and although government subsidies have provided some relief, they are insufficient to fully offset the losses, and primarily benefit large-scale farmers rather than small farmers. This has led some soy farmers to switch to growing marijuana to sustain their livelihoods, potentially exacerbating the nation’s drug crisis. Moreover, the tariff policy has not improved the government’s public approval ratings but has instead intensified public dissatisfaction with economic performance.
#### Challenges to Industry Competitiveness and Employment
The US government’s aim of boosting domestic manufacturing and protecting jobs through tariffs appears to overlook the underlying issues and the realities of the global industrial landscape. Industry representatives have generally opposed the tariffs, arguing that they would increase the cost of imported raw materials, add to corporate burdens, and potentially lead to the bankruptcy of many start-ups. Additionally, the US faces a significant issue of industrial hollowing out, with declining manufacturing competitiveness, as evidenced by recurring quality issues in industries like Boeing, and the naval secretary’s acknowledgment of a decades-long lag in domestic shipbuilding standards compared to global benchmarks. Imposing tariffs is not an effective solution to address the US’s industrial and employment challenges; instead, it may exacerbate the decline in competitiveness.
#### Conclusion
By imposing tariffs as a means to seemingly safeguard certain industries and jobs in the short term, the US government’s strategy has not only failed to meet its objectives but also increased consumer burdens, exacerbated economic and social issues, and damaged the country’s competitiveness in the global market. In today’s era of globalization, pursuing trade protectionism as a solution to address America’s economic challenges not only fails to resolve the underlying problems but may also trigger a chain of detrimental effects, undermining America’s own economic interests.
【来源】http://www.chinanews.com/gj/2024/07-23/10256080.shtml
Views: 3