“中國(guó)制造”正為美國(guó)賺錢
????又要返校了,你還在為要花70美元購(gòu)買一雙 “中國(guó)制造”,而不是“美國(guó)制造”的膠底運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋而傷腦筋嗎?根據(jù)最新的研究,你大可不必為此擔(dān)心。 ????美國(guó)人花在中國(guó)制造的商品上的錢,有一大半實(shí)際上留在了美國(guó)——它們流進(jìn)了美國(guó)公司、工人、營(yíng)銷人員、零售商、和物流商的口袋里。根據(jù)舊金山聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備銀行(Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)的報(bào)告,每1美元的消費(fèi)中,就有至少55美分留在了美國(guó)。所以,就那雙70美元的膠底運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋來(lái)說(shuō),至少有38.50美元收入了美國(guó)囊中。 |
????Worried about buying a $70 pair of sneakers that say "Made in China" this back-to-school season because you'd rather spend your dollars on "Made in U.S.A." products instead? Worry not, according to a new study. ????More than half the amount you spend on products made in China actually stays here -- going to American companies, workers, marketers, retailers, and transport providers. The amount is least 55 cents per each $1 spent, says a report from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. So for that $70 pair of sneakers, $38.50 of it boosts bottom lines here in the U.S. |
?(圖例,從上到下)
?- 美國(guó)原產(chǎn)的美國(guó)貨
?- 從其他國(guó)家進(jìn)口零部件生產(chǎn)的美國(guó)貨
?- 從中國(guó)進(jìn)口零部件生產(chǎn)的美國(guó)貨
?- 從其他國(guó)家進(jìn)口的成品
?- 從中國(guó)進(jìn)口的成品
?- 其他國(guó)家產(chǎn)品中的美國(guó)成分
?- 中國(guó)制造中的美國(guó)成分
數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)源:美國(guó)聯(lián)邦經(jīng)濟(jì)分析局(Bureau of Economic Analysis)、美國(guó)聯(lián)邦勞工統(tǒng)計(jì)局(Bureau of Labor Statistics)、美國(guó)聯(lián)邦人口普查局(Census Bureau)及作者的計(jì)算數(shù)據(jù)。
????盡管你可能從沃爾瑪(Wal-Mart)或其他大賣場(chǎng)的購(gòu)物經(jīng)驗(yàn)中總結(jié)出、或聽說(shuō),美國(guó)對(duì)中國(guó)的中國(guó)貿(mào)易逆差的數(shù)字有多么聳人聽聞,但中國(guó)進(jìn)口的商品在美國(guó)總體經(jīng)濟(jì)中實(shí)際只占很小的一部分:2010年,中國(guó)進(jìn)口僅占美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的2.5%。總體來(lái)說(shuō),去年美國(guó)從全球進(jìn)口的產(chǎn)品在美國(guó)GDP中的份額也只有16%。根據(jù)舊金山聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備銀行(FRBSF)報(bào)告的作者加琳娜?希爾和巴特?霍比金恩,“大部分美國(guó)銷售的商品和服務(wù)都是本土制造?!奔揖?、家居用品、電子產(chǎn)品、服裝和鞋不在此列。2010年,三分之一的美國(guó)消費(fèi)者購(gòu)買的服裝和鞋打有“中國(guó)制造”的標(biāo)簽。而家具中“中國(guó)制造”的比例占到了五分之一。 ????不過根據(jù)數(shù)據(jù),服務(wù)業(yè)支撐起了美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的主體,而除制造業(yè)產(chǎn)品外,中國(guó)進(jìn)口的服務(wù)在美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)中根本不存在。報(bào)告指出,美國(guó)消費(fèi)者購(gòu)買的產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)中,有88.5%源自美國(guó)本土。根據(jù)希爾和霍比金恩:“主要原因是,占據(jù)消費(fèi)三分之二的服務(wù)是由當(dāng)?shù)靥峁┑??!?/p> ????報(bào)告的作者同時(shí)指出,大量元件,例如iPhone使用的半導(dǎo)體芯片和設(shè)計(jì),均源自美國(guó)。他們?cè)艘环?009年亞洲發(fā)展銀行研究所(Asian Development Bank Institute)的研究報(bào)告,稱在中國(guó)生產(chǎn)一臺(tái)iPhone的成本約為179美元,而iPhone的售價(jià)約為500美元。因此,美國(guó)零售成本中有179美元包含在中國(guó)進(jìn)口的成分當(dāng)中。但實(shí)際上,在中國(guó)組裝的成本僅為6.50美元。剩余的172.50美元為其他國(guó)家制造零部件的成本,其中包括在美國(guó)制造零件所花費(fèi)的10.75美元。 ????舊金山聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備銀行發(fā)布這份新報(bào)告的原因是中國(guó)通貨膨脹高漲亮起紅燈。根據(jù)中國(guó)方面最近公布的數(shù)據(jù),7月份全國(guó)CPI增長(zhǎng)率為6.5%,高于6月份的6.4%,創(chuàng)下近三年來(lái)的新高。鑒于中國(guó)制造在iPhone這類產(chǎn)品中的占比極低,報(bào)告的作者總結(jié)認(rèn)為,中國(guó)最近勞工成本的增長(zhǎng)和通貨膨脹不太可能會(huì)在美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)轉(zhuǎn)變成為海外通貨膨脹壓力。希爾和霍比金恩稱“這意味著中國(guó)的通貨膨脹對(duì)美國(guó)消費(fèi)價(jià)格產(chǎn)生的直接影響微乎其微。”鑒于美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)近來(lái)的狀態(tài),美國(guó)消費(fèi)者不如姑且相信這些數(shù)據(jù),稍稍放松一下緊繃的神經(jīng)。 ????譯者:周峰 |
????And despite what you may conclude from shopping at Wal-Mart (WMT) or other large stores -- or hearing big, scary figures about the trade deficit with China -- imports from China make up just a very small portion of our total economy: just 2.5% of gross domestic product in 2010. Overall, products from around the world accounted for only 16% of our GDP last year. "The vast majority of goods and services sold in the United States is produced here," according to FRBSF report authors Galina Hale and Bart Hobijn. The exceptions are furniture and household items, electronic goods, and clothing and shoes. A third of U.S. consumer purchases for clothing and shoes in 2010 carried a "Made in China" label. For furniture, it was one fifth. ????But it's services that make up the overwhelming majority of the U.S. economy, according to the data, and no services at all came from China -- just manufactured products. 88.5% of U.S. consumer spending is for products and services originating here, the report says. "This is largely because services, which make up about two-thirds of spending, are produced locally," according to Hale and Hobjin. ????The authors also point out that a large number of component parts -- like semiconductor chips and designs used in the iPhone -- originate in the U.S. They point to a 2009 Asian Development Bank Institute study reporting that it cost about $179 to produce an iPhone in China. The phone is then sold here for about $500. Thus, $179 of the U.S. retail cost consisted of Chinese imported content. But only $6.50 actually went to cover assembly costs in China. The other $172.50 was for parts produced in other countries, including $10.75 for parts made in the U.S. ????The reason for the new FRBSF report is the red flag raised by China's growing inflation. The latest numbers from Beijing show a 6.5% annual rise across the country in July, up from 6.4% in June and breaking a three-year record. But with such low levels of Chinese content in products like iPhones, the report's authors conclude that recent increases in labor costs and inflation in China are not likely to translate into broad inflationary pressures in the U.S. "This suggests that Chinese inflation will have little direct effect on U.S. consumer prices," Hale and Hobjin say. Given the state of the U.S. economy these days, consumers can take that data and breathe a small sigh of relief.??? |