新闻来源：www.bloomberg.com
原文地址：China Deflation Latest: Why Nominal Is the Real Gauge to Watch
新闻日期：2024-09-10
中国通胀最新：为什么名义数字是实质关注点
我是波士顿的一位经济编辑，今天探讨中国通货紧缩的风险。请通过或X向我们发送反馈和建议。
在分析一个国家的经济产出时，通常需要去除价格变化的影响。但是当一个国家面临通货紧缩时，“实际”国内生产总值（GDP）实际上是被价格下降所夸大的。此时，名义GDP能提供更清晰的读数——就像日本所谓的“失落的十年”期间一样。
家庭知道收入减少，因此减少了消费。企业看到收入下滑，便削减了投资和招聘。政府的债务负担因税收增长停滞而增加。这是一个明显的警告信号。
如今轮到中国面临这一挑战。核心通胀率已连续三年处于最低水平，工厂出厂价格也自2022年末以来一直停留在通缩状态。根据Bloomberg Economics的预测，广义的价格指标——GDP平减指数在连续五个季度下降后，预计还将延续至2025年。
这意味着通货紧缩可能错失了一些关键信号。上一季度的实际增长率为4.7%，仍符合政府全年“约5%”的增长目标。但名义GDP同比增长仅为3.97%。
“因此，政策制定者更关注实际增长而非名义增长”，Citi Group的经济学家季晓宇和于向荣在最近的一份报告中写道。但是通缩对信心的影响是不容忽视的。
这股弱势促使一些经济学家呼吁采取更多货币宽松措施。然而，如卡耐基国际和平基金会高级研究员迈克尔·佩蒂斯所指出的那样，在中国，这种货币宽松可能无法打破今天的通缩循环，就像它在“失落的十年”期间未能实现一样。
与西方经济体，尤其是美国通过货币宽松刺激消费从而推动通胀不同的是，中国的货币宽松往往通过银行流向经济的供给端，增加产出并降低价格。他在一篇最近的文章中如此论述。
此外，本周三的数据也显示，中国企业在维持销售时不得不降价，而出口持续增长则是一个积极信号。
原文摘要：
I’m , an economics editor in Boston, and today we’re looking at China’s deflation risks. Send us feedback and tips to or get in touch on X via . And if you aren’t yet signed up to receive this newsletter, you can do so .In looking at a nation’s economic output, most of the time it makes sense to remove the impact of changes in prices. But things are different when a country .In that case, “real” gross domestic product is actually inflated by the decline in prices. That’s when nominal GDP can provide a clearer read on conditions — just as was the case during Japan’s so-called lost decades.Households knew their income was down and spent less. Companies saw their revenues drop and cut investment and hiring. The government’s debt burden rose as tax income stagnated. It was a to break.Today, it’s China that’s . Core inflation is running at the slowest pace in more than three years and factory-gate prices remain stuck in deflation, as they’ve been since late 2022. The broadest measure of prices, the GDP deflator, has fallen for five quarters and that stretch will probably extend into 2025, says Bloomberg Economics.That means risks missing key signals. Real growth was 4.7% last quarter, arguably still in line with the government’s “about 5%” target for the full year. But nominal GDP rose just 3.97% year-on-year.“With policymakers’ focus on real growth instead of nominal growth,” they haven’t been prodded into action yet, Citigroup economists Xinyu Ji and Xiangrong Yu wrote in a recent note. But deflation’s “impact on confidence is without question.”Such weakness is spurring calls by economists for additional monetary easing. But as Michael Pettis, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argues, that might not break the deflationary cycle in today’s China just as it didn’t through Japan’s lost decades. In contrast with Western economies such as the US, where monetary easing spurs consumption and thereby inflation, easy money in China tends to flow via banks to the supply side of the economy, boosting output and lowering prices, he argued in a recent article. And it could be worse. “Ironically, perhaps the reason China doesn’t experience more deflation is that the economy is already so overinvested that the positive supply side impact of credit expansion has lost much of its force.”The domestic demand deficit could be seen in Tuesday’s , with imports barely expanding while exports handily beat economists’ estimates in August. While the continued expansion of exports is positive for the economy, Chinese companies are having to cut prices to secure sales, with the volume of shipments rising faster than the value in recent months. Before the pandemic, the US economy needed to add about 75,000 jobs per month to prevent unemployment ticking higher. The immigration surge and a seasonable uptick in the participation rate saw that number surge to as high as 300,000 to 400,000 per month in 2022-2023, according to new analysis by economists at Goldman Sachs.With those trends now moderating, Goldman estimates the “monthly breakeven rate” for employment will be 150,000 to 180,000 over the next 12 months, economists led by Jan Hatzius wrote in a note. There’s considerable uncertainty around that breakeven rate, making signals from payrolls less useful. That’ll lead the Federal Reserve to put more weight on the unemployment rate going forward, they wrote. Enjoy Economics Daily? Plus, here are some newsletters we think you might like
