新聞:


But the real story of the Trump economy, and the president’s role in building it, is not so simple. If you compare key economic indicators from Barack Obama’s second term in office to the first three years of Trump’s time (that is, before the pandemic hit), the data show a continuation of trends, not a dramatic shift. It suggests Trump didn’t build something new; rather he inherited a pretty good situation.

但“特朗普經濟”的真實故事,以及總統在其中扮演的角色,并沒有(他說的)那么簡單。如果你對比巴拉克·奧巴馬第二任期和特朗普頭三年(即大流行爆發之前)的關鍵經濟指標,會發現數據顯示的只是趨勢的延續,而不是戲劇性的轉變。這表明特朗普并沒有建設什么新東西;相反,他是繼承了一個相當不錯的開局。

Start with the broadest measure of economic health, gross domestic product. In 2016, Trump said he was unhappy that the country’s economic growth rate was under 3 percent a year. Trump said he thought the economy could grow at better-than-4-percent annual rate.

首先是衡量經濟健康狀況最廣泛的指標——GDP。2016年,特朗普曾表示,他對美國的年經濟增長率低于3%感到不滿。特朗普說,他認為美國經濟的年增長率可以超過4%。

But the numbers show that average quarterly economic growth under Trump, 2.5 percent, was almost exactly what it was under Obama in the second term, 2.4 percent.

但數據顯示,特朗普任期內的平均季度經濟增長率為2.5%,幾乎與奧巴馬第二任期的2.4%相當。


Job numbers for Obama and Trump show a similar story.

奧巴馬和特朗普治下的就業數據也顯示了類似的情況。

The president rightly takes credit for having low unemployment during his presidency. In December of 2019, the unemployment rate was a scant 3.5 percent, the lowest it had been in 50 years.

總統理所當然地將自己任期內的低失業率歸功于自己。2019年12月,失業率僅為3.5%,為50年來的最低水平。


That’s not to besmirch the remarkably low unemployment under Trump, but it’s hard to ignore that the unemployment track under Obama had been downward. Again, the numbers look like the continuation of a trend, not something new.

這并不是要抹黑特朗普執政時期的低失業率,但很難忽視的是,奧巴馬執政時期的失業率一直在下降。同樣,這些數字看起來像是一種趨勢的延續,而不是什么新成就。

And the job creation numbers show more evidence for that view.

而新增就業的數字為這一觀點提供了更多的證據。


On average, the country created 215,000 new jobs a month in Obama’s second term. In Trump’s first three years, the figure was 182,000. They are both good numbers and if you look at the jobs data plotted on a graph, the rise since 2011 actually looks pretty consistent.

在奧巴馬的第二個任期內,美國平均每月創造21.5萬個新工作崗位。在特朗普執政的頭三年里,這個數字是18.2萬。它們都是不錯的數字,如果你看看圖表上的就業數據,會發現自2011年以來的增長實際上看起來相當一致。

But that’s the point. Since the recovery from the last recession the numbers look like a slow, steady build. There is no sudden change when Trump takes office in 2017. There was nothing dramatic in the post-2011 job figures until the pandemic hit this spring.

但這就是重點。自上次經濟衰退復蘇以來,這些數字看起來是緩慢而穩定的增長。2017年特朗普就職時,不會出現突然的變化。截至今年春天疫情爆發之前,2011年之后的就業數據并沒有太大變化。

There is one big indicator that suggests a change under Trump, the rise in the stock market. The Dow Jones Industrial Average in particular took off when he won the presidency.

有一個重要的指標表明特朗普領導下出現了變化,那就是股市上漲。他當選總統后,道瓊斯工業平均指數更是一路飆升。

On Dec. 31, 2019, the DJIA was at 28,538. That was up 56 percent from 18,332, where it was the day Trump was elected in 2016. That’s a pretty impressive run. (For the Dow, we use Election Day as the starting measure because investors can and often do react to big news events.)

2019年12月31日,道瓊斯指數為28538點。這一數字比2016年特朗普當選總統時的18332點高出了56%。這是一個相當令人印象深刻的表現。(對于道瓊斯指數,我們把選舉日作為開始衡量的標準,因為投資者能夠而且經常對重大新聞事件做出反應。)


The real question is: How important is the Dow to the overall health of the economy? Other lingering problems, such as continued high unemployment and a projected drop in GDP for the year, only emphasize how that one measure doesn’t come close to telling the whole story of the economy.

可真正的問題在于:道瓊斯指數對經濟的整體健康狀況有多重要?其他揮之不去的問題,比如持續高企的失業率和預計今年GDP將會下降,只會凸顯出這一指標并不能完全反映美國經濟的整體情況。

A president taking credit for the economy is nothing new, of course. It’s a time-honored tradition in politics. And there are parts of the economy that Trump can rightfully celebrate. But the idea that the president somehow rescued a nation that was struggling economically when he arrived simply isn’t borne out in the data.

當然,一位總統因經濟發展而邀功并不是什么新鮮事。這是一個歷史悠久的政治傳統。經濟中有一些方面是特朗普可以慶祝的。但是,“當總統上任時,他以某種方式拯救了一個在經濟上苦苦掙扎的國家”——這種觀點并沒有在數據中得到證實。

If Trump is re-elected, he would not be rebuilding the economy again; he would be taking on a new task he did not face when he first arrived in Washington. He might be the right person for that job, but there is little evidence in his record as president that says he is.

如果特朗普再次當選,他不會再重建經濟;他將承擔一項他除此入主華盛頓時沒有面對過的新任務。他或許是這個職位的合適人選,但在他擔任總統期間的記錄中,幾乎找不出證據表明他是。