中国消费增长的健康路径

Mar 31, 2014 Martin Feldstein

美国剑桥—中国决策者希望将中国的生产远离出口和重工业依赖，增加消费占GDP的比重。相对简单的鼓励医疗保险的制度性变化能极大促进后一个目标。

更高的消费支出水平将提高普通中国家庭的生活水平，这是中国领导人所谓的“中国梦”的首要要素。消费支出的更快增长还能逆转最近的GDP增长减速之势，提供为数百万农村地区中国人和数百万中国大学毕业生创造就业岗位所需要的需求。

如今，消费支出只占中国GDP的36%，大约为美国和西欧比例的一半。这一明显偏低的水平反映了家庭收入占GDP总量比重较小以及家庭储蓄率较高。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world’s leading thinkers, including long reads, book reviews, topical collections, short-form analysis and predictions, and exclusive interviews; every new issue of the PS Quarterly magazine (print and digital); the complete PS archive; and more. Subscribe now to PS Premium.

Martin Feldstein

Writing for PS since 2008
130 Commentaries

Martin Feldstein was Professor of Economics at Harvard University and President Emeritus of the National Bureau of Economic Research. He chaired President Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers from 1982 to 1984. In 2006, he was appointed to President Bush's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and, in 2009, was appointed to President Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. He was also on the board of directors of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Group of 30, a non-profit, international body that seeks greater understanding of global economic issues.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 3 Comments on this article

Zsolt Hermann Apr 7, 2014

Interesting advice.
So an alcoholic, who is in liver failure, close to death, is advising another patient, who has the early symptoms of the same disease, to start drinking even more, heavier and arrive to the same sad ending?
We all see and know by now that constant quantitative growth, stubbornly generating "aggregate demand", blowing bubbles on top of bubbles is collective suicide as it is unsustainable, we still try to continue doing it and we recommend others to behave the same way too.
How much more facts, scientific data, real life experience do we need to realize we have to change our whole paradigm, lifestyle, attitude?
How far do we have to exhaust the human resources, torn by social inequality, unemployment, intolerable debt burden, depression, substance abuse and a whole variety of social problems, unrest, riots, revolutions before we are ready to make changes?
When are we ready to become truly "human", a creature that is ready for critical self-assessment and subsequent, appropriate self-change in order to adapt to the evolutionary conditions?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Rajan Bhardvaj Apr 6, 2014

Why go down the route of employer based tax deductions with all the attendant issues that exist in the US? It seems that an individual catastrophic health insurance market with mandates or a single payer model would be more effective and able to deliver care more efficiently.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
RE Mant Apr 5, 2014

I know we don't do it in the West, but in order to invest you really do have to save first.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.