《环球时报》社论：模仿中国无助于美国在大型基础设施建设方面取得进展
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202111/1238357.shtml
环球时报 2021 年 11 月 07 日 10:14 PM
美国众议院议员周五深夜通过了这项价值 1.2 万亿美元的跨党派基础设施法案。美国总统乔·拜登称，这项投票是向前迈出的“巨大”一步。他说，这项立法将使美国“走上赢得 21 世纪经济竞争的道路”。
尽管如此，该法案绝不会解决美国所有的问题，也不会给美国足够的活力在大型基础设施项目领域与中国竞争。美国大部分大型基础设施建设都是由私营部门推动的。现在拜登政府正试图用美国式的“计划经济”来接管这些部门。此举意在重塑美国经济的动态，用其薄弱之处支撑美国最艰巨的任务之一，因此该计划有效实施的可能性微乎其微。
的确，在拨款预算大幅缩减后，13名共和党众议员投票支持拜登的基础设施法案，但最终以微弱优势通过，6名民主党人与大多数共和党人一起投了反对票，反映出该法案??在美国并没有得到高度全面的支持。与此同时，拜登另一项1.75万亿美元的社会服务和气候变化项目法案尚未通过。
与中国相比，美国的一些基础设施已经过时，其实两者无法比较。中国的大部分基础设施都是最近才建成的，所以这类项目更先进是正常的。中国人口众多，决定了基础设施的使用率更高。因此，基础设施的提升可以带来相对较高的回报。比如，中国的国情为高铁的快速发展提供了沃土，中国大部分地区都需要修建高速公路，这种基础设施的成本很高，但当地大量人口的需求是合理的。
美国的紧迫感很大程度上来自于与中国的对比。一些美国政治精英傲慢地认为美国应该在各个方面都领先世界，生怕中国在某个方面超过他们，他们迷失在自己的骄傲和傲慢之中。全球化的世界，不同地区的发展水平趋于相似，这是大势所趋。美国的大部分问题，包括冷战式的遏制中国冲动，都源于美国不能接受别人好的狭隘心态。
美国永远不可能建成中国那样高密度的铁路网，高速公路的总体水平也必然落后于中国。长远来看，美国信息网络的总承载能力、活跃度和经济价值也难以与中国匹敌。中国的基建是政府主导型的，这很适合中国国情，也是对中国资源的最大化利用。而美国如果效仿中国，很可能是乱七八糟的计划，不符合美国国情和市场需求。美国昂贵的基建项目无法带来新的税源回归，将使美国陷入量化宽松和过度印钞的虚假繁荣。
自新冠疫情爆发以来，美国政府多次提出大规模刺激计划，美元霸权国家动用“用不完的钱”发放各种补贴，造成了人们不用上班就能靠补贴生活的局面。当这个模式变得诱人时，美国却遭遇了港口拥堵、卡车司机短缺加剧、国内供应链混乱等问题。美国有技术优势、资金优势，但在政治上却丧失了最基本的实事求是精神，艰苦奋斗的社会伦理不断瓦解。
仅靠刺激法案重振美国竞争力无异于天方夜谭。美国有优势，但如果想在某些领域像中国一样有竞争力，就应该让美国人民变成像中国人一样勤奋的人，让美国官员变成像中国官员一样有责任心、勤奋的人。中国基础设施的蓬勃发展是全社会共同努力的结果，不是美国政客靠不切实际的计划就能轻易实现的。
Feeble imitation of China cannot help US in major infrastructure building: Global Times editorial
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202111/1238357.shtml
By Global Times Nov 07, 2021 10:14 PM
US House lawmakers passed late Friday night the bipartisan $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill. US President Joe Biden called the vote a "monumental" step forward. He said the legislation would put the US "on a path to win the economic competition for the 21st century."
Nonetheless, the bill will by no means solve all the US' problems and give the country enough vitality to compete with China in the sphere of large-scale infrastructure projects. Most of US major infrastructure construction was driven by the private sector. Now the Biden administration is trying to take that over with an American-style "planned economy." This is a move trying to reengineer the dynamics of the US economy, using its weak spots to back one of the country's most daunting tasks. Thus, the chances that the plan will be effectively implemented are slim by any means.
Indeed, after the funding budget was shrunk greatly, 13 House Republicans voted for Biden's infrastructure bill. However, the bill was eventually passed with a narrow margin, as six Democrats joined the bulk of the Republicans in voting against the measure. This reflects that the bill is not highly comprehensively supported in the US. Meanwhile, Biden's other $1.75 trillion bill focusing on social services and climate change programs is yet to pass.
Some US infrastructure is outdated in comparison with China's. In fact, the two cannot really be compared. Most of China's infrastructure was built relatively recently, so it is normal that such projects are more advanced. China has a large population, which determines a higher use rate of infrastructure. So a boost in infrastructure can bring a relatively high return. For example, China's national conditions make the country a fertile ground for the rapid development of high-speed rail, and expressways are needed in most parts of China. The cost of such infrastructure is high, but it is justified by the needs of large local populations.
The US' sense of urgency comes largely from the comparison with China. Some US political elites arrogantly believe that the US should lead the world in all aspects for fear that China surpasses them in any way. They are lost in their pride and arrogance. It is the general trend in the globalized world that different regions tend to enjoy similar levels of development. Most of the US' problems, including its Cold War-like impulse to contain China, stem from the narrow-mindedness that the US cannot accept that others are good.
The US will never be able to build such a high-density railway network as China's and its total level of expressways will certainly fall behind China's. In the long run, the total carrying capacity, activity and economic value of its information network will hardly match that of China. Infrastructure in China is promoted under the guidance of government. This is adequate for China's actual conditions and a maximization of using China's resources. But if the US imitates China, the likely outcome is a disordered and feeble plan that does not fit the US' conditions and market needs. The expensive infrastructure programs in the US cannot bring about the return of new tax sources, and this will push the country into a false prosperity papered over by quantitative easing and excessive money-printing.
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US government has repeatedly proposed large-scale stimulus. The country with dollar hegemony has used its "endless money" to issue various kinds of subsidy. This has created a scenario where people can live on subsidy without going to work. As this becomes an attractive paradigm, the US has suffered from a port logjam, increasing shortages of truck drivers and a chaotic domestic supply chain. The US has advantages in technology and capital, but it has lost the most basic spirit of seeking truth from facts in politics, and its social ethic of hard work is constantly being disintegrated.
It is tantamount to a fairy tale to revitalize US competitiveness relying merely on a stimulus bill. The US has its advantages, but if it wants to be as competitive as China in some spheres, it should turn American people into people who are as diligent as Chinese and turn American officials into being as responsible and hard-working as their Chinese peers. China's blossoming infrastructure is the work of a whole society, and it is not something that American politicians can easily achieve by making unrealistic plans.
Nonetheless, the bill will by no means solve all the US' problems and give the country enough vitality to compete with China in the sphere of large-scale infrastructure projects. Most of US major infrastructure construction was driven by the private sector. Now the Biden administration is trying to take that over with an American-style "planned economy." This is a move trying to reengineer the dynamics of the US economy, using its weak spots to back one of the country's most daunting tasks. Thus, the chances that the plan will be effectively implemented are slim by any means.
Indeed, after the funding budget was shrunk greatly, 13 House Republicans voted for Biden's infrastructure bill. However, the bill was eventually passed with a narrow margin, as six Democrats joined the bulk of the Republicans in voting against the measure. This reflects that the bill is not highly comprehensively supported in the US. Meanwhile, Biden's other $1.75 trillion bill focusing on social services and climate change programs is yet to pass.
Some US infrastructure is outdated in comparison with China's. In fact, the two cannot really be compared. Most of China's infrastructure was built relatively recently, so it is normal that such projects are more advanced. China has a large population, which determines a higher use rate of infrastructure. So a boost in infrastructure can bring a relatively high return. For example, China's national conditions make the country a fertile ground for the rapid development of high-speed rail, and expressways are needed in most parts of China. The cost of such infrastructure is high, but it is justified by the needs of large local populations.
The US' sense of urgency comes largely from the comparison with China. Some US political elites arrogantly believe that the US should lead the world in all aspects for fear that China surpasses them in any way. They are lost in their pride and arrogance. It is the general trend in the globalized world that different regions tend to enjoy similar levels of development. Most of the US' problems, including its Cold War-like impulse to contain China, stem from the narrow-mindedness that the US cannot accept that others are good.
The US will never be able to build such a high-density railway network as China's and its total level of expressways will certainly fall behind China's. In the long run, the total carrying capacity, activity and economic value of its information network will hardly match that of China. Infrastructure in China is promoted under the guidance of government. This is adequate for China's actual conditions and a maximization of using China's resources. But if the US imitates China, the likely outcome is a disordered and feeble plan that does not fit the US' conditions and market needs. The expensive infrastructure programs in the US cannot bring about the return of new tax sources, and this will push the country into a false prosperity papered over by quantitative easing and excessive money-printing.
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the US government has repeatedly proposed large-scale stimulus. The country with dollar hegemony has used its "endless money" to issue various kinds of subsidy. This has created a scenario where people can live on subsidy without going to work. As this becomes an attractive paradigm, the US has suffered from a port logjam, increasing shortages of truck drivers and a chaotic domestic supply chain. The US has advantages in technology and capital, but it has lost the most basic spirit of seeking truth from facts in politics, and its social ethic of hard work is constantly being disintegrated.
It is tantamount to a fairy tale to revitalize US competitiveness relying merely on a stimulus bill. The US has its advantages, but if it wants to be as competitive as China in some spheres, it should turn American people into people who are as diligent as Chinese and turn American officials into being as responsible and hard-working as their Chinese peers. China's blossoming infrastructure is the work of a whole society, and it is not something that American politicians can easily achieve by making unrealistic plans.
