Re: [討論] 中國究竟有沒有操縱匯率
中國時報在引用 The Economist 的 Burger-thy-neighbour policies 一文時,
沒有完整的引述 The Economist 的說法. 各位網友可以在下面的連結看到原文:
http://www.economist.com/finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13059709
這篇文章一開始指出兩點, 其中一點是中國時報有提到的. 我們都知道中國的確
在操縱人民幣匯率, 但重點不在中國是否有操縱, 而是人民幣是否有低估的情形:
Of course China manipulates its exchange rate—in the sense that the level
of the yuan is not set by the market, but influenced by foreign-exchange
intervention. The real issue is whether Beijing is deliberately keeping the
yuan cheap to give exporters an unfair advantage.
但中國時報並未提到的, 我認為是這篇文章的重點. 亦即, 人民幣是否低估, 以及
低估的程度如何, 並不是如同一般認為的那麼單純:
CHINA has been accused of “manipulating” its currency by Tim Geithner,
America’s new treasury secretary, and this week Dominique Strauss-Kahn,
the managing director of the IMF, said that it was “common knowledge” that
the yuan was undervalued. You would assume that such strong claims were
backed by solid proof, but the evidence is, in fact, mixed.
The Economist 指出幾點情形, 第一點是中國時報有引述的, 人民幣對美元雖然升值
幅度有限, 但對其他各主要貨幣則是大幅升值:
Since July the yuan has gained 10% in trade-weighted terms. It is up 23%
against the euro, and 30% or more against the currencies of many other
emerging economies.
然而, 中國時報卻並未完全引述接下來的內容. The Economist 提到了幾點關於人民幣
可能低估的論點:
Those who argue that the yuan is still too cheap point to three factors:
China’s foreign-exchange reserves have surged; it has a huge current-account
surplus; and prices are much cheaper in China than in America.
接下來, The Economist 一個一個說明, 為什麼這幾個論點不夠充份. 其中, 我認為
比較有趣的是第三點, The Economist 透過他們引以為傲的 Big Mac Index, 認為若
僅看價格本身, 中國的物價是比美國便宜很多; 但若考慮兩國所得的差距, 那麼中國
的物價較低並未不合理:
The Economist’s Big Mac index offers a crude estimate of how far exchange
rates are from PPP. Our January update found that a Big Mac cost 48% less in
China than in America, which might suggest that the yuan is 48% undervalued
against the dollar...
...Using a simple model, which adjusts the Big Mac index for differences in
countries’ GDP per head and relative labour costs, gives the result that the
yuan is now less than 5% undervalued.
最後, The Economist 引述 Cheung, Chinn and Fujii 的研究. CCF 指出, 2006 年
人民幣低估的幅度, 可能不是一般認為的 40%, 而是僅有 10%; 而在今天, 這 10%
可能已經反應在 07, 08 年人民幣的升值中了:
A new study* by Yin-Wong Cheung, Menzie Chinn and Eiji Fujii arrives at a
similar result using World Bank price data across the whole economy. Previous
assessments of such data had found that the yuan was around 40% undervalued.
But the latest price surveys have raised the estimated price level in China
(and so reduced GDP per head measured at PPP). The authors conclude that the
yuan was 10% undervalued against the dollar in 2006, which means that it
might now be close to parity.
*“China’s current account and exchange rate”. NBER working paper 14673.
* * *
最後補充一點, 關於 The Economist 的文章, 如果網友有什麼疑問,
又正好是台大經濟系的學生的話, 其實去問陳旭昇老師大概是最好的選擇.
首先, 他是專家, 很多經濟系學生都以為他是統計學和經濟計量的專家,
殊不知國際金融才是他真正的強項 (其實他好像沒有弱項吧!);
其次, 他和 Chinn 很熟 :P, 全台灣最適合說明 CCF 那篇在做什麼的,
大概就是他了吧!
--
人各任其能，竭其力，以得所欲．故物賤之徵貴，貴之徵賤，
各勸其業，樂其事，若水之趨下，日夜無休時，
不召而自來，不求而民出之．豈非道之所符，而自然之驗邪？
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.231.142.100
※ 編輯: washburn 來自: 118.231.142.100 (02/14 03:56)
→
02/14 03:57, , 1F
02/14 03:57, 1F
推
02/14 04:55, , 2F
02/14 04:55, 2F
推
02/15 17:41, , 3F
02/15 17:41, 3F
→
02/15 17:41, , 4F
02/15 17:41, 4F
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 2 篇)：
討論
0
2