温铁军：为什么中国能学美国发债，却无法像美国一样处理债务？

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the contrasting approaches to national debt between the United States and China, highlighting the differences in purpose and management of debt issuance [1][6]. Group 1: U.S. Debt Issuance - Historically, the U.S. has engaged in large-scale debt issuance primarily to address immediate financial crises, such as the Great Depression and the subprime mortgage crisis, leading to a significant increase in national debt [2][4]. - The U.S. government has not prioritized debt repayment, instead opting for a strategy of "assetizing" debt, leveraging the dollar's status to compel other countries to hold U.S. Treasury bonds, effectively using this approach to manage its debt [4][8]. - This strategy has resulted in a perception of irresponsibility, causing international distrust towards U.S. economic policies, particularly under recent administrations [8]. Group 2: China's Debt Issuance - In contrast, China's approach to debt issuance is focused on long-term goals such as infrastructure development and improving public welfare, with a strong emphasis on ensuring repayment capability [6]. - The Chinese government does not adopt a "default" strategy; instead, it aims to maintain its financial credibility by committing to repay issued bonds [6][8]. - The article concludes that while China could theoretically adopt a similar approach to the U.S., practical challenges exist due to the yuan's lack of status as a global currency and a reluctance to compromise national financial integrity [6].