Before reading this article, I sincerely invite you to click "Follow", which is not only convenient for you to discuss and share, but also brings you a different sense of participation, thank you for your support.
Under the current global economic situation, the motives behind the policies of various countries and their impact have gradually become the focus of public and expert attention.
U.S. financial policy, in particular, is often interpreted as having deep strategic intentions.
Recently, the truth behind the decision of the United States to refuse to cut interest rates has been widely discussed.
People are beginning to question whether this is simply about controlling inflation or if it has deeper implications, especially a potential blow to China's manufacturing sector.
Moreover, does the controversy surrounding the issue of "overcapacity" really reflect the actual state of the market, or is it just a strategic cover?
The US Federal Reserve's decision to keep interest rates high is often interpreted as a necessary means to control domestic inflation.
However, an in-depth analysis shows that this policy choice has a particular strategic implication for international markets, especially for China.
By maintaining high interest rates, the United States has actually formed a kind of capital magnetic field in the international financial market, attracting global capital flows to the United States.
This not only strengthens the global position of the dollar, but also indirectly affects the economic stability of other countries, especially China, a manufacturing powerhouse, through capital outflows.
The United States and its allies have often criticized China's manufacturing "overcapacity" as far exceeding market demand.
This argument seems reasonable on the surface, but in fact it ignores an important fact: the current global market demand for new energy and electronic products made in China continues to grow.
In fact, this so-called "overcapacity" argument is more of a strategic accusation against China by Western economies in the international trade competition, with the aim of influencing the decision-making of investors and policymakers by creating information asymmetry.
Further, the U.S. boycott of China's manufacturing industry is not only due to economic competition, but also to deep geopolitical factors.
As China's position in the global supply chain grows, the United States seeks to weaken China's economic influence through various means in order to maintain its global hegemony.
This includes an attempt to rebalance the already skewed international balance of power through sanctions, trade barriers, and political pressure on the international stage.
The U.S. decision not to cut interest rates has had a direct impact on the global economy, especially emerging market countries.
Many countries that rely on U.S. investment and trade have been attracted by the high interest rates of the U.S. dollar, which has led to capital outflows and depreciation of their currencies, exacerbating economic instability in these countries.
In addition, this policy has indirectly influenced the formulation of global monetary policy, forcing other central banks to adjust their interest rate policies in response to US decisions.
In addition to putting pressure on China, the U.S. policy of high interest rates has also had side effects on its own economy.
While financial markets can be stabilized by attracting foreign investment in the short term, high interest rates have dampened domestic consumption and business investment in the long term, which could hinder the U.S. economic recovery.
In addition, the high debt burden and possible market bubbles also cast a shadow over the future economic outlook of the United States.
In the end, we have to examine the question: Is the US financial policy and attitude towards China's manufacturing industry just a superficial economic operation, or is it a deep international game?
In today's interdependent global economy, policy changes in a single country can affect the whole body, and the impact may be far greater than expected.
We need to be vigilant and rationally analyze the intentions behind each policy and the long-term consequences it may bring.
What do you have to say about this? Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comment section!