瑞 · 达利欧：不要再把中美冲突称为贸易战了
亚太：2019-05-16
● 瑞 · 达利欧
英文原文：(略)
The Ideological War of Comparable Powers in a Small World
“旗鼓相当的两个大国, 在狭小世界里的一场意识形态之战”
By Ray Dalio
Co-Chief Investment Officer & Co-Chairman of Bridgewater Associates, L.P.
作者瑞 · 达利欧, 美国桥水投资集团共同主席和首席投资官
May 14, 2019
不要再把中美两国之间的冲突称为“贸易战”了，这是个具有误导性的词。这是旗鼓相当的两个大国在一个狭小的世界里进行的一场观念形态博弈。换言之，这与贸易关系不大，而是事关两个问题：由两种不同的处世之道延伸出的不同的政府、企业、个人行为方式和全球地缘政治形态；与此同时中国正崛起为一个可与美国一较高下的大国，并且在不远的将来还会进一步壮大，但世界并不大，在这样的环境下，这两个国家难免会以各种方式发生碰撞。虽然中美两国可以通过谈判解决贸易问题，但他们无法通过谈判解决更基本的问题 (例如，他们的处世之道，以及旗鼓相当的两个大国之间的碰撞)。这些基本问题 —— 比如企业与政府的关系 —— 是贸易争端的核心，也是症结所在, 而且将始终存在。
中国人数千年来的处世之道以儒家的、自上而下的家族式模式为核心，也就是他们所说的“中国特色”。美国人近250年来的处世之道则遵循个人主义的、自下而上的民主观念。期望中国人改弦易辙的想法未免天真，指望美国人做出改变也没有道理。这些不同的处世方式影响着两国领导人对政府、企业和个人之间关系的看法。而正是因为这些边界在“贸易战”谈判中被打破而导致了贸易谈判破裂 —— 至少暂时如此。
还有一个事实对谈判非常重要 —— 时间站在中国这一边，因为他们变强大的速度比美国更快，所以任何“战争”或是“对抗”，更早发生对美国有利，而较晚发生则对中国有利。同样值得注意的是，美国和中国对待“战争”或是“对抗”的方式不同。中国人的方法是试图“不战而屈人之兵”，韬光隐晦，再向对手展示肌肉，令其不战而退；而西方人的战斗方式往往更像动物，你一拳、我一脚，斗到两败俱伤，直到一方认输 —
Trump's immigration plan endangers America's ability to integrate foreigners https://apple.news/ApcgPFkcKRLWXmVUqBQwTJw It's family reunification, not highly skilled workers, that allows the U.S. to form a cohesive national identity.
To start with, these opponents ignore the enormity of the task of ensuring immigrants become full members of a new society. We expect people to arrive from somewhere else in the world, become American, have children who grow up as Americans, and possess loyalty, common civic values and a sense of shared identity. This is a dimension of immigration in which the United States probably has the world’s strongest track record. But practically speaking, how does that actually happen? https://apple.news/ApcgPFkcKRLWXmVUqBQwTJw One of the key reasons is family networks, which beget community networks. Family ties currently form the explicit basis of most legal immigration to this country. Visas for spouses, children, parents and siblings of those already in the country make up 66 percent of residency visas, or green cards. And that makes sense. I found in my research — on the integration of Germans who immigrated from Europe to Texas from the 1840s onward — that new arrivals reflexively relied on family first and foremost, even as they established an impressive set of educational, religious and social institutions to support them while they built their communities in the Lone Star state.
In contrast, a skills-based immigration policy would not provide this support system. While formal and informal social and voluntary organizations, including religious ones, would continue to do very important work, they would never make up for what we would lose through family networks. Some countries spend considerable amounts on such services, like Germany, but are often more famous for their lack of integration than for significant payoff from these programs. https://apple.news/ApcgPFkcKRLWXmVUqBQwTJw Beyond the practical question of who will do this work (and who will pay for it), there is the deeper question of what this new framework would mean for membership in our society. Are we setting ourselves up to host a set of people who see themselves as global winners, looking to negotiate the best residency deal for themselves without emotional connections to us or intellectual regard for our ideals? I am not confident that the civics exam Trump proposed will resolve the problem.
In contrast, a skills-based immigration policy would not provide this support system. While formal and informal social and voluntary organizations, including religious ones, would continue to do very important work, they would never make up for what we would lose through family networks. Some countries spend considerable amounts on such services, like Germany, but are often more famous for their lack of integration than for significant payoff from these programs. https://apple.news/ApcgPFkcKRLWXmVUqBQwTJw Beyond the practical question of who will do this work (and who will pay for it), there is the deeper question of what this new framework would mean for membership in our society. Are we setting ourselves up to host a set of people who see themselves as global winners, looking to negotiate the best residency deal for themselves without emotional connections to us or intellectual regard for our ideals? I am not confident that the civics exam Trump proposed will resolve the problem.
Invite Friends
Members
The page has timed out,
please click refresh to continue.
