今年美國總統競選的關鍵話題之一是美國工業的競爭力，盡管唐納德?特朗普和伯尼?桑德斯經常使用豐富多彩的語言來表達其觀點：美國已經喪失經濟優勢。

兩位候選人極為蔑視最近達成的貿易協定。他們認為，這些協定表明美國無法與中國或越南等國家競爭，后者的勞動力成本要低很多，同時也缺乏往往會給企業帶來沉重負擔的環境法規。

不過，如果你去問問真正的制造業高管，你就會發現他們對美國的未來要比這些政客樂觀得多。根據德勤公司與美國競爭力委員會聯合發布的2016年度《全球制造業競爭力指數》，美國制造業的競爭力高居全球第二位，僅次于中國。此外，全球制造業高管預計，到2020年，美國將成為全球制造業競爭力最強的經濟體。

A key theme in this year’s presidential race is competitiveness of American industry, though candidates like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders tend to use more colorful language when describing their belief that the United States has lost its economic edge.

Both candidates despise recent trade deals, which they feel have proven that the U.S. can’t compete with countries like China and Vietnam, which have far cheaper labor and less onerous environmental regulations.

But if you ask actual manufacturing executives, they’re far more bullish on America’s future than many of its political leaders. On Thursday, professional services firm Deloitte teamed up with the Council on Competitiveness to release its 2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index, showing that the United States is the second most competitive manufacturing economy after China. What’s more, global manufacturing executives predict that by 2020, the United States will be the most competitive manufacturing economy in the world.

美國排名持續飆升的原因在于，廉價勞動力對制造商成本的影響早已不復當初。20世紀90年代，中國制造業的工人數量達到頂峰，之后開始下滑。隨著制造業對工人的需求不斷減少，一國制造業取得成功的重要因素就變為，它能否獲得先進的技術和原材料，知識產權的保護措施是否完備等等。在這些方面，美國都要勝過中國。

這不是說對制造業就業率下滑感到焦慮就是杞人憂天。盡管制造類企業認為，美國是做生意的好地方，但他們在美國取得成功并不意味著，他們能如同半個世紀以前那樣，提供大量薪水豐厚的工作崗位。

在整整一代人的時間里，大多數工人的薪酬一直停滯不前。對于大部分沒有大學文憑的美國人而言，機遇正在不斷減少。因此，把糟糕的制造業就業情況看作一種可以被矯正的政治錯誤，是很自然的事情。然而，在過去20年里，中國喪失的制造業工作崗位其實比美國更多。這一事實有力地表明，對中國強硬完全無助于提高美國的就業率。

就如同農業等眾多行業曾經的經歷一樣，制造業就業率的下滑是一種再自然不過的經濟過程，而不是政治錯誤。隨著各個經濟部門更加擅長它們所做的事情，它們需要的勞動力往往會變得越來越少。

所以，盡管我們可以理解總統候選人對制造業境況的關心，但那些聲稱自己能提高制造業就業率的人，要么是不了解他們所談論的領域，要么就是在說假話。事實上，美國的政客們應該贊美那些愿意在美國經商的制造業高管，即便他們拯救不了苦苦掙扎的美國工人。（財富中文網）

譯者：嚴匡正

審校：任文科

So why has the United States been shooting up the ranks? Long gone are the days when cheap labor was the most important input for manufacturers. Total manufacturing employment in China peaked during the 1990s and has been falling ever since. And as manufacturing continues to reduce the number of workers needed, the important ingredients to success in the sector are whether advanced technologies and materials are available, and whether or not intellectual property protections are strong. The United States beats out China on both of these scores.

This is not to say that anxiety over the decline of manufacturing employment is misguided. While it’s good that manufacturing firms think that the United States is a great place to do business, their success in America will not have the same impact, in terms of providing a huge number of well-paying jobs, as they did a half-century ago.

Pay for most workers has been stagnant for a generation, and opportunities for the majority of Americans without a college degree are shrinking. It’s natural to look at the phenomenon of declining manufacturing employment as a political failure that can be rectified. But the fact that China has lost more manufacturing jobs than the U.S. over the past 20 years is a strong indication that playing hardball with the Chinese isn’t going to do anything to increase employment in the United States.

Rather than a political failure, the decline of manufacturing employment is a natural economic process that many industries, like agriculture, have gone through in past eras. As sectors become better at what they do, they often require fewer people to get the work done.

So while it’s understandable the state of manufacturing is of concern to presidential candidates, those who say they can bring back lost jobs in the sector either don’t know what they are talking about, or are being disingenuous. Instead, American politicians should be lauding the fact that manufacturing executives want to do business here, even if that fact won’t save the struggling American worker.