laitimes

Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?

author:Cloth Theory
Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?

Recently, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen brought up the old topic of overcapacity in China on a radio show. But this time, she didn't pass the test so well, because the anchor Lysdal directly threw out a hot potato: "Are we not as good as China in high-tech gadgets such as electric cars and batteries?" Yellen quickly shook her head in denial, but the rhetoric of "China has too many subsidies and unfair competition" sounded like a repeater.

Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?

Lysdal was not ambiguous, and directly took the United States' own "CHIPS Act" and "Inflation Reduction Act" to make a joke: "The money we spent on ourselves is also astronomical, why don't we mention it?" This wave of rhetorical questions can be said to be quite down-to-earth, and it directly hit the point.

Yellen went on to explain that U.S. subsidies are for national security, supply chain toughness, and job opportunities for ordinary people, with a posture of "we either want to keep it alone, or we have to protect ourselves". also pulled up a list of countries, saying that everyone was worried. No, Hua Chunying, assistant minister of foreign affairs, translated Yellen's subtext for everyone on the Internet: "U.S. subsidies, that's strategy; China subsidizes, that's foul. ”

Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?

Netizens also exploded, and some people ridiculed the United States for being full of "two-faced" skills, and the rules are set for others, and they can change if they want to. Some people also directly said that the United States has played this trick of "changing its mind if it can't afford to lose." Some people even hit the nail on the head, saying that the United States has always only looked at whether it is happy or not, and does not talk about win-win or win-win.

But then again, where is the surplus of green energy vehicles and solar panels in the global village, it is obviously in short supply! The International Energy Agency has said that in order to achieve carbon neutrality, the world will need 45 million new energy vehicles by 2030, which is 4.5 times that of now!

Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?
Yellen was tortured by the soul of the American anchor: Can the United States subsidize the wild, and if it is replaced by China, it will have overcapacity?

The rapid development of China's new energy industry is an accelerator that helps the world run green. Europe wants to ban the sale of fuel vehicles in 2035, but look at the price of its own electric vehicles, and don't look for affordable Chinese products to help, this environmental protection plan is afraid to be in vain.

So, behind this "subsidy war", is it China's real overcapacity, or is the United States unwilling to do so? Everyone's got it. What do you think, you might as well spit in the comment area, let's talk about it together!

Read on