Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
特朗普先生前往华盛顿

The new U.S. administration has promised many pro-growth policies, but can those ambitions survive the disruptive measures of its early months?
新一届美国政府承诺了许多促进增长的政策，但这些雄心壮志能否经受住其初期几个月的破坏性措施的考验？

In “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” Jimmy Stewart, playing the idealistic Jefferson Smith, has to hold the floor of the Senate by delivering a 25-hour filibuster to delay the unjust vote to expel him. By contrast, the administration of that very different Washington outsider, President Donald Trump, is in a race against time.
在《史密斯先生去华盛顿》（Mr. Smith Goes to Washington）中，吉米-斯图尔特（Jimmy Stewart）饰演理想主义的杰斐逊-史密斯（Jefferson Smith），为了推迟驱逐他的不公正投票，他在参议院进行了长达 25 小时的 "拉布"（filibuster）。相比之下，与之截然不同的华盛顿局外人唐纳德-特朗普总统的政府正在与时间赛跑。

In his first stint in the White House, voters had to go through a lot of uncertainty before they felt the benefit of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) in their pocketbooks. Sure enough, in the midterm elections the Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives.
在他首次入主白宫期间，选民们经历了许多不确定因素，才从口袋里感受到 2017 年《减税与就业法案》（TCJA）带来的好处。果然，在中期选举中，共和党失去了对众议院的控制权。

Given the ambition of the new administration’s agenda, as Shannon Saccocia wrote two weeks ago, consumers and business leaders may need to contend with even greater disruption before they get to the anticipated benefits of the TCJA extension and deregulation.
鉴于新政府议程的雄心壮志，正如香农-萨科西亚（Shannon Saccocia）两周前所写的那样，消费者和商界领袖在享受 TCJA 延期和放松管制带来的预期好处之前，可能需要面对更大的干扰。

We are starting to see that disruption in surveys, economic data and market performance. The new U.S. administration has promised many pro-growth policies, but can those ambitions survive the disruptive measures of its early months?
我们开始从调查、经济数据和市场表现中看到这种干扰。新一届美国政府承诺了许多促进增长的政策，但这些雄心壮志能否经受住其初期几个月的破坏性措施的考验？

Remarkable Level of Disruption
显著的破坏程度

It is hard to overstate the level and breadth of disruption this administration is creating. One reason is its rare combination of first-term energy and second-term experience.
很难夸大本届政府所造成的破坏的程度和广度。原因之一是它罕见地将第一任期的活力和第二任期的经验结合在了一起。

The past two weeks confirm that the alliances and security architecture of the developed world, stretching back to the Second World War, are being seriously questioned. The soft-power element of that architecture—aid and development finance—is at particular risk.
过去两周的情况证实，发达世界自第二次世界大战以来形成的联盟和安全架构正受到严重质疑。这一架构中的软实力要素--援助和发展融资--尤其面临风险。

The long-term objective may be to cut defense and aid budgets by disentangling the U.S. from global challenges and moving to a more transactional form of global engagement. In the short term, however, it is heightening geopolitical uncertainty, dampening investment sentiment and, in many cases, softening demand for U.S. goods and services.
长期目标可能是削减国防和援助预算，将美国从全球挑战中剥离出来，转而以交易性更强的形式参与全球事务。但从短期来看，这加剧了地缘政治的不确定性，抑制了投资情绪，并在许多情况下削弱了对美国商品和服务的需求。

While the administration’s trade policy may have the long-term goal of reciprocity and bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., it is also contributing to significant economic uncertainty. Reshoring jobs and supporting lower taxes would be growth-positive, but using broad-based tariffs to get there is unorthodox economics and the short-term effect may weigh on growth. Moreover, the on-and-off announcements and off-the-cuff carve-outs make it difficult to ascribe a strategic vision to the policy and to make long-term investment decisions.
虽然政府的贸易政策可能具有互惠和将制造业工作岗位带回美国的长期目标，但它也造成了重大的经济不确定性。重塑就业岗位和支持降低税收将对经济增长起到积极作用，但利用广泛的关税来实现这一目标是非正统的经济学，其短期效果可能会拖累经济增长。此外，时断时续的宣布和临时性的 "例外 "规定，使人们难以对该政策赋予战略眼光，也难以做出长期投资决定。

Political, Geopolitical and Economic Uncertainty
政治、地缘政治和经济的不确定性

Additionally, we have material fiscal policy developments, such as separate budget bills in the Senate and the House, with the President expressing a preference for the House’s one-bill approach. This would extend the provisions of the TCJA, and the debate now centers around whether that extension can be made permanent—at an estimated cost of $4.5 trillion in reduced tax revenues over the 10-year budget window. (Long-term budget projections assumed that the TCJA would expire, thus generating government revenue.)
此外，我们还有一些重要的财政政策进展，如参议院和众议院分别提出了预算法案，总统表示倾向于众议院的单一法案方式。这将延长《税法改革法案》的条款，目前的争论焦点是能否将这一延长永久化--在 10 年预算窗口期，估计将减少 4.5 万亿美元的税收收入。(长期预算预测假设 TCJA 将到期，从而产生政府收入）。

Whichever bill gains momentum, or passes, will require meaningful spending cuts. The House bill only narrowly passed in the face of concerns from Republican fiscal conservatives even though it seeks a full $2 trillion of spending cuts (over a 10-year period). The new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is already trying to find some of those savings, but many doubt that the $2 trillion target is realistic without politically damaging cuts to entitlement programs (Social Security and Medicare, in particular). We estimate that $1 trillion in savings will ultimately be enough to gain full Republican support.
无论哪项法案获得势头或通过，都需要进行有意义的开支削减。尽管众议院议案寻求在 10 年内削减整整 2 万亿美元的开支，但在共和党财政保守派的担忧下，该议案仅以微弱优势获得通过。新成立的政府效率部（DOGE）已经在努力寻找其中的一些节余，但许多人怀疑，如果不对福利项目（尤其是社会保障和医疗保险）进行政治上破坏性的削减，2 万亿美元的目标是否现实。我们估计，1 万亿美元的节约最终将足以获得共和党的全面支持。

The markets are not finding it easy to project what all this means for growth, inflation, global trade and security relations. We do see a balance in favor of growth-positive outcomes, however, and we still think this administration can get through the early months of political, geopolitical and economic uncertainty. The ultimate result will be enhanced nominal growth in the coming years, in our view.
市场难以预测这一切对经济增长、通货膨胀、全球贸易和安全关系意味着什么。然而，我们确实看到了有利于增长的平衡，我们仍然认为本届政府能够度过政治、地缘政治和经济不确定性的最初几个月。我们认为，未来几年的最终结果将是名义增长的增强。

Forces of History  历史的力量

One reason we think the administration can push through the current disruption is that the forces of history may be on the President’s side.
我们认为，政府能够克服当前困难的一个原因是，历史的力量可能会站在总统这一边。

Governments that overspend eventually face a reckoning. We see that in the 20-year cycles of alternating private- and public-sector dominance in the U.S. economy. From 1945 to the mid-1960s, government debt declined and the private sector boomed; the Vietnam War led to a return to government spending and private sector doldrums, followed by the rise of the private sector again during the Reagan-Bush-Clinton years, from 1980 to 2000.
超支的政府最终会面临清算。我们可以从美国经济中私营和公共部门交替主导的 20 年周期中看到这一点。从 1945 年到 20 世纪 60 年代中期，政府债务减少，私营部门蓬勃发展；越战导致政府支出和私营部门重新陷入低迷，随后在 1980 年到 2000 年的里根-布什-克林顿时期，私营部门再次崛起。

In our view, we may now be seeing the end of two decades of extraordinary government spending on the War on Terror, the Global Financial Crisis and the Covid pandemic. We think a resurgence of the private sector would bring about a welcome period of more sustainable economic growth.
我们认为，二十年来政府在反恐战争、全球金融危机和科维德大流行病上的超常支出现在可能已经结束。我们认为，私营部门的复苏将带来一个更可持续的经济增长的可喜时期。

We also see the forces of history in the realism among America’s allies and trading partners. Both the rhetoric and the significant spending plans set out last week by Germany and the European Commission signal an acceptance of change in the North Atlantic security architecture. Furthermore, President Trump thinks the economic relationship the U.S. had with China since it joined the WTO in 2001 has run its course; China’s renewed focus on its demographic challenges, low consumption and technological innovation suggests it might agree.
我们还从美国盟友和贸易伙伴的现实主义中看到了历史的力量。德国和欧盟委员会上周发表的言论和制定的重大开支计划都表明，他们接受北大西洋安全架构的变革。此外，特朗普总统认为美国自 2001 年加入 WTO 以来与中国的经济关系已走到尽头；中国重新关注其人口挑战、低消费和技术创新，这表明中国可能同意这一观点。

It is also notable that the Democratic party’s official response to President Trump’s address to Congress last week was delivered by a rising name on the moderate wing of the party, Senator Elissa Slotkin. She acknowledged that “America wants change,” reflecting Democrats’ support for big initiatives like industrial policy and jobs reshoring, asking only for a less “reckless” approach.
同样值得注意的是，民主党对特朗普总统上周在国会的讲话的官方回应是由该党温和派的后起之秀、参议员伊丽莎-斯洛特金（Elissa Slotkin）发表的。她承认 "美国希望改变"，这反映了民主党对工业政策和就业岗位转移等重大举措的支持，只是要求采取一种不那么 "鲁莽 "的方法。

As investors, we have to deal with the world as it is—and the past seven weeks have put us in the midst, one way or another, of a turning point, when uncertainty, volatility and risk are high. In the past, such turning points have often proven to be times of meaningful long-term opportunity.
作为投资者，我们必须面对这个世界的现状--过去七周，我们或多或少都处在一个转折点上，不确定性、波动性和风险都很高。在过去，这种转折点往往被证明是蕴含重大长期机遇的时刻。