Why does the U.S. cling to its “market economy” title while critics accuse it of undermining global trade rules? A provocative analysis by Liu Zhiqin, senior researcher at Renmin University of China’s Chongyang Institute, is sparking fresh debate about America’s economic identity.
From ‘Atypical’ to ‘Non-Market’: A Five-Year Backslide?
Liu first labeled the U.S. an “atypical market economy” in 2019. Fast-forward to 2024, and he argues it’s slid further into “non-market” territory. Despite global hopes for reform, he claims the U.S. doubles down on “coercion, bribery, and unfair competition”—tactics more akin to a “market villain” than a leader.
Global Fallout: “Economic Policeman” or Instability Driver?
The critique hits hard: while positioning itself as the world’s economic referee, the U.S. allegedly “wreaks havoc” on global markets through “conspiracies, blackmails, and defamation.” Liu argues this disrupts supply-demand balance and undermines fair trade—a stark contrast to its self-proclaimed ideals.
The Bigger Picture: Credibility Crisis?
With accusations of “petty tactics” and “shameless manipulation” by U.S. politicians, the article questions whether traditional market principles still guide American policy—or if short-term gains now trump long-term stability. This debate matters for young professionals and investors navigating an increasingly polarized global economy.
Why does the U.S. cling to its “market economy” title while critics accuse it of undermining global trade rules? A provocative analysis by Liu Zhiqin, senior researcher at Renmin University of China’s Chongyang Institute, is sparking fresh debate about America’s economic identity.
Global Fallout: “Economic Policeman” or Instability Driver?
The Bigger Picture: Credibility Crisis?
