當今所謂放眼歷史都堪稱強勁的經濟形勢，缺少了一個關鍵因素：井噴的GDP數據。

在上個世紀的后半葉，美國商務部發布的一些GDP報告令人印象深刻。從1950年到2000年，每個十年里最高的年度真實GDP增速如下：8.7%（1950年）、6.6%（1966年）、5.6%（1973年和1978年）、7.3%（1984年）和4.7%（1999年）。與21世紀的情況相比，這些數據高得夸張。2001年至2010年間，美國最高的真實GDP增速為3.8%（2004年）；從2011年至今，最高的增速為2.9%，發生過兩次（2015年和2018年）。

像美國這樣復雜的經濟體，絕非一個數據所能概括，不過以下一些因素有助于解釋為什么GDP增速不如從前。

經濟已經成熟

Bannockburn Global Forex的首席市場戰略官馬克·錢德勒表示：“我們是一個成熟的經濟體，我們有65%的消費貢獻給了服務業。對比中國，他們在過去20年里消費的水泥量比美國過去200年里還多?！边@可以引申出一個模式：經濟體會優先投入固定資產，它們對經濟增長具有強大的促進作用。固定資產包括道路、高速公路和樓房?！凹僭O你要建立一個家庭。首先，你得買房，隨后購置家具和電視。在此之后你會購買服務?！卑凑者@種模式，我們走到了今天，成為了一個以服務業為主的經濟體。

錢德勒表示：“技術正在改變一切。通用汽車（GM）如今可以在20個工時內造出一輛汽車。如今在裝配線上的工人制造幾輛汽車的耗時只是他祖父的零頭。他觸碰的也是電腦屏幕，而不是汽車部件?！?/p>

他指出，新技術——想想互聯網和高科技——節省了資本與人力?！八栽谶^去，你可能需要買臺電腦來代替打字機（后者曾經取代了鋼筆或鉛筆），但如今你可以購買新的應用，而不必再買新電腦了。”你有了更多的計算能力，但你不再需要花費那么多錢。

負債水平過高

Charles Schwab and Co.的首席市場策略師利茲·安·桑德斯認為大蕭條后的高負債水平也是原因之一。“這個循環不僅是后債務泡沫循環——它通常需要十多年來恢復——而且更廣泛地說，負債水平，尤其是聯邦政府和企業的負債水平，已經處于最高級別。隨著債務越積越高，經濟增長會漸漸走低。”

高負債影響經濟增長的部分原因在于個人、公司和政府償還債務會產生“擠出效應”。她表示：“高負債壓縮了對于生產資料的投資，減少了經濟支出和其他支出?！痹S多家庭過去十年里都在償付金融危機后留下的債務，“這就意味著貢獻給GDP的支出會有所減少?！?/p>

勞動力老化

房利美（Fannie Mae）的高級副總裁和首席經濟學家道格·鄧肯觀察到，第二次世界大戰之后的經濟擴張受到了“嬰兒潮一代”成長為勞動力和組建家庭的推動。其中包括女性參加工作的人數增多，并在2000年達到頂峰。更多的女性成為勞動力，就有了更多可以掙錢的人，也就產生了更多消費者，從而推動了真實GDP的增長。但是如今，隨著嬰兒潮一代的男男女女以每天1萬人的速度跨過65歲大關，由此導致的勞動力減少并不能夠被完全彌補。

此外，鄧肯表示：“遷入美國的移民速度有所降低，這也減緩了勞動力的增長?！边@也部分解釋了為什么如今美國空缺工作崗位的數量（按照美國勞工統計局發布的工作崗位報告，為740萬個）比能夠參加工作的人數（按照就業形勢報告，目前美國的失業人口是590萬人）要多出150萬。

政府監管

鄧肯還認為，近年來的政府監管也抑制了商業投資，直到特朗普當局大幅放緩了監管法規的發布速度并削減了稅率。他表示：“此舉導致小型企業的信心出現了有記載以來最大幅度的增長。不過當局也在增加支出，已經處于高水平的債務與GDP的比率又有攀升。此外，關于關稅的討論每天都在變化，這又給企業投資計劃平添了幾分不確定性，你只能做好減緩增長的準備。”

無論近年來GDP增速放緩的原因是什么，特朗普當局對未來幾年GDP年均增速的預測還是高達4%。有些人認為，更高的真實GDP增速會導致進入繁榮與蕭條循環的風險加大。美聯儲也在經濟有復蘇跡象的第一時間開始權衡降低利率以促進增長的做法，結論可能最快會在下一次美聯儲會議（7月30日和31日）上確定。高速增長的前景或許只是存在于我們國家年輕時期的美好回憶。（財富中文網）

譯者：嚴匡正

There’s something missing in today’s so-called historically strong economy: blowout GDP numbers.

During the last half of the past century, the Department of Commerce released some pretty impressive GDP reports. Here are the highest annual real GDP readings during each decade from 1950 until 2000: 8.7% (1950), 6.6% (1966), 5.6% (1973 and 1978), 7.3% (1984), and 4.7% (1999). Those are hefty numbers compared to the 21st century. Between 2001 and 2010, the highest real GDP recorded was 3.8% (2004), and from 2011 until today the highest yearly rate was 2.9%, which happened twice (2015 and 2018).

With an economy as complex as the United States, it’s never one thing, but here are a few elements contributing to tamer numbers on the GDP front.

Economic maturity

“As we’ve matured as an economy, we consume 65% services,” says Marc Chandler, Chief Market Strategist with Bannockburn Global Forex. “Compare that to China, which has consumed more cement in the last 20 years than the U.S. has for the last 200 years.” That follows a pattern where economies will spend money on fixed capital first, which is a strong stimulus for growth. That includes roads, highways—and houses. “Let’s say you’re starting a family. First, you buy a house, then you buy furniture and TV’s. After that, you buy services.” And that brings us up to today: a largely service economy.

“Technology is changing everything,” Chandler says. “GM can now make a car in less than 20 man hours. A guy on the assembly line today is making multiple cars in a fraction of the time his grandfather did. And his hands are touching a computer screen, not touching parts of a car.”

He points out that new technology—think the internet and high-tech—saves capital and labor. “So while in the past you might have bought a computer to take the place of a typewriter (which took the place a pen or pencil) now, instead of buying a new computer you can buy new apps.” You get more computing power, but you don’t have to spend as much money.

High debt levels

Liz Ann Sonders, Chief Market Strategist for Charles Schwab and Co., also blames high levels of debt following the Great Recession. “Not only is this cycle a post-debt bubble cycle—it usually takes a good decade to work out of these—but more broadly, debt levels, especially federal government and business, are in the stratosphere. As debt moves higher and higher, economic growth tends to move lower.”

Part of the reason for that is the “crowding out” effect as individuals, companies and the government make payments on the debt. “The higher debt crowds out investment in capital goods,” she says, “reducing economic output relative to what it would be otherwise.” And as many households have spent the past ten years paying down their debt following the financial crisis, “that means spending, which contributes to GDP, lessens.”

Changes in the labor force

Doug Duncan, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist at Fannie Mae observes that the post-World War II economic expansion was powered by the the movement of ‘Baby Boomers’ into the workforce, as well as household formation. That included the rise of women into the workforce, which peaked around the year 2000. More women entering the labor force created more wage earners, as well as more consumers, and played a role in increasing real GDP. But now, with Boomers turning 65-years-old at the rate of 10,000 each day—male and female—their departure from the workforce is not being fully replaced.

Additionally, “immigration has been slowed,” says Duncan, “thus slowing the growth of the workforce as well.” That’s part of the reason why there can be a million and-a-half more job openings (7.4 million according to the BLS Job Openings), significantly more than the number of people who could fill them (there are 5.9 million unemployed people according to Employment Situation).

Government regulation

Duncan also believes government regulation has put a damper on business investment in recent years, that is until the Trump Administration dramatically slowed regulatory issuance and cut taxes. “That generated the largest ever recorded increase of optimism of small business,” he says, “but the administration also increased spending, adding to an already very high level of debt to GDP. Add to that the uncertainty faced by business investment plans when tariff discussions, which change daily,” and you have a recipe for slowing growth.

Whatever the reasons for the slower GDP rates of recent years, not even the Trump Administration predicts GDP on an annual basis as high as 4% in the coming years. And there are some who would argue that higher real GDP rates would increase the risk of a boom and bust cycle anyway. So as the Fed weighs the benefits of lowering interest rates to stimulate growth at the first signs of economic weakening—which may come as soon as the next Fed meeting (July 30th and 31st)—the prospect of blockbuster numbers may remain a fond memory from our country’s younger days.