川普要和中国打贸易战。看了各大中文网站上网民的评论，只见皇协军们aka台独、港灿、美分、狗粮们一个个意气风发斗志昂扬吐沫星子飞溅地在那里断言美必胜中比输。
可到美国比较中立的英文媒体华盛顿邮报的网站上看了一下，发现皇军aka美国人却个个忧心忡忡，觉得川总太冒失了，弄得好中美两败俱伤，弄不好美国会受损更大。
会英文的网友自己去看看美国人写的评论吧。不会的，我找了两个有代表性的给你们翻译一下：
我想如果川总会中文，上中文网上了了皇协军们的表现，一定会感慨万千：皇军的战斗力居然不如皇协军，看来让美国再次伟大没戏了。还是向中国人投降吧。
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-trade-war-with-china/?utm_term=.0d7627c6eb6e
这位说：
Trade wars harm both sides. That said, Trump is starting this for no good reason, with a nation that has a population of over a billion AND holds a lot of United States debt. We still rank first, world-wide, in GNP, but China is third, after the European Union. And China has a LOT of untapped "torque" yet to bring to bear.
贸易战双方都要受损失。可以说，川普同一个人口超过10亿并持有大量美债的国家打贸易战，却没有一个很好的理由。在世界上，我们的国民生产总值是老大，但中国也是老三，仅次于欧盟。而且中国还有许多杠杆没有用上。
Suppose the effects of the higher prices of goods and materials begins to be felt here by the people who are Trump's "base?" This is what happens in a trade war: it's a ratcheting up of not only the price of stuff immediately affected, but of everything else that uses that stuff. Let's put it this way: if the price of stuff at Wal-Mart doubles, and income of its customers stays the same, how happy will they be with Trump?
想象当物价上涨时川普那些票仓会作何反应？这既是贸易战会发生的事情。不经直接受影响的东西会涨价，任何用这些东西的东西都会跟着涨价。如果沃尔玛的物价涨了一倍，而工资却原封不动，很难想象人们会为川普喝彩。
Very stupid move, and no, I don't think Trump or the United States will "win."
非常愚蠢的行动。我不认为川普货美国会“赢”。
还有这位说：
Tariffs pick winners and losers. But it is not as simple as picking American winners and foreign losers. Tariffs create winners and losers within America. Tariffs on raw materials make winners of domestic raw material producers and losers of raw material consumers, i.e., finished goods manufacturers. Tariffs on consumer goods make winners of domestic consumer goods producers but losers of consumer goods consumers, i.e., retail shoppers.
加关税会产生赢家和输家，但不是像美国赢和外国输那么简单。关税会在美国内部产生赢家和输家。如果对原料征税，那些在国内生产原料的人会成为赢家，而用这些原料的人，以及终端产品生产商会成为输家。对消费品征税，国内生产消费品的生产商成为赢家，而消费者及商店成为输家。
Into the entire process, tariffs throw a certain amount of "sand," i.e., additional friction to the market, that adds across the board costs to everyone. So even if there are some winners and losers, the net overall balance tends to be a net cost to everyone.
从整体上，关税相当于沙子，加剧了市场的摩擦，并增加了每个个体的成本。即使从个体上说会产生一些赢家或输家，但从整体上看，平均到每个人，大家全是输。
In some instances tariffs can be a "scalpel" to protect critical industries, and are not only defensible, but very important to have. There is little in the current round that suggests this is the main consideration.
在一些特例里，增加关税可以用来保护对国家至关重要的部门。但这不能成为经济活动的常见措施。
