Long Live The People's Republic of China

伟大的祖国万岁，伟大的中国人民万岁，世界人民大团结万岁！！！

Excelon Quits the United States Chamber of Commerce

The company just quit United States Chamber of Commerce, along with some other companies that is specialized in new energy and utilities. The company has a fleet of nuclear powerplants and has a vested interest in passing the new carbon curbing law. Though the law has been passed by the House of Representatives, it has to wait for the Senate's approval. But that doesn't seem likely in the near future. Since the Senate and the Obama's administration are troubled by the health-care reform. Many states with coal-fired power plants may put up a fierce resistance to the new law. For the past few months they have been gaining ground, but now green businesses are leading the fight against the resistance of the new law. National Manufacturers Association and Chamber of Commerce believe that the new law will raise cost for their members. But excelon firmly believe that the new law actually would create jobs. Of course there is great financial incentive for excelon to sport the new law. If cap and trade system were adopted, excelon would benefit tremendously. Even though excelon may not win the battle it could gain from the grain stance it took in the campaign.
Many people probably don't know that in Chicago there is a Chicago Climate Exchange. As far as I know there are many companies already voluntarily dissipate in the trade of greenhouse gases. And the CCE trading has reached billion-dollar level. Companies that joined the game early certainly are looking forward to a formal system in which their advantage could turn to more profits. We're still not sure about the future of carbon reduction. The final law would be a compromise between the House and the Senate. But no matter what, without this legislation, America cannot assume the leading role in the battle against climate change.

Without a known enemy, America is at war with itself

Ever since the end of the cold war, America seemed lost its ultimate enemy, and thus its ultimate unitor. There may have been small "evil", like Saddam Hussein, or North Korea, Iran, maybe the combination of them called the "axis of evil". Then there's this unvisible "terror" like al qaeda, pervasive and faceless. At last, there's some potential "big evil" like China. But none posed the threat like the Nazi Germany or the Stalinist Soviet. Even if the "war on terror" for a very short period of time pull americans together. The united front fell apart quickly.

Now, Americans are at war with each other. The monsters and the devils, they discovered, are among themselves. They are radicals, communists, illegal aliens, gun-hangers, baby-killers, wealth distributors, muslim, bankers, and the list go on and on. In the name of democracy, they fight an unending war with each other. Their news became part of a propaganda machine, aiming and destroying the other side. It makes me think: what's good if no consensus and progress can be made? What's real about the motto "government of the people, by thepeople, for the people", if the people are so divided by fixed ideology while suffering common disease?

The effect of losing an real enemy and the failure of creating an replica have led to a total collapse of the domestic consensus building mechanism. So it seems that democracy works well with imperialism and global struggle, not that well with pax americana.

Political Convenience Won Over Chimerica

There seemed no miss that every time when a politician was forced to choose between his domestic political support and sound international relations, he'd have picked his base over his reach. Obama was no exception. Though his selection for the jobs to handle Chimaerica relations is excellent, he has to obey the rules of gravity after all. Particularly this time of the year, when big business is fighting back with entrenched ideological weapons and wide conservative reinforcement.

On the one hand, tires and steel tariffs are bad precedents for global trade, but the damage so far is amendable if communication channels are properly opened and maintained. Also, if the majority of the trade relations is untouched. Chinese protests lacked teeth and further restrictions would produce domestic backlash, and Obama's advisors should know these. The real question here is : can these actions even bring the support from the unions as his political advisors imagined? The answer actually is unlikely.

Protectionism can only buy Obama limited number of votes. Unions alone have very small chance of boosting his job ratings or health care reform. In fact, China continues to buy US bonds will lend more support to his costly programs than anything else. Therefore, I think some actions to flex the musle and show his willingness to "protect American interest" are enough. But rolling down the path of protectionism and thinking of no future domestic consequences would be stupid to say the lest.

Apparently, the president's anachronism on timing of reform has caused him too much trouble. Hopefully he won't generate vicious chain reactions from this.

Finally Obama Fought Back

It's been two month the right kept demonizing the health care reform and the president's respond was less than optimal. As the so called blue dog democrats prepared to sold out the real meaning of the reform and the reformists started to retreat, things looked dimmer than ever. I heard from the radios, even today, that people calling the U.S. health care system "world's best" and the only proof was that somehow foreign folks came to the U.S. for medical treatment. There was a huge gap between information offered by proponents and opponents of this reform. Yet, from my own experience, health care only works if you are rich in this country, or in this world.

Unfortunately, the news media after the speech were only crazy about the poor Rep. Wilson from SC who called the president a liar. Since the people he represents could burst into that kind of classless shout, I guess so could he. The lack of respect and civility for a black president seems to be the wide spreading disease in the right wing extremists. They are hurt, deeply, by the fact that their country was "lost".

Among other comments, I like Michael Pollan's NYtimes Big food vs. big insurance the best. Rarely are people thinking outside the set primeters and trace it to the root of the problem. Aparently, anyone coming from outside of the US could tell there something wrong with American food. It's fat, high calories, ill-nutritious, and bad taste. Moreover, middle to low class whose access to qulity food is limited has to consume a huge amount of cheap bad food. The accumulation of fat is unbelieveable, including myself! Of course, even Mr. Pollan was reluctant to point out that Americans are overworked comparing to the Europeans. And that makes them even more unhealthy.

The discussion on COST can also be extended into other professional areas. In the American system, professionalism is rewarded with extravagant salary. Doctors, Lawyers, Bankers, whoever goes to a professional school and pays the big tuition bill will get a fat job. These profesisons have been effectively mystified to the outsiders and anyone who wants to get professional service is bound to pay these people handsomely. The limit supply of these professionals constrained quality service and raised the bar so high that all the other people would have to foot the bill.

Obama was absolutely right in his speech, and Polanyi was right from the very beginning, that the market would work against itself if left alone. The irony is that without government intervention to design a better playing field, the market would actually be distorted to benefit only a few. It will be a real shame, much bigger than Wilson's blunder, if Americans forsake this chance of reform again.

中美两个改革开放

今年是中国建国60周年和改革开放30周年的重要年份。在回首中国30年改革开放历程的时候，我们往往忽略了另一个重要的国际变化，即美国也经历了近30年的“改革开放”。这个美式“改革开放”就是从1981年里根总统上台开始的所谓“里根革命”。里根在就职演说中就宣称“政府不是我们所面临问题的解决办法，政府本身就是问题”。因此“里根革命”的核心内容就是“自由化”或者说“去政府化”。基于供给学派经济学的信条，里根政府实行了大规模减税促进投资、限制工会并控制工资增长、大规模提高军费支出但缩减所有社会福利支出、推动市场自由化、以及放松环境法律标准和监管等一系列刺激经济增长的措施。这些措施在一定程度上消除了美国经济70年代的“滞胀”状态，控制住了通货膨胀，使失业率有所下降，但同时也导致矫枉过正的市场狂热和难以控制的财政赤字。虽然老布什政府在1992年的竞选中输给了巧打经济牌的克林顿总统，美国共和党却赢得了美国国会的主导权，不仅继承而且发扬了“里根革命”的精神。最突出的表现就是美国国会在1999年终于投票撤销了自1933年新政时代订立的格拉斯—斯蒂格法，消除了商业银行与投资银行之间的经营限制。尽管由于一系列的金融丑闻，国会于2002年通过了萨班斯—奥克斯利法案以加强对上市公司的会计监管，但金融业过度依赖行业自律、放松政府监管的趋势一直延续下来，成为这次美国大衰退的根源。

如果说“里根革命”以改革国内经济政策为主，那么克林顿政府就把重点就放在了市场“开放”上。随着苏东剧变、冷战结束，不仅原社会主义国家，大部分发展中国家也加入到逐渐形成的全球贸易体系中来。在“华盛顿共识”的引导下，各国都纷纷降低关税、开放贸易、结成双边或多边自由贸易区，而美国受到来自欧盟的竞争压力也加快了自身开放的步伐。1994年克林顿政府通过谈判达成了北美自由贸易区，1995年推动建立世界贸易组织。最重要的是通过长期艰苦的谈判，中美终于在1999年末达成了包括建立双边“永久性正常贸易关系”在内的中国加入WTO的协定。通过开放市场、促进贸易，在过去十五年间，美国的对外贸易总额增长了285%，中美之间的贸易额在过去30年间更是增长了130倍。连9/11事件和“反恐战争”都没有阻止美国贸易自由化的脚步。贸易的开放促进了资本的全球流动，而交通和通讯技术的发展使贸易和投资的全球化如虎添翼。资本市场的开放以美国和其他西方发达国家的退休金制度改革为基础获得了巨大的个人养老保险基金，从而使金融业更加迅猛地发展起来。

中美两国三十年来分别展开的改革开放重新塑造了世界经济体系。中国建立社会主义市场经济体制的努力借助于美国和世界的“改革开放”，而美国经济的全球化战略也得益于中国不断深入的体制改革和市场开放。由于中美经济间紧密的相互依赖关系，美国学者弗格森提出了“中美国联队”的主张，然而这不过是对中美经济互动业已成为世界经济增长发动机的确认而已。虽然国内外诸多国际政治学者反对这种提法，但全球经济复苏首看中美表现的事实是存在的，中美之间需要战略与经济协调以维护地区和平和世界经济发展的趋势是不变的。事实上，要把出轨的经济列车扳回到正轨上来，就需要中美两国总结改革开放的利弊得失，并在此基础上大胆地深化改革、扩大开放从而获得新的经济增长点。

单就美国而言，奥巴马总统在竞选期间已经提出了以纠正市场原教旨主义为中心的改革方案，其主要内容包括修正“里根革命”以来（特别是小布什政府）造成的贫富差距、过度消费、监管缺失、环境退化、教育和医疗保障昂贵而低效的各种积弊。但是，美国目前的国内政治形势令人担心奥巴马政府推动“变革”的决心和能力。首先，针对美国金融体系的改革虽然比较全面，但在监管机构的统一性、执法权限和力度、以及对金融衍生品的交易限制与管理方面仍旧存有漏洞。第二，对美国金融业的救助和为美国经济复苏投入的巨额资金的确有助于消除金融系统性风险和缓解经济衰退的冲击，可迄今为止对美国的就业形势帮助不大，而由此累积的政府赤字却造成了其他改革的政治障碍。再次，美国国会通过了瓦克斯曼—马凯气候变化议案，不过由于各种政治妥协造成法案远低于减排的预期。奥巴马追求医疗改革两党妥协的努力同样令他陷入进退两难的境地。由于失去了肯尼迪参议员的政治技巧和有力支持，加上保守派和医疗保险集团利用财政负担煽动群众反对改革，医保法案极有可能重蹈克林顿政府1993年的失败经历。种种迹象表明，奥巴马政府并不能像他们所希望的那样重现罗斯福总统在大萧条后大刀阔斧的新政改革。这也说明，近30年来的经济增长所支撑的通俗经济学理念，所造就的既得利益团体，以及所掩盖的深层结构性矛盾不会因为一时的经济衰退和政治变化而自动退出历史舞台。

假使美国的新“变革”处处碰壁，裹足不前，对中国的经济将会是弊大于利。美国的平均汽油价格10年来上涨了近3倍，美国家庭的大学教育和医疗负担也分别增加了50%和119%，而期间美国家庭平均收入只增加了约20%且代表贫富差距的基尼系数2007年达到战后最高点。支撑美国近十几年来高消费的源泉很大程度上是房地产价格提高带来的抵押贷款增值，所以次贷危机发生后，美国收入偏低人口的消费能力大大下降了。短期内减税或“现金换旧车”计划虽然刺激了部分消费，但长期来看，如果没有体制改革降低家庭负担、没有政府政策推动新兴产业，没有国际协作保证市场开放和金融稳定，美国要实现经济高增长的可能性将很有限。相对而言，缺少美国旺盛的消费需求和健康的资本市场，中国扩大内需、创造就业、保证外汇资产和推动产业升级的任务就会面临更大的挑战和不确定性。令人欣慰的是，中美两国的有识之士都认识到双边关系的重要性，中美战略与经济对话也已经日趋成熟。奥巴马政府中的两位华裔部长，能源部长朱棣文和商务部长骆家辉，以及新任驻华大使洪博培都是熟悉中国，能够密切中美关系的合作伙伴。中美两国只有成功地变危机为机遇，落实改革的理想和承诺，才能为下一个30年的繁荣打下坚实的基础。最终，我们从这次危机中得到的启示恐怕是不存在福山式的终结历史的最优制度，凡是自满于已有成就而放弃不断自我更新的国家，只会遭到历史的惩罚。