The research index named following the first US Treasury Secretary shows that the United States has taken the lead in 4 of the 7 major advanced industries by China. Can China overtake the US in an all-round way? It also depends on whether the current mountain can be subdued, which will affect the pattern for the next 20 years.
China’s economy rebounded in May as the outbreak was brought under control. AP picture
The “Information Technology and Innovation Foundation”, sponsored by technology companies such as Amazon and Microsoft, recently released the “Hamilton Index” that evaluates the competitive performance of countries in advanced industries: the United States ranks among the world’s largest in pharmaceuticals, aerospace, information technology and information services. However, in the electrical equipment, machinery and tools, automobile industry, and computer, electronic optical products, China slightly surpasses the United States in the world.
Hamilton, the first U.S. Treasury Secretary, published a report in 1791 recommending that the fledgling nation be made stronger economically and militarily by developing manufacturing. What he advocates is not the neoliberalism that the United States advocates today and wants developing countries to follow, but thorough trade protectionism, coupled with the planned economy where the government interferes with the market – the government should use import tariffs, direct subsidies and other means to Supporting the domestic manufacturing industry – Hamilton’s set is not new. In the 19th century, Prussia unified the scattered city-states, formed a powerful customs union, and protected the industry of this new country through high tariffs. As a result, Germany’s national strength was greatly enhanced.
The familiar American and Western historical views are not described in this way. Everyone thinks that the strength of Europe and the United States depends on free market competition, democratic elections, intellectual property rights, fair trade, the spirit of contract, etc., but whether it is the United Kingdom, the United States, or Germany, Japan, etc. , the industrialization process of developed countries has never been a policy of “small government, big market”.
The most important thing is that the United States and the West believe in “power” – Wealth is Power. The most classic example is in the 1980s, when Japan caught up with the United States in the fields of automobiles, electronic products, and semiconductor chips. The United States used tariffs and exports in all aspects. Restrictions, forced exchange rate appreciation and other means to combat “Made in Japan”. Today, the biggest threat to the U.S. is “Made in China.” The U.S. re-imposes the old trade protectionism. The name of Hamilton is mentioned once more, which means that the U.S. will actively seek to “decouple” from China’s technology. To move the world industrial chain from China to Southeast Asia, Japan, South Korea or India, of course, the best way is to return to the United States.
The globalization dividend that China has enjoyed in the past 20 years cannot be achieved with the help of technology transfer from the United States. China needs to independently develop domestic core technologies in the next 20 years. China’s mixed economy should be more inclined to the “Hamilton” route, that is, the government needs more Long-term investment, while guiding enterprises not to take the capital shortcut of “quick money”, the most important thing is how to adjust the mainland’s real estate policy more effectively. The adjusted overheated real estate measures are expected by the market to be loosened as an economic stimulus.
The trap of real estate is not easy to overcome. The slogan regarding encouraging companies to invest in technological development can be very loud. However, considering the factors of high technology, high risk, and long return time, seeing real estate become active once more, what do you think? Could it be that the United States can print money, but can’t we start a big economy? This is a hidden worry for China’s future technological development.
China advocates that what you sow pays off. AP picture
To be fair, national wealth is not entirely owned by any private person or enterprise. The state is a stakeholder in this environment and has the responsibility to regulate it. Letting the free market dominate, it will eventually create an asset bubble, leading to a further disparity between the rich and the poor. Printing money can’t print, and speculating on real estate can’t. The United States has begun to move in the direction of a promising government, and China must not fall behind the situation. “Hi Tech” is a feature of high-tech investment, but it’s worth it. As for Low Tech, for China, it must not be “gained”. It’s hard to say that you are betraying national interests, let alone going to Fry!
