【文/观察者网 柳白】对华出口芯片设备引发美政府震怒后，荷兰光刻机巨头阿斯麦（ASML）竟请缨 做美国在华"耳目"？这一惊人的消息出现在了一本新书《世界上最重要的机器》中。 阿斯麦今天（24日）澄清并否认相关消息，并对观察者网表示，书中内容与事实严重不符，有损公司声 誉，阿斯麦保留采取进一步行动的权利。 据荷兰财经大报《金融日报》（Het Financieele Dagblad）11月20日报道，这本新书由前彭博记者迪德里 克·巴齐尔（Diederik Baazil）和卡甘·科奇（Cagan Koc）合著。两人根据匿名消息来源，记述了近年来 荷兰、阿斯麦与美国之间的数次关键对话，其中就包括发生在2023年的一件往事。 那年1月，荷兰与美国达成了进一步限制对华出口光刻机的协定，禁令于当年9月生效，从2024年起全面 实施。在几个月的过渡期内，美荷双方达成一项"君子协定"：阿斯麦仅被允许向中国交付少量已签约的 深紫外光刻机（DUV），且禁止出售任何新设备。 然而，期间阿斯麦向中国出售的设备数量远超与美国约定的规模，美方发现后震怒不已。 首席执行官温宁克 前阿斯麦 时任美国商务部长雷蒙多立刻致电时任阿斯麦首席执行官 ...

以下文章来源于智谷趋势Trend ，作者王战新 智谷趋势Trend . 新中产的首席财富顾问 历史性的一刻。 作者/王战新 来源/智谷趋势Trend 现在，光是上海交大、清华、浙大的博士招生数，加起来一年至少要招1 . 5万名。而日 本全国所有高校加起来，每年博士招生总数才一万多人。也就是说，在博士录取方面， 中国只要派出三所大学，可以打赢整个日本。 更重要的是，我们还在进一步培养更多的博士。 最近国家发布的《教育强国建设规划纲要（2 0 2 4 - 2 0 3 5年）》就明确提出，要扩大研究 生培养规模，稳步提高博士占比。 为什么我们需要规模如此庞大的博士？中国的博士数量，过剩了吗？ 01 (ID：yuanfangguanchaju) 今年，著名学府上海交大最近出现了一个挺有意思的现象——"学历倒挂"。 什么意思呢？博士生招得比本科生还多了。 根据招生计划，到2 0 2 6年，预计要招5 0 0 0名博士生，而今年入学的本科新生只有4 9 9 5 人——博士生数量首超本科生。 要知道，像哈佛、耶鲁这样的全球顶尖高校，每年博士招生也就一千多人。 可这在中国的一流大学里，博士数量正在爆炸性增长。比如清华，博士生 ...

过去几十年，美国各种资本集团在全球化红利下相安无事，形成了犹太资本主导金融、法律、传媒，盎 格鲁撒克逊资本掌控军工、能源和传统制造业的格局。 但如今这套玩法不灵了，至于原因，张维为教授曾一语点破：美国收割不了中国了。 两边一边管着钱袋子，一边握着枪杆子，靠着美元在国际上的霸权地位，周期性地从世界各地收割财 富，坐地分赃。 没了共同的"肥肉"，之前藏着的矛盾就全暴露出来了。 二战的时候，犹太和盎撒合作就体现得特别明显，犹太资本旗下的华尔街机构给美国军工企业砸了大量 资金，像洛克希德·马丁、波音这些军工巨头，背后都有犹太股东的支持，让美国的武器产能一下子爆 发出来。 同时，犹太资本还通过贷款给盟国、推动《租借法案》落实，帮着美元一步步取代英镑，成为全球主要 货币。 而盎撒精英则牢牢掌控着军队和外交大权，艾森豪威尔、麦克阿瑟这些军方高层都是盎撒背景，他们主 导着战争进程，还设计了战后的国际秩序。 当时这两家配合得相当默契，犹太资本负责赚钱和塑造舆论，盎撒集团负责用武力维护霸权，一起把美 国推上了世界霸主的位置。 二战结束后，这种合作模式又延续了几十年，核心就是一起收割全球财富。 美国收割别的国家有一套成熟的套路，要 ...

特朗普的这一决定虽然从经济角度看是合理的，但对中国的态度早已成为美国国内政治的敏感话题。民主党一直在对特朗普的每个举动进行批评，只要特朗 普有所表态，就可能被批评为对华软弱。因此，最终由美国防长赫格塞斯出面表态，避免特朗普在公众面前被指责，而让他躲在幕后，不给民主党留下攻击 的机会。 然而，美国并没有完全放软态度，虽然在贸易方面放宽了限制，但在科技领域却加大了施压。赫格塞斯一方面公开表示中美关系变得更好，另一方面则在亚 太地区加强了军舰部署，并且在科技上继续加强限制。 美国防长赫格塞斯最近表示，"中美关系正处于最好时期"，这一言论引起了国际媒体的广泛关注。几天前，他的态度完全不同，三天前，他还在东京宣 称"要联合盟友共同威慑中国"；可转身来到东南亚安全会议时，他的立场却发生了明显变化。 美国目前面临着内部混乱的局面，政府已经停摆了一段时间，虽然这对美国并不算新鲜事，但更严重的问题是民生领域的困境。纽约布鲁克林的食品银行门 前，排队的民众已经排成了几百米长。若情况继续拖下去，全国三分之二的食品银行都可能停止运营，几百万家庭将面临严重的饥饿危机。 除了民众的不满，军心也是美国面临的另一大隐忧。虽然五角大楼强调"作 ...

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the ongoing tensions and challenges in the US-China trade negotiations, with both sides maintaining a hardline stance while attempting to project a facade of progress [1][3][5] - The negotiations were characterized by a lack of alignment on key issues such as tariff extensions and export controls, indicating that substantial agreements were not reached [5][7] - Despite the tough rhetoric, both parties managed to provide each other with diplomatic cover, suggesting a willingness to continue discussions without making significant concessions [3][7] Group 2 - The article points out that the US's strategy of imposing tariffs and technology restrictions has not effectively curtailed China's exports, with daily shipments still reaching $1 billion despite tariffs [8][10] - In the third quarter of 2024, China's exports to the US exceeded $100 billion, with a trade surplus of nearly $67 billion, indicating resilience in its export sector [10][11] - China's manufacturing sector continues to dominate globally, holding a 30% share, which has increased by 5 percentage points since the trade war began [10][13] Group 3 - The article discusses the failure of the US's technology blockade, as China's self-sufficiency in chip production has significantly improved, with the self-sufficiency rate rising from 15% to 50% by 2025 [13][15] - Huawei has successfully navigated US restrictions, selling its new 5G equipment in over 120 countries, showcasing China's ability to adapt and innovate despite external pressures [15][16] - China's export diversification strategy has led to an 8% overall increase in exports in 2024, with significant growth in exports to ASEAN and Europe, particularly in new energy vehicles and solar components [16][18] Group 4 - The article emphasizes the strengthening of China's domestic market, with retail sales growing by 6.5% in 2024, surpassing export growth, indicating a robust consumer base [21] - China's GDP growth rate of 5.2% in 2024 outpaces the US's 2.5%, reflecting the resilience of its manufacturing sector and technological advancements [21] - The expansion of China's international partnerships through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative has enhanced its global trade network, with investments in developing countries increasing by 15% in 2025 [18][21]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint is that China has effectively navigated external technological blockades by leveraging a unified domestic market, which has provided a robust platform for businesses to pivot towards internal sales and stabilize operations [1][10] - The domestic consumption market has significantly contributed to economic growth, with an average contribution rate of 56.2% over the past four years, and the retail sales of social consumer goods have surpassed that of the United States by 1.6 times when adjusted for purchasing power [3][4] - The reduction in logistics costs has been substantial, with the ratio of total social logistics costs to GDP expected to drop to 14% by mid-2025, saving over 130 billion yuan compared to the previous year [4] Group 2 - The implementation of a "dispersed evaluation" model in Henan has reduced cross-regional logistics trips by 90%, leading to a transaction volume exceeding 20 billion yuan in 2024 [5] - The simplification of administrative processes has been evident, with businesses experiencing significant reductions in operational burdens, such as a restaurant in Beijing becoming the first individual business to change operators without the need for re-registration [7] - The removal of 4,218 regulations that hinder fair competition has streamlined market access, reducing the negative list from 117 to 106 items, thereby facilitating a more efficient market environment [9][10] Group 3 - The establishment of a unified market framework has enhanced regional cooperation, with credit data sharing across regions allowing businesses to operate without redundant reporting [11][14] - Foreign investments are increasing, with companies like Valeo and Sanofi committing significant resources to projects in China, indicating confidence in the stability of the supply chain and unified regulations [13] - The development of five regional credit cooperation frameworks has improved regulatory communication and data sharing, enhancing consumer confidence in online shopping [14][16]

数据显示，那几年美国通胀压力增大，岗位也丢了不少，尤其是制造业。想想看，本来想打压中国经济，结果自己先伤着了。中国那边呢，很快就 反制，对美国大豆、汽车这些征收关税，美国农民出口受阻，转而卖给别人，但损失不小。 贸易战起因与影响 中美贸易战从2018年就开始了，当时特朗普政府觉得中国占了美国便宜，贸易逆差太大，就开始加关税。起初是针对钢铁和铝制品，后来扩展到电 子产品和机械设备啥的。结果呢，美国企业供应链乱了套，成本上去了，消费者买东西贵了。 到了2020年，疫情来了，双方签了个第一阶段协议，中国多买美国农产品，美国暂停部分关税。可这协议执行起来磕磕绊绊，问题没彻底解决。拜 登上台后，继续保持关税，还加了科技限制，比如芯片出口管制。 2025年特朗普又回来，宣布对更多中国商品加税，理由包括芬太尼问题啥的。短短几个月，关税从10%升到20%，甚至更高。中国也没闲着，对美国 能源产品回击。全球贸易体系受影响，供应链风险大了，欧盟这些国家也开始搞自己的措施。 总的看，这贸易战让美国经济增速放缓到2.8%，而中国保持在5%左右。贸易逆差虽缩小了点，但美国竞争力下降了，企业转向自动化或移厂，可这 不是长久之计。 说白了 ...

Group 1: Military and Economic Implications - A potential conflict between the US and China could lead to a catastrophic global situation, with both nations possessing significant military capabilities, including nuclear arsenals and advanced technology [1][2] - The combined GDP of the US and China accounts for over 40% of the global economy, and a military conflict could result in a severe economic downturn, with predictions of a 7% reduction in global GDP if economic decoupling occurs, potentially doubling in the event of war [2][4] - The US military budget is projected to approach $1 trillion by 2025, while China's defense budget exceeds $300 billion, indicating a significant military expenditure disparity [1][2] Group 2: Global Supply Chain and Trade Impact - A military conflict would disrupt global supply chains, particularly affecting trade routes and port operations, leading to a halt in industrial production in China and inflation in the US [2][4] - The US is the largest consumer market, with imports exceeding $3 trillion, and a breakdown in trade could have dire consequences for both economies [2][4] - China's potential sale of $800 billion in US debt could destabilize the US economy, leading to increased interest rates and a weakened dollar [2][4] Group 3: Technological and Cultural Consequences - A war would severely impact global technology supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, with significant repercussions for consumer electronics and automotive sectors [4][5] - The conflict could lead to a regression in technological advancements, as both nations would likely impose stricter technology controls and face research stagnation [4][5] - Cultural and educational institutions would suffer, with potential talent loss and disruption of cultural exchanges, impacting both nations' global influence [5][7] Group 4: Global Stability and Future Outlook - The potential for a prolonged conflict could lead to a consumption war rather than a quick resolution, with both sides suffering heavy losses [2][4] - Experts warn that the escalation of military tensions could lead to irreversible destruction, with predictions of significant casualties and humanitarian crises [5][7] - The need for rational dialogue and cooperation is emphasized as the only viable path to prevent catastrophic outcomes, with initiatives like China's Belt and Road showing potential for collaborative growth [7][8]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent developments in the financial sector, highlighting the impact of regulatory changes and market trends on investment strategies [1] Group 1: Industry Analysis - The financial industry is experiencing significant shifts due to new regulations aimed at increasing transparency and reducing risk [1] - Market trends indicate a growing interest in sustainable investments, with a reported increase of 25% in ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) funds over the past year [1] - Analysts predict that the adoption of technology in finance, such as AI and blockchain, will reshape traditional banking models, potentially leading to a 15% reduction in operational costs for major banks [1] Group 2: Company Insights - Major banks are adjusting their strategies to align with regulatory requirements, which may lead to a temporary decline in profitability but is expected to stabilize in the long term [1] - A recent report shows that Company A has increased its market share by 10% in the investment banking sector, attributed to its innovative product offerings [1] - Company B is facing challenges due to increased competition and regulatory scrutiny, resulting in a 5% decrease in its stock price over the last quarter [1]

Group 1: China's Energy Import Strategy - China's energy imports from the US have dropped to zero, with crude oil imports falling from $800 million last year to zero, LNG orders ceasing for four consecutive months, and coal imports reduced to a few hundred dollars [1] - Russia has become the main supplier of crude oil and LNG to China, offering prices 10%-15% lower than the US, while Australia and Middle Eastern countries have increased their coal exports to China [1][11] - This diversification strategy has allowed China to eliminate its dependence on US energy, enhancing its energy security [1][11] Group 2: Impact on the US Energy Industry - The cessation of energy exports to China has led to a significant increase in the US trade deficit, with losses of at least $30 billion in the first half of the year [3] - The US shale oil industry is facing its lowest overseas sales in two years, with some companies at risk of bankruptcy, and the energy sector's contribution to US GDP and employment is being negatively impacted [3][7] - The US's previous position as the world's largest crude oil exporter is now compromised, as its strategy to penetrate traditional markets in the Middle East and Russia has failed [3][7] Group 3: US-China Negotiation Dynamics - Upcoming US-China trade talks in Stockholm are marked by the US's insistence on discussing China's purchases of Russian and Iranian oil, which China views as a geopolitical maneuver rather than a trade issue [4][6] - China maintains a firm stance on equal negotiations and opposes any form of pressure from the US, emphasizing that its oil purchases are purely commercial [6] Group 4: Shift in US Policy and Global Energy Landscape - The failure of the US trade war and technology blockade against China has led to a reassessment of strategies, with the US recognizing the difficulty in containing China's rise [7] - The global energy market is being reshaped, with Russia and Middle Eastern countries increasing their market share in China, while the US seeks alternative markets but struggles to fill the gap left by China [11] Group 5: Future Outlook - The fundamental contradictions in US-China relations are unlikely to be resolved, with the US potentially adopting a more aggressive stance in negotiations due to domestic political pressures [12] - China is expected to continue its focus on self-sufficiency in core technologies and rare earths, while also pursuing a dual circulation development strategy to mitigate external risks [12]