11月5日，美国联邦政府"停摆"进入第36天，打破2018年底至2019年初"停摆"35天的纪录，成为美国历史上持续时间最长的政府"停摆"。 11月5日，美国首都华盛顿的国会大厦前亮起红色的交通信号灯。 新华社记者 胡友松 摄 这一天，美国核动力航母"乔治·华盛顿"号停靠韩国釜山港休整补给。据报道，如果政府继续"停摆"，11月中旬的美国军队军饷发放又将成问 题。 11月5日，在美国首都华盛顿，联邦雇员排队领取免费食品。 新华社记者 胡友松 摄 11月5日清晨，在美国波特兰的深秋寒意中，无家可归者蜷缩在街边角落里。 新华社记者 吴晓凌 摄 11月5日清晨，在美国波特兰的深秋寒意中，无家可归者排队等待领取救助物品。 新华社记者 吴晓凌 摄 目前，全美每天有数千架次航班延误。美国航空协会数据显示，自"停摆"以来，已有超过320万美国旅客受航班延误或取消影响。美国交通部 长肖恩·达菲警告，如果"停摆"持续，美国可能被迫关闭部分空域。 11月5日，在美国纽约肯尼迪国际机场，乘客排队值机。 新华社记者 张凤国 摄 11月5日，一架客机从美国纽约肯尼迪国际机场起飞。 新华社记者 张凤国 摄 11月5日，在美国首都华盛顿拍摄 ...

Group 1 - The trade policies initiated by the Trump administration have led to significant disruptions in global trade dynamics, with unilateral tariffs causing inflation and economic downturns in the U.S. [2][3] - The tariffs imposed on steel and aluminum, as well as the high tariffs on Chinese goods, are projected to increase U.S. inflation by 1.2 percentage points and reduce global trade volume by 1% [2][3] - The agricultural sector in the U.S. has been particularly hard hit, with exports to China dropping by 32% in the first quarter, resulting in a loss of $15 billion [5][9] Group 2 - Consumer confidence in the U.S. has plummeted to its lowest level in three years, impacting factory profits and leading to increased layoffs [3] - The trade war has prompted retaliatory tariffs from Canada and Japan, adversely affecting U.S. exports of automobiles and aircraft [5][9] - The global response to U.S. tariffs has been overwhelmingly negative, with over 50 countries criticizing U.S. unilateralism and exploring alternatives to the dollar [5][7] Group 3 - The tariffs are seen as undermining the foundation of U.S. economic hegemony, with allies potentially shifting their partnerships due to the trade policies [7][9] - Despite the challenges, China's economy has shown resilience, with a projected increase in foreign investment and growth in domestic consumption [7][9] - The trade conflict has complicated relationships with allies, leading to a potential decline in global economic growth rates as estimated by the IMF [9]

超过美国，既是目标，也是我们的追求。 美国霸权这个词我们几乎听了无数遍，但你有没有想过，美国霸权到底依赖的是什么？ 一提到美国霸权，很多人会想当然地认为是军事实力，是美元，这个答案当然也没有错。但从另一个角度来看，还不足够有说服力。 毕竟军事实力，那更多是震慑威慑，并不会对霸权起到实质性的作用，而美元也是一样的道理，它可以自由流通，不管是美联储加息还是降息，对美国乃至 全球来说，都有好有坏，其结果不存在完全的可控。 所以，从这个角度来看，这些是美国的"霸权"，但也不完全是美国的"霸权"。 美国真正的霸权是什么？其实是美国庞大中产组成黑洞一样的消费市场。 Property play the state the state t and the state the state of the state CHAND 255 t and the first the first t and the the state in 2 2004 GENE the state TENNER WNGHE and 11 3 3 international and and ST CONTRACT 2005 898 and and 999 ...

今天又听到有人说，美国股市"高科技七姐妹"牛得很，市值不断上涨但是市盈率并不高，而中国同类科技股市盈率太高了。这种论调我听了二十多年了， 起初我也觉着有道理，但追踪分析发现，其中破绽不少。吹捧美国经济、美国股市的人，其实不在意真正的经济学原理，而是预先设定了美国"强者恒 强"，中国只能做跟随者的宣传框架、理论框架、话语框架。其中最典型的是：这些人在上世纪八九十年代宣传美国蓝筹股的市盈率十倍很合理，但是当 道琼斯指数市盈率涨到二十多倍时，他们还认为合理；这些人在2010年之前宣传美国债务/GDP比率60%左右很完美，现在债务/GDP比率超过119%了，他 们也是异口同声说没问题。这是很奇怪的逻辑和很奇怪的宣传。 来源：鹏友来开会 他们的核心破绽是：吹捧美国经济、美国股市的人，完全不考虑美国霸权，把霸权所导致的一系列不公平分配、不公平计价、不公平转移，完全忽略不 计，极力营造并宣传霸权框架下的美国超级跨国公司的无比正确、无比优秀、不可超越。 然而，在2008年美国金融危机爆发后，美国霸权笼罩下的国际经济金融领域的不公平现象得到充分暴露，美国霸权的反噬效应也日益突出。这是包括中国 在内的广大发展中国家呼吁建立更加公 ...

Core Viewpoint - The recent statements by former President Trump regarding tariffs on China and the cessation of Russian oil purchases highlight a shift in U.S. foreign policy, revealing cracks in American hegemony on the global stage [1][3][12] Group 1: Trump's Tariff Strategy - Trump advocates for immediate tariffs of 50% to 100% on China as a means to leverage its influence over Russia to end the Ukraine conflict [1][3] - The approach reflects Trump's transactional mindset, attempting to apply domestic negotiation tactics to international relations, viewing tariffs as tools for pressure rather than diplomatic solutions [3][12] - Historical context shows that previous tariffs imposed during Trump's administration resulted in significant economic losses for the U.S., with estimates of annual losses around $125 billion due to tariffs on China alone [7][9] Group 2: Reactions from Allies - European Union officials express skepticism about the feasibility of implementing such high tariffs, citing potential harm to their economies and the risk of retaliation from China [6][9] - Canada, while chairing the G7, refrains from supporting Trump's tariff proposals, indicating a desire to repair relations with China and India instead [6][7] - Other G7 allies, including Japan and South Korea, also voice concerns about the economic implications of joining a U.S.-led tariff initiative, highlighting the growing reluctance among allies to follow U.S. directives [7][12] Group 3: Implications for Global Trade - The proposed tariffs could lead to significant disruptions in global supply chains, with potential negative impacts on various industries reliant on Chinese goods [9][12] - The push for a "tariff alliance" by the U.S. may further strain relationships with allies, as countries prioritize their own economic interests over U.S. demands [9][12] - The overarching theme suggests that unilateral trade actions may undermine global cooperation and trust, with the potential for escalating tensions rather than resolving conflicts [10][12]

Group 1 - The core concern of the U.S. regarding China is not merely a perceived "threat," but rather the challenge posed by China's rise to U.S. global hegemony [1][30] - The U.S. has historically employed strategies to suppress rising competitors, such as Japan and the Soviet Union, but these methods have not been effective against China [4][11] - China's unique development path, which diverges from U.S. expectations, has led to its emergence as a top global power [2][13] Group 2 - China's economic model combines market economy with socialist principles, successfully addressing efficiency and equity [15] - The rise of Chinese companies in the electric vehicle sector, such as BYD and NIO, highlights China's growing influence in global markets despite U.S. attempts to impose tariffs and restrict technology transfers [17][20] - China's advancements in high-tech industries, including drones and quantum computing, indicate a significant challenge to U.S. technological dominance [19][20] Group 3 - The U.S. has attempted to undermine Chinese companies like Huawei through sanctions, but these efforts have often backfired, leading to increased Chinese innovation [22][24] - China's response to U.S. military pressure in the South China Sea and Taiwan has involved strategic countermeasures, including military exercises and infrastructure investments [26][28] - The Belt and Road Initiative has allowed China to strengthen its economic ties globally, particularly in regions like Africa and Southeast Asia, challenging U.S. influence [28][30]

Group 1 - The article highlights the rapid changes in the international political landscape, indicating a potential decline of U.S. hegemony and a shift towards a multipolar world order [1][11] - The U.S. is facing significant challenges both domestically and internationally, with its trade policies being questioned and losing effectiveness [3][5] - Traditional allies, such as India and Japan, are showing signs of independence from U.S. influence, indicating a broader trend of shifting alliances [6][9] Group 2 - China's new global governance proposal is gaining recognition and support from various countries, contrasting with the U.S. unilateral approach [11][12] - The principles of China's initiative emphasize equality, international law, multilateral cooperation, and a people-centered approach, resonating with many nations [11] - The article concludes that the recent international events signal a profound transformation in global power dynamics, with countries seeking to maximize their interests in the context of great power competition [11][12]

Group 1 - The article discusses the immediate economic impact of Trump's decision to impose a 10% tariff on Chinese goods, which has created tension in global markets and affected US-China trade relations [1] - China's response includes retaliatory tariffs on US products, strict controls on rare metal exports, and adjustments to the RMB exchange rate, demonstrating China's resilience and strategic capabilities [1][3] - The US's focus on Ukraine's rare earth resources is driven by the pressure from China's export controls, highlighting the importance of rare earths in US high-tech and military industries [3][5] Group 2 - The article criticizes the US for its self-serving actions in international relations, particularly its demands from Ukraine, which could exacerbate the country's already precarious situation [5][7] - Ukraine lacks the technology and resources to effectively utilize its rare earth resources, making the US's demands appear exploitative and detrimental to Ukraine's future [5][7] - The ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the US's actions are seen as attempts to maximize benefits at the expense of Ukraine, raising concerns about the long-term implications for the country [5][7] Group 3 - The article concludes that Trump's actions reflect a disregard for international norms and ethics, while China's strong economic position and industrial capabilities have allowed it to effectively defend its interests [7] - The evolving dynamics of US-China trade relations and the international landscape will continue to be significant, with China expected to maintain its influential role [7]

Group 1 - The article discusses Trump's shift in strategy regarding technology exports to China, allowing companies like Nvidia and AMD to sell chips to China while requiring a 15% revenue share from these sales [2][6][8] - This move indicates a potential failure of the U.S. technology war against China, as it suggests a relaxation of previous restrictions and a shift towards monetizing U.S. technological dominance [4][6][8] - Trump's approach is characterized as a transactional strategy, where he leverages U.S. security concerns to extract financial benefits from American companies, effectively turning national security into a revenue-generating mechanism [6][14][16] Group 2 - The article highlights concerns that this new policy could undermine the competitive position of U.S. companies, as they may face higher costs that could be passed on to consumers, ultimately affecting their market dynamics [11][9] - There is a cautionary note regarding the potential risks of allowing Chinese access to U.S. technology, particularly the fear of embedded security vulnerabilities in exported chips [13][14] - The article suggests that this shift could lead to a broader opening of U.S. markets to China, potentially extending beyond technology to other sectors like military and aerospace, as long as the revenue-sharing model is maintained [8][9][16]

Group 1 - The current US-India relationship is characterized by tension, with India leveraging low-cost Russian oil to produce refined products for the EU, which angers the US [1][3] - The US has imposed a 25% additional tariff on Indian goods, raising the total tariff to 50%, significantly impacting sectors like textiles and jewelry, which employ millions [3][5] - India's Prime Minister Modi has expressed a firm stance against compromising on agricultural interests, indicating a strong resistance to US pressure [3][5] Group 2 - Modi's government is responding to US tariffs by reducing import duties on cotton and promoting "Make in India" initiatives, aiming to decrease reliance on external markets [5][7] - India is actively seeking new export markets, having signed a free trade agreement with the UK and negotiating with the EU to mitigate the impact of US tariffs [7][8] - The upcoming UN General Assembly in September may provide a platform for Modi and Trump to discuss their differences, but the outcome remains uncertain [7][8]