美国网友热议: 中国作为一个发展中国家, 为什么在基建上远超美国近日有美国网友在该国论坛布了这么一

傻大方提示您本文标题是：《美国网友热议: 中国作为一个发展中国家, 为什么在基建上远超美国》。来源是奇闻大箩筐。

美国网友热议: 中国作为一个发展中国家, 为什么在基建上远超美国。基建|网友|中国|a+|热议|美国---

近日有美国网友在该国论坛布了这么一个帖子：中国作为一个发展中国家，为什么在基建上远远领美国？

引发网友纷纷评论，评论翻译如下：（如有翻译错误，纯属偶然）

（ps：以下外国网友评论，均不代表小编的看法。）

评论翻译（译者：卡思，xiyi77，Linsanity2018，tastebook，535045781@qq.co，铁嘴乌鸦）

基建|网友|中国|a+|热议|美国---傻大方小编总结的关键词

Paul B B.Ec. Economics (2016)

Answered 19h ago

That seems like a loaded question and I’m not sure if you’re entirely correct. But I’ll take it for granted that China is “so ahead in infrastructure”.

这似乎是一个诱导性的问题，我不知道你的观点是否完全正确。但我对于中国“在基础设施上如此领先”这一看法是赞同的。

The reason is probably that the USA built most of its infrastructure a long time ago. Once it’s there there is little incentive to upgrade it. Why spend billions when you can make do with what you’ve got? Also once the capital stock of a country reaches equilibrium a large fraction of savings (pretty much all of it) is used up in maintaining existing capital.

原因可能是美国很久以前就建设了大部分的基础设施。一旦它已经存在，没有什么理由来升级它了。当你能用所拥有的东西来完成想做的事时，为什么还要额外花费数十亿美元呢？此外，一旦一个国家的资本存量达到均衡，大部分储蓄（几乎全部)都被用于维持现有资本。

Rewind to 1990 and China had very little infrastructure. As its economy has boomed it has accumulated capital very rapidly. Now it is at a point where there is too much capital. The government has used investment to employ some of the country’s excess capacity and support an ultimately unsustainable rate of growth. The problem is that the capital will not be able to be maintained. It would require an astronomical savings rate. China wants to transition to a consumption driven economy but how can it do this while simultaneously maintaining a high savings rate to support a huge capital stock?

倒回1990年看，中国当时的基础设施很少。随着经济的蓬勃发展，资金的积累非常迅速。现在则是处于一个资金过剩的阶段了。政府就利用投资来开发该国的一些过剩能力，并支持最终不可持续的增长率。问题是资本不能一直维持下去。这将需要一个天文数字的储蓄率。中国要转型为消费型经济，但如何实现这一目标呢？同时保持高储蓄率来支持巨额资本存量？

基建|网友|中国|a+|热议|美国---傻大方小编总结的关键词

You have to understand China is not a typical developing country. This term is a bit antiquated in that it was more appropriate during the 80–90’s to describe the emerging countries that were not fully developed not part of USSR and not Third World Countries.

China is what we call a newly indusrialized country. Its economy is still not completely dominated by services and trade because the industry is very strong and predominant. Among the features we can find: export-driven and fast-growing economy developing urban centers large corporates strong political leadership and high human development index.

你要知道，中国并非一个典型的发展中国家。

“发展中国家”这个称谓已经有点不合时宜了，它更适用于形容上世纪八九十年代的一些新兴国家——它们既不是苏联的一部分，同时也不属于第三世界，这些国家当时尚未充分发展起来。

中国是我们常说的新兴工业国。在中国的经济中，由于强大的工业占据了支配性地位，服务业与贸易尚未完全成为经济的主导。

在这些特点中，我们可以看出，中国拥有由出口驱动的快速增长的经济、建设中的城镇中心、众多的大型企业、强有力的政治领导以及较高的人类发展指数。

It’s because they started building their infrastructure about 80–100 years AFTER the USA did. Thus the engineering was standardized (mostly by the USA) material costs were down and technology existed that they could reasonably implement that the USA cannot without having to tear out the OLD infrastructure (and as another person answered much of the US’ spending is in maintaining the existing infrastructure roads bridges and train tracks where as China because they (comparatively) have nothing and had almost literally nothing in the way of modern infrastructure 30 years ago did not have these maintenance costs. It’s a problem they will run into going forward.

那是因为他们基建建设的时间比美国晚80-100年。因此，工程已经标准化（大部分由美国制定），材料成本下降，他们可以合理地实施的技术早已存在。而如果美国要使用这些技术的话，就得先把旧建筑完全拆毁。另一个人已经回答了这个问题，美国的大部分消费用在维护中现有的基础设施道路桥梁和火车路线上。因为（相对来说）中国简直一无所有，30年前几乎没有任何现代化的基础设施，就没有这些维护成本。未来中国也会面临美国现在所面临的基建问题的。

基建|网友|中国|a+|热议|美国---傻大方小编总结的关键词

China should eventually MOVE ahead as they continue to liberalize their economy and government simply due to demographics (having 5 times the population of the USA the Chinese economy will have to surpass the US economy just to keep the people in jobs and clothes as they move out of being a mostly agrarian society to a more diversified nation - though the current forced relocation of entire villages to metropolitan areas could backfire. Which I suppose is another way the USA is currently ahead of China - we don’t forcibly relocate our citizens off of their property to cities hundreds of miles away (or anywhere at all). Of course a citizen’s property in the USA IS their property. It doesn’t belong to the government which can then take it away with no justification at all required. China’s not there yet.

中国总是向前发展的，因为他们继续开放经济和政府，仅从人口数量看（美国人口的5倍)也能知道，中国经济必定要超越美国经济才能让人们有工作做，有衣服穿，他们也正在从一个农业为主的社会向一个更加多元化的社会转变 - 虽然目前将整个村庄强制搬迁到大都市地区的行为可能会事与愿违。我认为在这件事上美国使用的另一种方式要比中国先进得多 - 我们不会强行让我们的公民搬迁他们的财产到数百英里远的地方（或其他任何地方），当然，在美国，公民的财产是他们的财产，它不属于政府，可以没有任何理由地把它们拿走，中国还没达到这一步。