原標題：新華社評論回應GDP數(shù)據(jù)疑慮：沒必要玩數(shù)字游戲！

10月26日，新華社發(fā)表英文評論，回應關(guān)于中國平滑GDP數(shù)據(jù)（data smoothing）的質(zhì)疑,。

新華社評論稱，中國經(jīng)濟已經(jīng)連續(xù)三個季度實現(xiàn)6.7%的平穩(wěn)增長,，導致很多分析師懷疑中國在一定程度上平滑了數(shù)據(jù),。然而，中國政府沒有任何目的或者必要去洗白真實的經(jīng)濟狀況,。連續(xù)三個季度經(jīng)濟增速相同顯然是一個巧合,。中國有充足的政策工具保持經(jīng)濟增速在6.5-7%的區(qū)間，包括貨幣政策和財政政策,，以及結(jié)構(gòu)性改革,。中國經(jīng)濟再平衡和持續(xù)增長的可能性將由時間來證明，而不是分析師,。

以下是新華社評論全文：

中國經(jīng)濟已經(jīng)連續(xù)三個季度實現(xiàn)6.7%的平穩(wěn)增長,，導致很多分析師懷疑中國在一定程度上平滑了數(shù)據(jù)。

然而,，事實是,，中國政府沒有任何目的或者必要去洗白真實的經(jīng)濟狀況。

人們總是喜歡用懷疑的眼光來看待中國這個全球第二大經(jīng)濟體,，而中國經(jīng)濟連續(xù)三個季度增長6.7%,，更是引起了評論者們的質(zhì)疑。

然而事實上,，中國沒有必要在GDP上玩弄數(shù)字游戲,。政府今年設(shè)定了6.5%-7%的靈活增長區(qū)間,，而中國擁有充足的工具，包括貨幣政策,、財政政策以及結(jié)構(gòu)性改革,，來使經(jīng)濟增速保持在這一區(qū)間內(nèi)。

平滑數(shù)據(jù)似乎是最簡單的方法,，但政府十分清楚,，這是一種自欺欺人的做法，最終會損害結(jié)構(gòu)性改革和長期經(jīng)濟增長,。

誠然,，確實有一些數(shù)據(jù)造假的案例，尤其是地方政府,。在去年末的反腐行動中,，東北地區(qū)的部分省份被發(fā)現(xiàn)數(shù)據(jù)造假。

為解決這一問題,，中國去年采取了IMF的標準來加強數(shù)據(jù)系統(tǒng),，國家統(tǒng)計局官員獨立采集地方數(shù)據(jù)以保證準確性。

本月稍早,，中國政府領(lǐng)導層呼吁防范政府數(shù)據(jù)造假,，并誓要嚴懲數(shù)據(jù)造假者。

而且,，中央政府正在逐漸減少只通過GDP表現(xiàn)來評估地方官員,，進一步減少了數(shù)據(jù)造假的必要性。

連續(xù)三個季度經(jīng)濟增速相同顯然是一個巧合,，但中國擁有一個穩(wěn)定的經(jīng)濟的現(xiàn)象不足為奇,。

使用GDP數(shù)據(jù)作為經(jīng)濟表現(xiàn)的關(guān)鍵指標已經(jīng)有點過時，這越來越成為一個共識,。GDP不一定完全準確反映經(jīng)濟的真實狀況,，過于依賴GDP可能適得其反。

還有一些數(shù)據(jù)是特別難操縱的,，如發(fā)電量,、貨運和物流量,，而這些數(shù)據(jù)都顯示（中國經(jīng)濟的）平穩(wěn)跡象,，顯示出制造業(yè)活動和消費的復蘇,。

是的,，數(shù)據(jù)可以造假，觀點也可以有偏頗,，但是質(zhì)疑中國數(shù)據(jù)的準確性總是比通過詳細的調(diào)查來了解中國經(jīng)濟趨勢要容易,。

不管怎么樣,，中國將繼續(xù)推進改革,，同時保持經(jīng)濟擴張,。中國經(jīng)濟再平衡和持續(xù)增長究竟是奇跡還是海市蜃樓,，將由時間來證明，而不是分析師,。

以下是新華社評論英文全文：

China's economy has achieved steady growth of 6.7 percent for three consecutive quarters, leading many analysts to suspect that there has been a bit of untoward data smoothing.

However, the reality is that the government simply has no incentive or necessity to whitewash the real economic picture.

It's routine for people to view economic data from China, the world's second largest economy, with skeptical eyes, and the fact GDP growth was exactly the same for three consecutive quarters, a first since such figures were released in 1992, raised more than a few eyebrows among commentators.

However, it would not be much of a whitewash by the statistics bureau to indulge in fabrication as such moves would inevitably draw widespread skepticism.

In reality, there is no need to play the numbers game. The government has set up a flexible GDP growth range of between 6.5 percent to 7 percent this year, and China has ample policy tools, including monetary and fiscal policy as well as structural reforms, to keep the economy within this range.

Smoothing the data might seem the easiest way to an end, but the government well-knows that it would be an act of self-delusion that could easily derail structural reforms and hurt economic growth in the long run.

Admittedly, there have been cases of faking statistics, especially by provincial governments; provinces in northeast China were found doctoring GDP data during an anti-corruption probe late last year.

To solve the problem, China adopted IMF standards to strengthen its data system last year and national statisticians now collect their own independent provincial data to ensure accuracy. Earlier this month, the Chinese leadership called for the prevention of fake government statistics and vowed to punish offenders accordingly.

Regardless, central government is now edging away from evaluating local officials solely based on GDP performance, further reducing the incentive for statistics bureaus to massage the figures.

The identical quarterly performance three times in a row is clearly a coincidence, but the implication that China has a stabilizing economy is of no surprise at all.

There is an increasing consensus that GDP data as a key gauge of economic performance is somewhat outdated. It does not necessarily paint the real economic picture, and being overly GDP-oriented can be counterproductive.

There is other economic data that is particularly difficult to manipulate, including electricity output, freight traffic and logistics volume, which all show signs of stabilization and point to a recovery in factory activity and consumption.

Yes, data can be faked just as opinions can be biased, but it is often easier to question the accuracy of economic data rather than attempting to gain a real insight into economic trends through detailed research.

Nevertheless, China will continue to press ahead with its reforms while maintaining economic expansion. Time, not analysts, will tell whether China's economic rebalancing and sustainable growth are a miracle or mirage.