特朗普的“制造业回归”政策能否奏效？

2017年1月3日，福特汽车公司密歇根州平岩装配工厂生产线上的一辆福特野马跑车。

如果说古罗马的皇帝是“法令治国”，特朗普也可以算是“推特治国”了。在特朗普正式入主白宫之前，他仅凭一条140字的推特，就能让全球最大的一些企业俯首就范。虽然他咄咄逼人的作风的确给他在政治上加了不少分，但好政策并不一定总能带来好的经济成果。

从他的行动来看，特朗普的确是想履行“关闭美国边境”和“把工作带回美国”的承诺的。他积极为广大工人站台，把包括福特、通用汽车、丰田、波音、洛克希德马丁、联合技术、开利等美国最强大的企业挨个批判了一遍。

目前为止，还没有哪家公司的CEO有胆量站出来硬扛特朗普。通用汽车的CEO玛丽•巴拉曾声言，公司将继续把小型车的生产线放在墨西哥，不过她在重压之下改弦易辙估计也只是个时间问题。特朗普在推特上东一榔头西一棒子的呛声让很多CEO都心存恐惧，生怕一不小心就成了他的下一个目标。目前，大多数企业都选择不去招惹他。日本软银的孙正义和菲亚特的塞尔吉奥•马基奥尼还表示要在美国加大投资。

随着各大企业纷纷向这位新领导表态效忠，福特汽车公司也不甘落于人后，叫停了打算斥资16亿美元在墨西哥建设小型车工厂的计划。随后特朗普又敲打了一下日本最大的汽车制造商丰田及其CEO丰田章男，称他上台后要征收“一大笔边境税”，即要对丰田在墨西哥生产并出口到美国的汽车征收高达35%的进口税。

不久之后，马基奥尼宣布要对两家已经投产的美国工厂投资10亿美元，并且创造2,000个工作岗位——其实这笔投资已经在克莱斯勒的计划当中。马基奥尼还表示，如果特朗普征收的关税太高了，他的公司“很有可能”将彻底放弃墨西哥的工厂。

特朗普的眼睛不光瞄着汽车界。他还游说开利公司不要在国内裁员，威胁波音削减“空军一号”的成本，逼迫洛马给F-35战斗机砍价，并且要求各大药企降低高昂的药品价格。

毫无疑问，特朗普已经打赢了这场政治仗，让美国最大的企业全部臣服在他的脚下瑟瑟发抖。但他的这种高压做法很可能会削弱美国企业在全球市场上的竞争力，甚至招致其他各国政府的报复。

美国经济最大的优势之一，就是拥有许多依靠创新、品质和营销主导市场的全球性企业。这也是美国企业得以在从IT、电商、社交媒体到金融、制药、医疗技术、消费品、汽车、农业设备、飞机制造业等许多行业成为领军者的根本。他们依托全球供应链进行产品的设计和制造，从而实现成本最优化，这样才能在保持盈利的同时，给全球顾客带来最大化的价值。在很多国家，美国企业都必须将一部分产品进行本地化生产。

正是归功于这种全球化战略，美国企业才能有效地与中国、日本、德国、韩国等国的制造企业进行竞争——这些国家的制造企业也正奋力地在全球市场上攻城略地。也正是实行了全球化战略的缘故，美国企业才能攒下足够的利润对产品研发和创新进行二次投资。因此，美国企业才能再次领先其全球竞争对手一步，继续扩大其市场份额。所以，即便这些全球化企业的股价已经增长至历史最高水平，由于这种良性循环的存在，这些美国企业依然能够对他们的生产设施进行大量资本投资，并且为股东贡献大量收益。

特朗普已经学会了如何绕过主流媒体通过推特直接与美国人民打交道。在多次威胁要向进口商品征收高额税赋之后，他成功地逼迫这些制造业巨头做出了一系列不符合经济理性的决定——比如开利公司要付给印第安那工厂的工人25美元的时薪，让他们去做墨西哥工人2.5美元时薪就能做的工作。不过工人的工资终究会被转嫁到最终产品的价格上，从而使开利公司的空调在全球范围内丧失价格优势。或者如果开利公司不堪忍受高额的人工成本，改用机器人取代人力生产（特斯拉在生产电动汽车的过程中已经这样做了），那么长远看来，最终受损的依然是普通工人的利益。不管是这两种情况中的哪一种，开利公司都要被迫在印第安那工厂进行裁员，它的工人最终也将成为输家。

这个逻辑同样也适用于福特、通用汽车、克莱斯勒和丰田等制造企业。丰田已经在美国直接雇佣了136,000人，并且在美国投入了210亿美元的资金。特朗普眼下的“胜利”，无非是伤敌一万，自损八千，因为从长远来看，这将使美国制造业失去竞争优势，而且就业率也将不升反降。

另外，特朗普还反复威胁要对从中国和墨西哥进口的商品课以重税。如果他是认真的，那么他会很快发现，其他国家也会打这张牌，而且很愿意这么干。在由此掀起的贸易战中，首先处于不利地位的就是美国的公司。美国商品花了几十年才打开的海外市场也将迅速流失。

在特朗普的高压威胁和CEO们的低姿态回应背后，还隐藏着一个更深层的问题：美国亟需对现有劳动力的技能进行升级，这样他们才有能力在未来的就业市场上进行竞争。虽然截至2016年12月31日，美国的失业人口已达750万人，但让人感到讽刺的是，美国还有550万个工作岗位招不到人，最主要的原因就是缺乏拥有适当技能的人才。再过些年，随着职业需求越来越复杂，对工人的教育培训水平的要求越来越高，这个问题还将变得愈发严重。如何把拥有足够资质的美国劳动者填满这些工作岗位的缺口，这对美国企业的竞争力也是极为重要的。

特朗普和国会与其强迫企业做出不符合经济理性的决定，还不如与各大企业展开合作，对广大劳动者进行教育培训。美国甚至可以制定一个长远的战略，重点在于教育劳动者为未来的新兴工作做好准备，而不是挽救那些已经日薄西山的工作。

如果特朗普真把他的这些推特变成了行业政策，这将标志美国进入了一个“权贵资本主义时代”，就像法国和俄罗斯那样。然而美国企业的成功是建立在自由市场、充分竞争、自由贸易、英才主义和多元化等原则上的。50多年来，美国政府一直致力于确保美国企业能在世界各地与当地企业平等地进行竞争。

然而现在，美国政府却开始围绕就业、工厂选址和很多其他问题跟本土企业掐架。如果这种风气成了“新常态”，美国的全球性企业将不愿意再建立新的工作机会以及投资建厂，因为他们担心自己将陷入无法盈利的境地。目前美国的失业率仅为4.7%，还算不错，而法国的失业率高达9.5%，整整比美国高出一倍，这主要便是拜这种短视的经济政策所赐。

希望特朗普的推特只是雷声大雨点小。如果特朗普和他的团队还算明智，他们最好利用他日益增长的声望，打造一些改革性的政策，让美国企业在全球市场上更有竞争力，为美国的下一波真正的增长奠定土壤。 （财富中文网）

本文作者比尔•乔治是哈佛商学院高级研究员，美敦利公司前董事长兼CEO，著有《真北》(Discover Your True North)一书。

译者：朴成奎

A Ford Motor Co. Mustang vehicle stands on the production line at the company's assembly plant in Flat Rock, Michigan, U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2017.

If the Roman emperors ruled by edict, President-elect Donald Trump appears poised to rule by tweet. Even before taking office, Trump has discovered he can move the world’s largest global corporations with simple, 140-character tweets. And though his aggressive approach is winning politically, good politics doesn’t necessarily mean good economics.

Voters see Trump fulfilling his campaign promises to close America’s borders and bring jobs back home. He is using the bully pulpit to stand up for workers by taking on the most powerful American companies, including Ford, General Motors, Toyota, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and United Technologies/Carrier.

Thus far, no CEOs have had the courage to stand up to Trump. General Motors CEO Mary Barra has said the company’s small-car production will remain in Mexico, but it could only be a matter of time before she’s forced to change course. Trump’s sudden tweets likely worry many CEOs who fear they may be his next target. Right now, most have just tried to stay out of his way. Some, like SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son and Fiat’s Sergio Marchionne, have put forth peace offerings to invest more in the U.S.

Most striking was Ford’s recent decision to reverse plans to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico to produce small cars. Then Trump rattled Japan’s leading automobile producer, Toyota, and its CEO, Akio Toyoda, by threatening to slap a “big border tax”—which he has referred to as 35%—on any automobiles the company assembled in Mexico and imported into the U.S.

Shortly thereafter, Marchionne committed to invest $1 billion in two existing U.S. plants and create 2,000 new jobs—investments that were already part of Chrysler’s plans. He said it is “quite possible” his company will abandon Mexican production altogether if Trump’s tariffs are too high.

Trump didn’t stop with the automakers. He jawboned Carrier into keeping jobs in the United States, threatened Boeing for the cost of Air Force One and Lockheed on its F-35 aircraft, and pharmaceutical companies on their high drug prices.

There is no doubt that Trump is winning the political game and shaking up America’s largest companies. But there is real danger that his pressure may corrode the competitiveness of U.S.-based global companies and cause retaliation by foreign governments.

One of America’s greatest strengths is having global companies that dominate their markets around the world through innovation, quality, and marketing. That’s why American companies lead a wide range of industries, from information technology, e-commerce, and social media to finance, pharmaceuticals, medical technology, consumer products, automobiles, farm equipment, and aircraft. They do so profitably with global supply chains that enable them to design and produce products to achieve optimal costs and deliver the greatest value to their customers around the globe. In many countries, they are required to produce a portion of their products locally.

The global strategies of our corporations have enabled them to compete effectively with Chinese, Japanese, German, and Korean manufacturers—all vigorous competitors striving to win share in global markets. At the same time, they have been profitable enough to reinvest substantial portions of their profits in research, innovation, and product development. When they do so, they stay ahead of their global competitors and increase their market shares. This positive cycle allows them to justify large capital investments in their facilities and provide substantial returns for their shareholders, as share prices for these global companies are at all-time highs.

Trump has learned how to reach the American people directly through his tweets, thus bypassing mainstream media. With his threats of large tariffs on imported goods, he has succeeded in forcing these giants to make uneconomic decisions—such as Carrier paying $25 per hour to its workers in Indiana to do work that can be done by Mexican employees for $2.50 per hour. However, in the long run, this will be a losing strategy for American workers if it forces Carrier to sell its air conditioners on the world market at non-competitive prices, or replace its production workers with robots, as Tesla has done in producing its electric cars. In either case, Carrier will be forced to reduce its Indiana workforce, with its workers ultimately becoming the losers.

The same logic applies to Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, and Toyota. Toyota has created 136,000 American jobs through direct employment, and has invested $21 billion in the U.S. What appear now to be significant “wins” for Trump may turn into pyrrhic victories, as America loses its competitive edge and hiring declines instead of increasing.

Trump has also repeatedly threatened to levy large tariffs on imports from Mexico and China. If he is serious about doing so, he will quickly learn that other countries can also play this game, and are quite willing to do so. This could trigger a trade war that will disadvantage American companies and their employees. Decades of progress in opening up foreign markets to American-made goods could quickly vanish.

Behind all of the threats and CEO responses lies a much deeper issue: the vital need for America to upgrade its workforce so that American employees can compete for jobs of the future. While there are 7.5 million unemployed Americans as of December 31, 2016, the irony is that there are 5.5 million jobs unfilled, many due to a lack of skilled workers. This situation will get worse in the years ahead as jobs become more complex and require more education and training. Filling these jobs with qualified Americans is essential for the competitiveness of U.S. companies.

Rather than jawboning companies to make uneconomic decisions, Trump and Congress should instead work with major employers to train and educate workers. Americans might even find a real strategy that emphasizes preparing for the jobs of the future vs. trying to save the jobs of the past.

If Trump’s tweets turn into an industrial policy, this may signal that the U.S. is headed into an era of “crony capitalism,” similar to the systems of France and Russia. In contrast, American business has been built on free market principles of market-based competition, free trade, meritocracy, and diversity. For five decades, the U.S. government has worked to ensure U.S. companies are free to sell their goods around the world on a level playing field with local competitors.

Now it appears the focus may shift to negotiation with the U.S. government over jobs, factory sites, and a host of other issues. If this becomes the prevailing norm, global companies will be reluctant to create new jobs and invest in new factories for fear of being locked into unprofitable decisions. This is a primary reason why France’s current unemployment rate of 9.5% is more than double the U.S.’s relatively modest 4.7% rate.

Let’s hope the bark of Trump’s Twitter account is worse than its bite. If Trump and his new team are wise, they will use his rising popularity to create transformative policy that fosters real growth for the next generation by making America truly competitive in world markets.

Bill George is senior fellow at Harvard Business School, former chair and CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.