全部版块 我的主页
论坛 经济学论坛 三区 宏观经济学
3290 3
2009-02-06
书中如是说”...Chinese citizens now produce export goods from which they derive no direct economic benefit. In effect, consumer goods are rationed in China so as to make them plentiful in the United States.

However, when WWII ended, American factories didn't shut down; they merely returned to consumer goods production. Soldiers didn't lose their jobs; they merely put their labour into more productive use. Instead of being wasted on a war(which unfortunately had to be fought), resources were applied to civilian purposes, leading to a postwar economic boom.

The same would apply in China today. As Americans once sacrificed to defeat the Nazis and Imperial Japan, the Chinese now sacrifice merely to support the purchasing power of Americans. If China allowed the dollar to decline against the yuan, American purchasing power would by definition be transferred to the Chinese. In China, factors of production would therefore be reallocated as they were during the postwar period in United States. Factories would retool and labour would seek more productive employment. Instead of wasting scarce resources producing goods to export, China would instead produce goods for domestic consumption.“

那为什么不让人民币升值呢?反正美国已由生产型经济转为服务型, 美国无法以商品偿还中国,同时美金1963年脱离今本位,美元是fiat money,拿着越来越多的美国债卷在实对中国有什么好处?

 现在暂时还可用债卷和其他国家换取货品,但一旦美金失去它的世界储备金地位,美国生产力相对下降,中国将会用大量美国政府债卷做些什么?

这很令人关注好奇。。。

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-2-6 20:40:08编辑过]

二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

全部回复
2009-2-6 20:46:00
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2010-7-15 08:33:06
什么意思,简直。。。。。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2010-7-17 23:10:14
个人认为,打战要钱,用钱打他是一样.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

相关推荐
栏目导航
热门文章
推荐文章

说点什么

分享

扫码加好友,拉您进群
各岗位、行业、专业交流群