主题：从萧条到繁荣，再到萧条 -- 西瓜子
家园 猫mm接宝。 谢谢：作者意外获得【通宝】一枚鲜花已成功送出，消耗 铢钱 1 个，可能得宝。可通过工具取消
提示：此次送花为【有效送花赞扬，加乐善、声望、帖得花总数】。
家园 宗主国和殖民地的经济关系 下面是《美国经济史》中的一点内容。从这里可以看出，宗主国并不是简单贱买原料，贵卖工业品。只是对于殖民地自身的贸易进行限制，以有利于宗主国。
美国革命在于自身的经济发展可以满足自身的要求，不需要依赖宗主国，因而和英国最终产生了矛盾。
“美洲殖民地和西印度群岛对英国的唯一用途和利益在于垄断他们的消费品和运出他们的产物。”具体的说就是对于宗主国需要的产品，宗主国提供奖励，鼓励种植，并且在英国实现垄断。对于和宗主国同类的产品，宗主国用高额关税实施限制。在制造业方面，如果产品和宗主国有竞争则加以限制和禁止。殖民地不得发行纸币，以便宗主国控制殖民地的金融信贷。
富兰克林说：“美国每年从英国进口五十万英国的产品，但是只向英国出口四万英镑的产品，差额用美国和西印度的贸易所得补充。”
由于英国以工业品为主，所以美国也出产工业品就会和他形成竞争，这样宗主国自然限制殖民地的工业发展，不过美国自身的条件早期也无法很快的发展工业。
家园 主要是左右其殖民体系中一切经济体，以宗主国为中心运转 事实上，我们需要对英国殖民地分级别，继而加以分析：
最惨的一类，就是印度、加勒比和非洲殖民地了。以印度为例，英国人先摧毁其手工纺织业，然后将其棉花等原料运到英国，纺织成棉布后，返销印度。这个算是英国人操作的典型案例了。
尤其在失去北美十三块殖民地后，以及美国内战导致英国原料供应地美国南方经济发展方向转向之后，英国的重点就转向了印度。所以分析印度是个重点。
除了棉花方面外，英国人还强迫印度人减少粮食种植，而大量种植鸦片，低价收购（低价？恐怕一点钱也不付），然后卖到中国去，换取中国的白银。
至于粮食，英国人还会继续做文章：灾荒年间，英国人囤积居奇，垄断粮食供应，屡次造成印度的大饥荒，死亡者动辄数十万、上百万，这些都是书上能找到的。
其实，英国从印度和非洲、加勒比殖民地掠夺原料，会给印度人和非洲人钱么？呵呵，我说低价获取原料，恐怕都是夸张呢。
第二类殖民地，为加拿大、澳洲、以及独立前的北美殖民地。
比起印度一类殖民地来，其居民主体是盎格鲁撒克逊人移民。因而，这些殖民地作为“自己人”，英国人手下留情得很呢。
实际上，他们用文明得多的方法，柔性控制。战略目标，只要求维持这些殖民地原料供应者的位子。
所以，在很多问题上，他们之间会作出妥协的。
praising老兄提到的帝国特惠制等等贸易体制，其中一个重要支点，就是维持殖民地原料供应英国，而接受英国在殖民地独占工业品之垄断销售的权力。
第三类，就是如中国这种列强都未能实际控制的半殖民地（类似的还有土耳其），事实上，很多时候，包括英国人在内的列强卖商品的时候，多少带着低价倾销的味道——当然，土耳其的情况如何，我不太了解。
我们看《多收了三五斗》，里面就是列强对中国低价倾销其“过剩”农产品的例子。
*********************************
这段对于说明问题比较重要，所以加在上面的正文最后了。
通宝推：parishg,家园 英属东印度公司占领孟加拉以后两年中孟加拉人口饿死三分之一 家园 hehe, 我说低价获取原料，恐怕都是夸张 hit the nail on the head...
家园 yes, 实际上，他们用文明得多的方法，柔性控制 Please feel free to translate them into Chinese.
America was an exception: without political independence, it could not win economic sovereignty. Without its high tariff system in 19th century against British and European industrial products, its domestic manufacturing industry would not have developed and matured into global dominance in early 20th century.
North America finally surpassed its master during the 2nd industry revolution in 1870s.
Canada practised similar high-tariff policy against Europe and Britain. That's why I can call Canada and America two "traitors" and "gravediggers" of the British imperial preference system.
The true "sheep" in the commonwealth are New Zealand and Australia: look at what they sell on the global market EVEN TODAY, you can clearly see how ass-kissing they are when they deal with their British masters. But anyway, even today, most Australians still identify themselves as Britons and are proud of that.
In 18th century, British empire has SPECIFIC LAW: no export of textile machinery technology to North America (actually French kingdom practised the same policy against its North American colony--Nouvelle France (New France), today's Quebec). Therefore, one British worker memorized all technical details of textile machinery and then replicated everything in States. He was called "Father of American Factory system"--what a nasty "British traitor"...
while, if you "stole" technology for America, you are hero.
If you steal tech from America, you are "pirates", Chinese style.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Slater
key: Samuel Slater (May 4, 1768 – April 21, 1835) was an early American industrialist popularly known as the "Father of the American Industrial Revolution" or the "Father of the American Factory System" because he brought British textile technology to America. A native of England, he was apprenticed to Jedediah Strutt in Belper as a manager in a cotton mill of the type pioneered by Richard Arkwright at Cromford.
In 1789 he violated a British emigration law that prohibited the spread of British manufacturing technology to other nations. When he left for New York, he had memorized the plans for the mill and had a deep understanding of Strutt's managerial practices. He offered to sell his knowledge to American industrialists, doing so to Moses Brown of Providence, who used the plan, and made major profit. He soon found work in Rhode Island replicating British factory equipment for a textile mill, and earned the owner's backing to design and build the first water-powered cotton mill in the United States.
Other nasty tricks played by Britons against Americans:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/beard/history-us/ch04.htm
The Acts against Manufactures. – The second group of laws was deliberately aimed to prevent colonial industries from competing too sharply with those of England. Among the earliest of these measures may be counted the Woolen Act of 1699, forbidding the exportation of woolen goods from the colonies and even the woolen trade between towns and colonies. When Parliament learned, as the result of an inquiry, that New England and New York were making thousands of hats a year and sending large numbers annually to the Southern colonies and to Ireland, Spain, and Portugal, it enacted in 1732 a law declaring that “no hats or felts, dyed or undyed, finished or unfinished” should be “put upon any vessel or laden upon any horse or cart with intent to export to any place whatever.” The effect of this measure upon the hat industry was almost ruinous. A few years later a similar blow was given to the iron industry. By an act of 1750, pig and bar iron from the colonies were given free entry to England to encourage the production of the raw material; but at the same time the law provided that “no mill or other engine for slitting or rolling of iron, no plating forge to work with a tilt hammer, and no furnace for making steel” should be built in the colonies. As for those already built, they were declared public nuisances and ordered closed. Thus three important economic interests of the colonists, the woolen, hat, and iron industries, were laid under the ban.
The Trade Laws. – The third group of restrictive measures passed by the British Parliament related to the sale of colonial produce. An act of 1663 required the colonies to export certain articles to Great Britain or to her dominions alone; while sugar, tobacco, and ginger consigned to the continent of Europe had to pass through a British port paying custom duties and through a British merchant’s hands paying the usual commission. At first tobacco was the only one of the “enumerated articles” which seriously concerned the American colonies, the rest coming mainly from the British West Indies. In the course of time, however, other commodities were added to the list of enumerated articles, until by 1764 it embraced rice, naval stores, copper, furs, hides, iron, lumber, and pearl ashes. This was not all. The colonies were compelled to bring their European purchases back through English ports, paying duties to the government and commissions to merchants again.
家园 其实印度也不是你说那样 英国向印度倾销商品主要通过两个手段：一是自身的大工业生产带来的商品的成本低廉，价格也低。二是通过抬高关税壁垒，堵死印度商品出口的可能，英国商品在印度尽量少收税，在价格上进一步打击印度商品。这样才达到了它倾销商品的目的。也就是你说的低价倾销，不是一开始想的贵卖工业品。
作为原料产地，英国主要是通过改革印度的税制来达到目的。起初印度的原料远远不够供应英国，税制改革之后，地主和农民的积极性增加，更多的种植经济作为，这样才满足了英国原料需求。
如果说对于殖民地剥削，应该是殖民的劳动力是被奴役的，价格非常便宜，从而导致了商品的价格也很便宜，而不是贱买。其实这个在英国本土也是这样的，当劳动力便宜的时候商品自然就会便宜，只不过用的是大工业生产的手段。我觉得你可能混淆了货币和资本的区别。
- 复 更多的原料
家园 两极分化是答案 如果殖民地的财富成平均分布的话，那么谁都买不起相对昂贵的工业品，但是，如果财富两极分化的话，那么总有一些富裕的人可以买得起。处于半殖民地半封建社会的中国，既有流离失所的难民图，也有纸醉金迷的大上海，就是明证。
所以，好的掠夺对象都是向中国或者印度这样的有着庞大人口基数的国家，在这个地方制造两极分化，同时也制造出产品的市场。只是大多数人就苦了！
- 复 两极分化是答案
家园 不同意 大上海那帮富人，消费不了国外的工业品，他们人数少，用不了那么多。
老兄详查。
- 复 不同意
家园 那就卖军火，毒品， 黑奴都是西非黑人自己抓来卖的。 有枪的黑人去抓没有枪的黑人，运到港口来换更多的枪支，烧酒和工业品。也是个正循环。河里马前卒有篇文章就专门讲过这个。现代的BLOOD DIAMOND不过是翻版。
- 复 不同意
家园 一个新问题 呵呵，小弟也没有具体的数据，只是一种感觉。
兄台大才，我读后受益匪浅。我另有一个问题，你觉得美元是不是极大的超额发行了呢？如果是，为什么不担心有通货膨胀呢？美国又没有什么策略去限制这种潜在的通货膨胀呢？
- 复 一个新问题
家园 美元当然超量发行了 我以前给出过一个图，是美国M1、M2、M3发行情况，老兄可以看到老美在08年金融危机前滥发流动性的疯狂。
外链图片需谨慎，可能会被源头改值得注意的是，08年后，美国虽然M3大幅下降，但是M1和M2却继续疯狂上涨。
我的解释是，次贷泡沫破裂，让很多垃圾债券蒸发，而这些垃圾债券原本表现在M3里面。
M1、M2的暴涨，反映的是美国释放流动性的继续疯狂——尤其是M1，这个对应的是美联储直接弄出来的基础货币的量。
还有一张图，小了点，但是可以反映自从03年以来美国人货币供应量疯狂增长的变化：
外链图片需谨慎，可能会被源头改注意：细细的灰线，是M1；粗一点的灰线，是M2。
M3最奇怪，前半部分是黑色粗线，后半部分是蓝色粗线。原因，是美国人厚颜无耻地停止公布M3数据（怕吓着大家，呵呵）。后来蓝色粗线部分，是推测出来的数据。