首页 > 美国 > 中国预算比美国少,为什么还能建那么多基建? [美国网评]

中国预算比美国少,为什么还能建那么多基建? [美国网评]

五毛网 美国 2017年09月11日 来源:龙腾网

中国预算比美国少,为什么还能建那么多基建?

【以下是评论部份】

Joseph Wang ex-VP Big investment bank - Hong Kong
Answered May 31
The numbers are very misleading. Most infrastructure projects in China are not financed directly from the central government budget.
这个数字误导人,大多数中国的基建都不是直接由中央政府的预算投资的。

What happens is that if you want to build a road or a railroad the people building it form a company which is owned by the local government. The local government sells land to fund the company and the company then issues bonds which are to be paid from the revenue of the company. Now at some point the company may have trouble paying the bonds and people expect at that point that the government will do a bail out but it means that most Chinese infrastructure projects are off-budget.
如果你想修一条公路或是铁路,是由当地政府所有的公司修建的,当地政府卖地得来的资金投资给公司,然后公司发行债券,这些债券将从公司的收入中支付。现在在某个时候,该公司可能支付债券会有困难,人们期望那时政府会出手救助,这就意味着大多数中国的基础设施项目都超出了预算。
http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/...

What this means is that China has truly stunning amounts of debt that’s not on the books.
这意味着中国实际上的债务比报告的数字要大得多。

It’s hard for the US to do this now because the US doesn’t have land that it can sell but large parts of the railroad infrastructure of the US in the 19th century was financed this way.
美国现在很难这样做了,因为美国并没有地可卖,实际上,19世纪时,美国修建的大多数铁路都是以这种方式完成的。
88.3k Views · 419 Upvotes

Walter Xu native Chinese.
中国人,徐

Answered May 26
I would concur with your assumption.
我同意你的假设。

The first reason is of course as a developing country building infrastructure is indeed a government priority compared to the U.S. The government routinely needs to transform city landscapes in order to lift more people out of poverty and increase economic growth to leap towards a developed society.
第一个原因当然是,作为一个发展中国家,基础设施建设是政府的首要任务。美国政府经常需要变换的城市景观,与之相比,中国政府的目标是为了让更多的人摆脱贫困和提高经济增长走向发达的社会。

The other reason is while I’m not an expert in the field but socially China is a one-party state and if some good comes out of this is that the efficiency of the government is incredibly high. Seeing and knowing American politics for some years now (as well as other democratic country’s rationale on social factors) it is clear that people’s will is weighing an important factor when it comes to the government’s decision.
另一个原因是,虽然我不是这个领域的专家,但在中国是一个一党制的国家,从好的方面来说,一党制政府的效率是非常高的。我看到和了解美国政治已经有好几年了(以及其他民主国家对社会因素的理论基础),很明显,在美国政府的决定中,人民的意志是影响政府决策的一个重要因素的因素。

However the Chinese authoritarian standpoint is not to indulge in the mess of hearing from the people and simply carrying out what’s in their best interests. And learning business for two years this lead me to conclude that there comes lesser costs than if there has to be heavy litigation and legal paperwork process. As I think this is the reason why China’s government has such a high support rate — they move the country forward rather quickly by not listening to others. A bit arbitrary I know so lots of consequences follow as I’m sure many are familiar with so it’s a good thing that the leader seems to know what’s in the best interest (elite politics) and deciding on the opportunity costs.
1.7k Views · 16 Upvotes
然而,中国威权主义的立场并不是过多的听取人民的意见,导致造成混乱,而是为了人民的利益去做一些事情。我学着做生意已有两年,这使我得出结论,如果有许多的诉讼和法律文书处理,就会造成成本上升。我认为这就是为什么中国政府如此高的支持率,他们不听别人说三道四,从而让国家向前相当迅速发展。我知道,有点武断,所以许多后果会随之而来,我相信很多人都很熟悉,所以领导者似乎知道什么是最佳利益(精英政治),并决定以最小的代价完成。。

1.7k观点·16个赞

Walter Chow Director Joesdata.com where deal starts
Answered Jun 9
I compared the budget of US and China before. Out of the $3.8 trillion of the 2015 US expenditure there are $1.28 trillion of social social security and $1.05 trillion of medicare(Federal Spending: Where Does the Money Go) . Chinese government’s $2.8 trillion expenditure in 2015 does not include the social security spending and medical care spending. China’s medical care and social security money are managed by two separated funds under the Ministry of Human Recourse and Social Security. And the government subsidies around $150 billion from the $2.8 trillion expenditure to the social security and medical funds (2015 China Social Security Spending).
我以前对比过美国和中国的预算,美国2015的开支超过3.8兆美金,其中1.28兆用于社会保障,1.05兆用于医疗保险(参考资料,联邦政府支出:钱去哪了?)。中国政府2015的2.8兆美金开支并不包括社会保障和医疗保险花费,中国的医保和社保资金由人力资源部门和社会保障部门两个分开基金管理,并且从2.8兆美金开支里有1500亿美金政府津贴是流向社保和医保的(参考资料 2015年中国社保支出)

Also after the medical and social security spending US also has around $609 billion military spending this leaves 3.8 - 1.28 - 1.05 - 0.609 = $0.861 trillion. And China’s military spending is much smaller maybe just $150 billion. But I think the Chinese budget of $2.8 trillion includes provincial level spending. So for comparison purpose maybe also need to add 1.9 trillion spending of US state governments to the US annual budget (US Government Spending in $ trillion Total Federal State Local for 2017). so it will be 0.861 + 1.9 = $2.761 trillion for the US and $2.8 - 0.15 - 0.15 = $2.5 trillion for China not including military spending. if including military spending then it will be 2.761 + 0.609 = $3.37 for US and $2.65 for China.
同样,继医保和社保支出之后,美国还有大概6090亿美金的军事开支,最后剩下3.8-1.28-1.05-0.609=0.861兆美金。中国的军事支出要少得多,大概只有1500亿,但我想中国2.8兆美金的预算包括了各省支出,为了同等对比,大概也要在美国联邦政府年度预算基础上再加上1.9兆各州财政支出(参考资料:2017美国政府开销上兆,联邦,州,地方)因此美国的财政预算会是 0.861+1.9=2.761兆美金,中国会是2.8-0.15-0.15=2.5兆美金,不包含军事支出. 如果加上军事支出, 应该是美国 2.761 + 0.609 = 3.37兆美金,中国2.65兆美金

Also i think it needs to notice that the social security and medical spending in China is much smaller than that of the US and the 1 dollar can purchase more in China than in the US because of the price difference.
另外,我认为需要提醒注意的是中国社保和医保支出比起美国少很多,而且1美金在中国的购买力要比美国大,因为两国物价水平不同。

1k Views · 2 Upvotes
 

Tim Worstall former Journalist
Answered Sat

China is poorer than the US significantly so per capita. Poorer places have lower wages - this is definitional being a poorer place means lower wages lower wages means a poorer place.
Finally the cost of anything and everything is in the end income to someone. Again this is definitional GDP is any one of the three of all production all income or all consumption.
So imagine we have a place where the wages are half what they are in some other place. The place with the lower wages can have twice as much infrastructure for the same cost just because of the lower wages.
This isn’t all of it nor is that an exact and wholly accurate descxtion. But it’s good enough. China gets more infrastructure per $ million spent because the people building the infrastructure get lower wages.
1.3k Views · 9 Upvotes

中国比美国更穷,人均水平尤为明显地体现出来。贫困地区有较低的工资--这么解释,是贫穷的地方意味着低工资,低工资意味着这地方很贫困。
最后,任何花费的成本以及每样东西最终都归为个人的收入。再次说明下,GDP是任何形式在三种生产方式中的体现,所有收入或全部消费。
所以,想象一下,我们一个地方的工资是他们其他地方工资的一半。工资较低的地方因为工资比较低可以获得两倍同等成本下的基础设施。
这不是全部,也不是准确和完全准确的描述。但这足够好了。中国花上百万的美元去造基建是因为建设这些基建的人们拿着较低的工资。
1.3k观点· 9个赞

Ray Comeau A decade in China interest in geopolitics
在中国10年,热衷地缘政治(它主要是根据地理要素和政治格局的地域形式,分析和预测世界或地区范围的战略形势和有关国家的政治行为。它把地理因素视为影响甚至决定国家政治行为的一个基本因素。又被称为“地理政治学”。)
Answered Aug 16
A2A
谢邀
To be brief :
In terms of purchasing power parity (PPP) China’s economy has now grown larger then the US’s. The crossover happened in 2013 I think.
A very huge reason China is the worlds factory is they know how to be very effective in reducing product costs. mcKinsey Global cites their innovation in this area of cost efficiency.
Chinese government owns all the land in China and sells long term leases to developers etc.
The Chinese government employs specialized State-Owned Enterprises or partially owned SOE’s to build their infrastructure avoiding excessive private industry profits.
The Chinese government is very effective in finding ways to generate very early on infrastructure projects…………. since the vast majority of Chinese citizens do not pay any income taxes. Nor do they pay sales taxes on purchases with a few exceptions.
2.8k Views · 26 Upvotes · Answer requested by Christian Duarte
简而言之
在购买力平价(PPP)方面,中国的经济体现在增长得比美国大。 我觉得是2013年超越的。
中国是世界工厂的一个很大的原因是他们知道如何有效降低产品成本。 麦肯锡全球研究院还援引他们在这个成本效益领域的革新。
中国政府拥有中国所有的土地,并向开发商长期租赁等等。
中国政府雇用专门的国有企业或国企部分控股企业建设基础设施,避免他们像私营企业盈利过高。
中国政府前期就非常善于用各种方式增加财政收入投入基建项目............ 因为绝大多数中国公民没有缴纳个人所得税,除了少数例外也不缴纳增值税。
2.8k Views · 26 Upvotes · 受Christian Duarte邀请回答
Mandy Lane
Answered May 26
Alright lets see this.
好吧,让我们看看下面数据
Trump proposed spending up to $1 trillion over a decade to make America's infrastructure “second to none.”
特朗普提出要在十年内在基建上花费高达1万亿美元,意使美国的基础设施“首屈一指”。
Except for China that is.
The world's second-largest economy has already topped that this year alone with $1.4 trillion splurged on roads railways bridges telecom networks and other infrastructure in the ten months through October.
那么中国呢?
截止今年10月的十个月里,这个世界第二大经济体已经稳占今年首位,在道路,铁路,桥梁,电信网络及其他方面基础设施,总共花费了1.4万亿美元。
Trump's plan for an “America's Infrastructure First” policy mirrors China's build-it-and-they-will-come model except on a much smaller scale. China has spent about $11 trillion on infrastructure in the last decade – more than 10 times what Trump is proposing.
特朗普的计划“让美国基础设施世界第一”对比中国前瞻模式“建造出它们未来的样子“,除了规模更小,在过去十年中国还花费大约11万亿美元用于基建,是特朗普计划的十多倍。
Now how small is China budget for infrastructures compared to US?
现在说说,中国的基建预算与美国比哪里少了?
Donald Trump's $1tn infrastructure plan is big but not as big as he says it is
唐纳德·特朗普的1万亿美元基建计划很大,但实际并不是他说的那么大
1.2k Views · 10 Upvotes

Tau Chang works at Intel 
从事互联网工作
Answered Jun 13
The question must be “Why is the infrastructure cost in US so exorbitant” -Ever wondered why that single lane’s construction carry on for ever? Or why they are expanding the highways that barely have traffic?
问题应该是“为什么美国的基建成本如此高?”或者是疑问为什么总在建设单行道? 或者是为什么他们在扩建几乎没有车流量的高速公路?
Answer: High-end corruption that lingers around in an invisible cloak.
答案是:高层腐败躲在隐形斗篷里四处游荡。
3k Views · 17 Upvotes
Sthitapragnya Deshpande worked at China
在中国工作
Answered May 26
This question has already been answered here - 
Why are infrastructure projects in China so much cheaper than in the USA?
Please do go through it
问题别人已经答过了,请搜索查阅。:
-为什么中国的基建项目成本比美国要低那么多?

1k Views · Answer requested by Christian Duarte
受Christian Duarte邀请答复-

Aaron Cai studied Economics
Answered May 26
Man can have many answers but in my opinion it’s the scale that matters the most.
人们可能会有很多答案,但在我看来,最重要的规模。
The scale of the market is so big that has helped China to have a giant group of highly experenced workers engineers material manufacturers and with its scale the unit cost of everything has been successfully cut to a lowest level without lowering its quality.
如此之大规模的市场帮助中国拥有一个由有经验的工人、工程师、材料制造商构成的集团,由于其规模大、所有东西的单位成本已成功削减到最低水平而没有降低其质量。
Another advantage is industrial concentration all manufacturers in a complete supply chain re are usually deployed pretty close with no long-range transportation needed the whole chain could finish the whole process from raw materials to final products.
另一个优势是产业集中度,完整的供应链中的所有制造商通常部署的相当接近,不需要远程运输,整个产业链链可以完成从未加工的原材料到最终产品的整个过程。
Big project in America usually relies on global supply chain not only the time is longer but the cost would be signicantly higher.
美国的大的工程通常依赖于全球供应产业链,不但时间更长,成本也显著地提高。
1.1k Views · 6 Upvotes

Godfree Roberts upvoted this
Mervyn Locke
Mervyn Locke Enlightened laowai/Decade-long China resident/Permanent China bull
Answered May 26
Indeed they spend more on infrastructure. But more importantly budgets are spent locally but the numbers you refer to are in USD. If you adjust for purchasing power parity you get almost twice the bang for the buck in China meaning that they can easily build more infrastructure than the US.
确实 他们花了更多的预算在基建上 . 但更重要的是 这些预算是花在(中国)当地的 但是你提到的数字换算成了美元 . 如果你按购买力平价(PPP)核算的话 (1美元在中国的)购买力几乎是在美国的两倍 . 这意味着他们很容易打造出比美国更多的基建 .

4.1k Views · 17 Upvotes
 

Sc Cornwell Senior Sales Engineer (2016-present)
Answered Jun 8
Some of these answers are very good but one of the largest reasons is that China is not a democracy. Their people are not free. Some of their people have more sense of freedom than before but the Chinese government can swoop in and take away land to build any project. I should note that The US government can also take your land (and has done so many times in the past) but it is much much harder and can be fought in court. There are many recent stories of local politicians/thugs in china who swoop in and take peoples land to build lucrative projects destroying peoples lives. I have seen more than one BBC special in china where the news cameras were broken and news crews are harrased trying to expose the injustice in chinaThere is also a lot of hidden poverty in china that is never shown. This relates to borderline slave labor. Think early 20th century america working conditions. I have visited china many times and while it is not as exposed or publicized as in europe or the unites states you can see it. If china wanted to it could make 50000 people work on a project for very little money. The sad thing is most chinese people would do it without a fight since their concept of freedom is not the same as much of the world.
1.2k Views · 7 Upvotes
Sc Cornwell,高级销售工程师(2016)
S c C o r n w e l l , gāo高 jí级 xiāo销 shòu售 gōng工 chéng程 shī师 ( 2 0 1 6 )
Answered Jun 8
回答6月8日
huí回 dá答 6 yuè月 8 rì日
Some of these answers are very good but one of the largest reasons is that China is not a democracy. Their people are not free. Some of their people have more sense of freedom than before but the Chinese government can swoop in and take away land to build any project. I should note that The US government can also take your land (and has done so many times in the past) but it is much much harder and can be fought in court. There are many recent stories of local politicians/thugs in china who swoop in and take peoples land to build lucrative projects destroying peoples lives. I have seen more than one BBC special in china where the news cameras were broken and news crews are harrased trying to expose the injustice in chinaThere is also a lot of hidden poverty in china that is never shown. This relates to borderline slave labor. Think early 20th century america working conditions. I have visited china many times and while it is not as exposed or publicized as in europe or the unites states you can see it. If china wanted to it could make 50000 people work on a project for very little money. The sad thing is most chinese people would do it without a fight since their concept of freedom is not the same as much of the world.
这些答案都很好,但最大的一个原因是,中国不是一个民主国家。他们的人民没有自由。虽然他们中的一些人现在比以前有更多的自由感,但是中国政府仍可以一举占领土地,建造任何项目。我应该注意到,美国政府也可以占用你的土地(在过去已经做过很多次了),但是它要困难得多,会导致诉讼。还有当地的政客和暴徒在中国最近的许多故事,一举把人民的土地建设有利可图的项目,破坏人们的生活。我见过一个以上的英国广播公司在中国拍摄特殊的新闻时相机被损坏了,试图揭露中国不公正的新闻记者被骚挠。中国也隐藏着很多从未被揭露的贫困,这与边境线奴隶劳动有关。想想二十世纪初美国的工作条件,他们就在那样的条件下工作。我曾多次访问中国,知道这些事情没有被暴露或被公布,不是象在欧洲或美国那样你能看到它。如果中国愿意,它可以使50000人在一个项目的工作,只用很少的钱。可悲的是,大多数中国人都会毫不犹豫地去做这件事,因为他们对自由的观念和世界上其他地方有所不同。
1.2k观点·7个赞

Roger Zelin Sales Manager (2015-present)
Answered Jun 8
Chinese infrastructure spending is designed to stimulate economic growth.
中国的基础设施支出旨在刺激经济增长。
US Infrastructure spending is designed to line the pockets of politically influential unxs and the companies who employ them.
美国的基础设施支出旨在为具有政治势力的尤尼克斯财团和雇佣他们的公司赚大钱。
Therefore building a 1 mile stretch of road in China is significantly cheaper. In a recent paper they compared the cost of building subways in different countries. New York City costs 1.7 Billion USD per KM. Recent subway expansions in other countries are significantly cheaper. Singapore for example was $130 million per KM Paris and Berlin both cost about $250 Million per KM.
因此,在中国修建一段1英里长的道路成本要低多了。在最近的一篇论文中,他们比较了不同国家修建地铁的成本。纽约市每公里要花费17亿美元。其他国家最近的地铁掘进成本明显低很多。以新加坡为例,每公里为1.3亿美元,巴黎和柏林两地的每公里成本约为2.5亿美元。
So you can see by these examples the cost of voters failing to hold political parties accountable. Our infrastructure is crumbling because we have systematically allowed government to intentionally drive up costs.
因此,从这些例子中你可以看出选民没有把选票投给负责任的政党(付出)的代价。我们的基础建设正在逐步衰弱,因为政府故意推高了成本,而我们对此已经无可奈何,唯有默认。
1.2k Views · 11 Upvotes 
1200个点击 · 11个赞

Mohammed Haq studies at Elk Grove High School (2020)
Answered May 26
China is able to do things because of their exports and imports. They create so many things and ship them. Major companies like Apple and Microsoft assemble their products. This way China is helping itself.
724 Views
Randall Burns BA Economics University of Chicago (1981)
Answered May 26
China has much lower living costs than the US. On top of that wages for many classes of workers are less than those in the US even accounting for cost of living. Regulatory costs for major infrastructure are also much less in China than the US.

The big problem with the US when it comes to infrastructure is not social security and medicaid(though medical care is much more expensive in the US than China in part for legal and regulatory reasons):

The big problem is the US has been wasting trillions on wars in the middle east that serve no essential purpose for the United States. Those wars are favored by major oil companies and and pro-Israeli lobby that are allowed a voice in US politics by campaign finance practices that would be considered bribery in almost every other developed country.

Mohammed Haq,在埃尔克格罗夫高中的研究(2020)

Answered May 26
回答5月26日

China is able to do things because of their exports and imports. They create so many things and ship them. Major companies like Apple and Microsoft assemble their products. This way China is helping itself.
中国能做的事情,因为他们的出口和进口。他们创造了这么多的东西并把它们运送出去。像苹果和微软这样的大公司组装他们的产品。这样,中国是帮助自己。

724读者

Randall Burns BA Economics University of Chicago (1981)
Randall Burns,芝加哥大学经济学学士(1981)
 
Answered May 26
回答5月26日

China has much lower living costs than the US. On top of that wages for many classes of workers are less than those in the US even accounting for cost of living. Regulatory costs for major infrastructure are also much less in China than the US.
中国具有更低的生活成本比美国。除此之外,许多工人的工资比美国的工人还低,甚至是根据生活费用计算也是这样。重大基础设施监管成本也在中国比美国少得多。

The big problem with the US when it comes to infrastructure is not social security and medicaid(though medical care is much more expensive in the US than China in part for legal and regulatory reasons):
美国在基础设施方面的大问题是没有社会保障和医疗补助(虽然在美国医疗的比中国贵一部份原因是法律和监管的原因):

The big problem is the US has been wasting trillions on wars in the middle east that serve no essential purpose for the United States. Those wars are favored by major oil companies and and pro-Israeli lobby that are allowed a voice in US politics by campaign finance practices that would be considered bribery in almost every other developed country.
最大的问题是美国在中东战争上浪费了数万亿美元,这对美国没有任何重要的意义。这些战争受到主要石油公司和亲以色列游说团体的青睐,这些游说团体在竞选活动中允许在美国政治中有发言权,这种做法在几乎所有其他发达国家都被视为行贿行为。                    

爷点一下来个评论

相关文章

发表评论