【2015-08-11】
@海德沙龙 【焦点议题】有关贫富差距的数字常令公众大吃一惊,但许多抓人眼球的惊人“差距、变化”,其实往往是统计假象,其背后根本没有人们以为它所揭示的事实,同一组数据,平凡还是惊艳,更多取决于如何组织和表述它,本文分析了其中一例,今后我们还会介绍更多 http://t.cn/RLmCHik
@whigzhou: 所以在对统计数字发出感慨之前,最好先弄清楚统计指标是怎么设计的,然后再想想差异或变化到底是不是你打算感叹的那个因素造成的。举个简单例子,假如(more...)
【2015-08-11】
@海德沙龙 【焦点议题】有关贫富差距的数字常令公众大吃一惊,但许多抓人眼球的惊人“差距、变化”,其实往往是统计假象,其背后根本没有人们以为它所揭示的事实,同一组数据,平凡还是惊艳,更多取决于如何组织和表述它,本文分析了其中一例,今后我们还会介绍更多 http://t.cn/RLmCHik
@whigzhou: 所以在对统计数字发出感慨之前,最好先弄清楚统计指标是怎么设计的,然后再想想差异或变化到底是不是你打算感叹的那个因素造成的。举个简单例子,假如(more...)
【2015-08-11】
@熊观七路:辉格老师所持的无镇腹主义更倾向于大卫.弗里德曼吗?
@whigzhou: 比较能相容,但也有很大不同,哲学基础上,他是功利主义,虽然是我比较能接受的版本,但和我们契约主义还是有着深层区别,现实问题上,他大概接受不了我的很多亲保守派主张,但无论如何,对我来说,他都符合最理想对话者的条件
@whigzhou: 所谓理想对话者,就是三分钟内即可hedge出各自论点,找出分歧(more...)
【2015-08-11】
@黄章晋ster:因为他们俩大致属于同一个生态位。
@tertio:右边这个判断错得太离谱了吧,这等于说安兰德与哈耶克一个生态位
@whigzhou: 教官说的是事实,虽然我对这一事实何以出现也是大惑不解。刚花了十几分钟想了想,这似乎揭示了有关政治生态、政治光谱,以及政治倾向如何结晶成派系的某些一般模式
@whigzhou: 为说明这情况,我需要先做一点预备性论证。对个人而言,从哲学基础,到主义(或者叫政治信条,表现为一组标签),再到具体的政治主张(more...)
Shocking data on wealth inequality
哗众取宠的财富不平等数据
作者:Scott Sumner @ 2015-5-18
译者:Veidt 校对:小聂
来源:Library of Economics and Liberty,http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/05/shocking_new_da.html
Imagine living in a country where the top 30% of the population had roughly 25 times as much wealth per person as the bottom 30% of the population. That seems pretty unequal, doesn’t it?
设想一下,你生活在这样一个国家,其中最富有的30%人口的个人财富大约是最贫穷的30%的人口的25倍。看起来挺不平等的,不是吗?
Now suppose the same statistics applied, but every person at any given age had exactly the same wealth. All 18 year olds had the same wealth as other members of their cohort, as did all 60 year olds. But 18 year olds had much less wealth than 60 year olds.
现在假设同样的统计结果,并且所有年龄相同的人拥有的财富也相同。所有18岁的人和他们的同龄人拥有一样多的财富,所有60岁的人也都拥有相同的(more...)
Dear Dave, My wife and I have just started getting on track with our money. We have $2,000 in savings, and the only debt we have is our house and two cars. I work in the oil and gas industry and make about $180,000 a year, but things are pretty volatile right now. We're upside down on both vehicles, and we owe $39,000 on one and about $48,000 on the other. Under the circumstances, should we go ahead and build a fully funded emergency fund or work on paying off the cars? Kendall 亲爱的Dave,我和妻子才刚刚开始赚钱。我们有两千美元的储蓄,仅有的债务是我们的房贷和两辆车的车贷。我在油气行业工作,每年的收入大约有18万美元,但现在形势很不稳定。为了买这两辆车我们已经把钱都花光了,在其中一辆车上我们欠了39,000美元,另一辆车则欠了48,000美元。在这种情况下,我们是应该把赚来的钱用于设立一个充足的应急基金呢,还是用来偿还两辆汽车的欠款呢?Kendall Dear Kendall, Are you kidding me? Sell the cars, dude! You need to go to Kelly Blue Book's website right now, and find out what your cars are really worth. Then, put them on the market as a private sale. You'll get thousands more selling them that way than you will at a dealership. You'll have to talk to a local credit union or bank for a small loan to cover the difference, plus a little bit more so you guys can get a couple of little beaters to drive for a while. 亲爱的Kendall, 你不是在跟我开玩笑吧?赶快把车都卖了吧,我的朋友! 你现在要做的是去Kelly蓝皮书的网站查一下你的车到底值多少钱,然后以私人销售的名义把它们挂到汽车交易市场上。以这种方式出售,你得到的钱会比你通过汽车经纪商出售多几千美元。你还需要去找一家本地信用合作社或者银行谈谈,借一笔小额贷款来弥补差额,并让你们能够买两辆小“甲壳虫”暂时开一段时间。【译注:此处beaters疑为beatles之讹。】I'm going to go out on a limb and guess there aren't very many similar letters in China. Like the advice columnist "Dave", I have a temperament that makes it easy to save. But as a libertarian I favor allowing people like Kendall to spend their money when and how they wish. 这里我想斗胆猜测一下,中国应该不会有太多类似的读者来信。和上面那位建议专栏的作者Dave一样,我在性格上倾向于储蓄。但是作为一名自由意志主义者,我倾向于允许Kendall这样的人按自己的意愿去决定何时、如何花自己的钱。 The only qualification is that I think people should be forced to save enough to cover the things that society would otherwise have to pay (basic retirement, medical, etc.) 我认为唯一合理的限制是,假如因为人们因自己的储蓄不足,而需要整个社会来付出代价时,强制性储蓄才是必须的(例如基本的退休工资,医疗保障等)。 If we believe that people should be free to choose when to spend their wealth, we will end up with far more wealth inequality than if we try to force everyone to consume the "right amount" of each year's income. But I don't see how that sort of wealth inequality could be considered a problem. 如果我们相信人们拥有选择何时花掉自己所拥有财富的自由,那么相比强制所有人都花掉每年收入中“正确比例”的钱,最终的财富不平等程度会高得多。但我完全不觉得这种原因导致的财富不平等会是个问题。 Inevitably some will misconstrue what I am saying here. Just to be clear, even accounting for all the factors I mentioned (age, saving preferences, etc) there is still lots more inequality due to big differences in lifetime earnings (or inherited wealth.) So this post is not trying to suggest that inequality is not a problem. 难免有人会误解我的意思,所以我要澄清一下,即便考虑了上面提到的所有这些因素(年龄、储蓄偏好等)之后,由人们生命周期中巨大的收入差异(或是财产继承上的差异)所造成的不平等仍然是巨大的。这篇文章并不是想说不平等不是个问题。 Rather I'm suggesting that if inequality is a problem, we would not be able to know that from the wealth inequality data that is presented in the media. And that's because even if wealth inequality were not a problem at all, the actual inequality of wealth would look shocking large, with 100 to 1 disparities easily accounted for by nothing more than differences in age and saving propensities. 实际上我更想表达的是,假如不平等的确是一个问题,我们并不能从媒体上出现的那些有关财富不平等的数据里得知这一点。因为即使在那些财富不平等根本不算个问题的情况下,实际数据上的财富不平等程度看起来也会很惊人,仅仅是年龄和储蓄偏好上的一些差异就能轻易地造成100比1这样的差距。 The only data that truly gets at the inequality question is consumption inequality, which is very rarely discussed in the media. 对于不平等问题,唯一切中要害的数据,其实是消费的不平等,但有关后者却极少在媒体上被讨论。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
Are Aussie housing regulations the dumbest rules on Earth?
澳洲的房屋管制是否是世界上最愚蠢的规定?
作者:Scott Sumner @ 2015-6-7
译者:混乱阈值 (@混乱阈值)
校对:小册子(@昵称被抢的小册子)沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
来源:TheMoneyIllusion, http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=29551
Commenter Colin Docherty sent me an article on the Reserve Bank of Australia’s counterproductive attempt to hold down house prices with tight money:
评论员Colin Docherty发给我一篇关于澳大利亚储备银行试图用紧缩银根这种适得其反的手段来抑制房价的文章:【译注:作者收到的文章地址http://www.afr.com/real-estate/residential/housing-bubble-compels-rba-to-hold-rates-at-225pc-20150407-1mfyvh】
The Reserve Bank of Australia’s surprise decision to defer its widely anticipated April rate cut for at least another month might have been inf(more...)
The Reserve Bank of Australia’s surprise decision to defer its widely anticipated April rate cut for at least another month might have been influenced by the increasingly pricey housing market, which it regards as posing a real “dilemma”. 外界普遍预期澳大利亚储备银行将在四月份降息,但其却出人意料地决定将降息往后推迟至少一个月。此举可能是受了房价日趋上扬的影响。在储备银行看来,房价的不断上涨让他们陷入了真正的“两难处境”。 According to UBS, in March the ratio of Australian dwelling prices-to-disposable household incomes equalled – and is presently surpassing – the previous record of 5.3 times set back in September 2003. And they predict it will climb further. 根据瑞士联合银行(UBS)给出的数据,三月份澳洲的住房价格与可支配家庭收入比已经追平——并且正在赶超——2003年9月创下的5.3倍的纪录。而且上升势头可能还会持续。As a result, Aussie inflation is now sliding far below the 2.5% target, and unemployment has been climbing. This is the same policy the Fed tried in 1929. This is the same policy the Riksbank tried in 2010. Do central bankers ever learn? 结果,澳洲目前通胀率远低于2.5%的目标,而失业率则一直在攀升。同样的经济政策,美联储(Fed)在1929年就用过了,瑞典中央银行(Riksbank)在2010年也用过了。中央银行的银行家们就不会吸取教训吗? Back in 2009 I ridiculed the idea of bubbles by pointing out that while all the English speaking countries had seen huge house price surges in the early 2000s, only the US and Ireland saw a crash. Australian prices were particularly robust. But despite the bubblemongers being wrong about these countries, they continued to insist it was all a bubble. 2009年时我就嘲笑过那些认为房市存在泡沫的观点,那时我指出,尽管在本世纪头几年所有英语国家的房价都迅猛上涨,但只有美国和爱尔兰的房市出现了崩盘。而澳大利亚的房价尤其坚挺。尽管那些泡沫论贩子对这些国家的房市判断出错,他们依然坚持房地产市场全是泡沫。 OK, I can sort of understand how people could make that mistake in 2009. But now, six years later, Australian house prices are still up at the same lofty levels. Is the term “bubble” now so elastic that it can fit a house price boom that’s occupied virtually the entire 21st century? 好吧,人们在2009年犯错还算情有可原。然而六年后的今天,澳大利亚的房价依然处在同样的高位。如果整个21世纪至今几乎一直在延续的房价上涨还能叫做是“泡沫”,那“泡沫”这个词的弹性也太大了吧? How about if prices are still high in 2020—will it still be a bubble? How about 2030? How about 2050? Of course the bubblemongers will refuse to answer these questions because like soothsayers they always want an “out” if their predictions fail. They always want to be able to say; “You just wait and see.” 如果房价在2020年依旧很高,还是泡沫吗?2030年呢?2050年呢?当然这些泡沫论贩子会拒绝回答这些问题,因为他们就像算命先生那样,总能为自己失败的预言找到托词。他们永远会说:“你等着瞧好了。” And how about those people who said Bitcoin was a bubble at $25? I’m will to buy coins from you guys at twice the price you said was a bubble back then. 那么那些在比特币价值25美元的时候说出现了泡沫的人怎么样了?我愿意用当初你们说是泡沫的价格的两倍跟你们购买比特币。 I still haven’t gotten to the dumbest policy on Earth. Australia is the size of the continental US, with a population smaller than Texas. Like Texans, Aussies should be able to afford comfortable single-family homes. But in the right column of the article linked to above, I see links for these articles: 目前为止我还没说到地球上最愚蠢的政策呢。澳大利亚的国土面积和美国本土一样大,人口比德克萨斯州还少。和德州人一样,澳洲人应该能够买得起舒适的独户住宅。然而就在前面提到的文章的右边栏上,我看到了以下这些文章的链接:
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand. 如果你让联邦政府负责管理撒哈拉沙漠,五年之内沙子就会短缺。Well the Australian government was put in charge of land use in a country the size of the Sahara, and now they have microapartments. 好吧,人们让澳洲政府负责管理面积相当于撒哈拉沙漠的土地使用,于是现在就有了微型公寓。 I’m begging regulators there to make me look like a fool. Pop that nonexistent housing bubble by changing the fundamentals. Give landowners the freedom to build, like they have in Germany. Please, make me look like a fool. 我倒是希望澳洲的监管者们能让我看起来像个笨蛋。通过改变经济基本因素来戳破那根本不存在的房市泡沫吧。像德国那样给予土地所有者建造房屋的自由吧。拜托了,让我看起来像个笨蛋吧。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
【2015-08-10】
@冬川豆 “在可以预见的未来,认同政治的历史影响将会凌驾于共识政治之上。我之所以要给读者提供认知训练,就是为了让他们在即将来临的决断时刻正确判断形势。骰子落地以前,机会千金难买;骰子一旦落地,坐失良机者必定后悔莫及。”《读史早知今日事——<经与史>跋》 http://t.cn/RLEXoZc
@whigzhou: 我来概括一下吧,本文大概表达了三点意思。A)我们需要某种历史哲学吗?需要。这点 我完全同意,理由见托马斯·库恩(more...)
The Hours and Academic Achievement
时间分配与学业成就
作者:Bryan Caplan @ 2015-05-13
译者:史祥莆(@史祥莆) 校对:Marcel ZHANG(@马赫塞勒张)
制图:amen(@治愈系历史)
来源:Library of Economics and Liberty
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/05/the_hours_acade.html
Adults love controlling the way kids spend the hours of the day. What’s the payoff for all their meddling? Hofferth and Sandberg’s “How American Children Spend Their Time” (Journal of Marriage and the Family) provides some fascinating answers for kids ages 0-12.
成年人总喜欢控制孩子们每天支配时间的方式。然而这样多管闲事的结果是(more...)
Jeb Bush’s Beltway Climb
杰布·布什的华府攀登路
作者:社论 @2015-7-24
译者:王涵秋 校对:Animu (@丹哲生)
来源:华尔街日报
网址:http://www.wsj.com/articles/jeb-bushs-beltway-climb-1437693373
He proposes reforms that are good, bad and ugly.
他提出的改革之中,有好的,有坏的,还有不堪入目的
As Florida Governor, Jeb Bush conquered what he called “Mount Tallahassee,” and now that he’s running for President he is proposing to do the same to “Mount Washington.” On Monday he offered some initial ideas on how to do it, and some are better than others.
作为佛罗里达州州长,杰布·布什已经成功登上了他所称的“塔拉哈西之巅”;既已开始竞选总统,他还要登上“华盛顿之巅”。本周一,他已就如何开展竞选提出了(more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
Canada Cuts Down On Red Tape. Could It Work In The U.S.?
加拿大精简繁规缛章,美国行吗?
作者:Uri Berliner @2015-7-25
译者:@苏格底柏德図 校对:晓舸 (@ShawXG)
来源:NPR
网址:http://www.npr.org/2015/05/26/409671996/canada-cuts-down-on-red-tape-could-it-work-in-the-u-s
Canada says it’s the first country with a law that eliminates one regulation for every new measure that’s adopted. The One-for-One Rule is designed to ease the burden on businesses.
加拿大宣称自己是世界上第一个采纳“一换一”规则的国家,这项法律规则要求:每出台一项新的监管措施,必须相应的排除一条旧的。此项规则旨在减轻企业的负担。
RENEE MONTAGNE, HOST: In Canada, the government has figured out a surefire way to slash red tape with a law that eliminates one regulation for every new one that’s created. The One-For-One Rule was adopted last month in a nice Canadian way, without political warfare. NPR’s Uri Berliner reports.
主持人,蕾妮·蒙塔:在加拿大,政府想出了一种削减繁杂监管规章的可靠办法,为每项新出台的监管措施削减掉一项旧的。上个月,“一换一”规则以一种加拿大人特有的优雅方式而被采纳,没有引发政治纷争。
URI BERLINER, BYLINE: The story starts in 2001 in Canada’s beautiful west coast province of British Columbia. Laura Jones lives there, in Vancouver. She’s with the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. And she says back then, the economy of British Columbia was a mess, partly because there were so many time-consuming regulations. And she says some of them were pretty dumb.
文章署名,乌利·(more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
Prostitution and the internet: More bang for your buck
卖春和互联网:花钱玩得更爽
作者:The Economist @ 2014-8-9
译者:Who视之 校对: 乘风(@你在何地-sxy),小册子(@昵称被抢的小册子)
来源:《经济学人》(The Economist)
网址:http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21611074-how-new-technology-shaking-up-oldest-business-more-bang-your-buck
How new technology is shaking up the oldest business
新科技在如何改变这个最古老的行当
WARNING: We rarely feel the need to alert readers to explicit content. But our discussion of the online sex trade requires frank language, and some may find the topic distasteful.
警告: 我们极少会觉得有需要提醒读者,文章内容包含露骨的描写。但我们讨论网上性交易时需要用很直白的语言,因此这个题材可能会令有些人感到不适。
FOR those seeking commercial sex in Berlin, Peppr, a new app, makes life easy. Type in a location and up pops a list of the nearest prostitutes, along with pictures, prices and physical particulars. Results can be filtered, and users can arrange a session for a €5-10 ($6.50-13) booking fee. It plans to expand to more cities.
对于那些在柏林找乐子的人来说,一个叫Peppr的新款手机应用让事情变得容易多了。只要输入一个地址,附近妓女的名单、照片、价钱、身体特征等信息就都跳了出来。用户可以对结果进行筛选,安排一次服务只需要花5-10欧(合6.5-13美元)的预约费。这个应用还将被推广到了更多城市。
Peppr can operate openly since prostitution, and the advertising of prostitution, are both legal in Germany. But even where they are not, the internet is transforming the sex trade. Prostitutes and punters have always struggled to find each other, and to find out what they (more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
THE SAYINGS OF JOHN MCCARTHY
约翰·麦卡锡语录 Vol.3
作者:John McCarthy
译者:斑马(@鹿兔马朦)
校对:慕白(@李凤阳他说)
来源:John McCarthy’s Home Page,http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/sayings.html
Clinton can say: in my industry 5/6 of the experienced men are unemployed. – jmc 1993 and earlier
克林顿可以说:在我这一行,六分之五的熟练男子都是无业的。
Oh, he’s sincere all right. The question is: what is he sincere about? – jmc after 1986, perhaps about Gorbachev
哦,他是很真挚。但问题是:他真挚地想要干什么呢?——当时我可能是在说戈尔巴乔夫
His ambition is to be the spider in the World Wide Web. – jmc 1994
他的野心是成为互联网上的一只蜘蛛。
My hobby of not attending meetings about recycling saves more energy than your hobby of recycling. – jmc 1994
我不出席关于废物回收的会议这个习惯省下的能源,比你的废物回收习惯省下的还要多。
r.a.b. Needs an FFF – frequently flamed flames, each with a sampling of exchanges, culminating in an application of GodwinR(more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
THE SAYINGS OF JOHN MCCARTHY
约翰·麦卡锡语录 Vol.2
作者:John McCarthy
译者:斑马(@鹿兔马朦)
校对:慕白(@李凤阳他说)
来源:John McCarthy’s Home Page,http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/sayings.html
It’s possible to program a computer in English. It’s also possible to make an airplane controlled by reins and spurs. – jmc 196x
用英语写计算机程序是有可能的。制造一个通过缰绳和马刺来控制的飞机也是有可能的。
The reason why a professor does something has even less connection with why he says he does it than with most people – jmc 1985
与大多数人相比,一个教授做一件事情的真实理由同他所宣称理由之间的联系更为薄弱。
It’s a poor cause for which no-one will scuttle a ship or cut a throat. – jmc 1985
这是个差劲的目标,没有人会为它而毁掉船只,也没有人会为它而割断别人的喉咙。
In this book masculine pronouns embrace not only the feminine but also the robotic. – jmc 1985
在这本书中,阳性代词不仅被用来指代女性,也被用来指代机器人。
A true intellectual is a man who, after reading a book and being convinced by its arguments, will shoot someone or, more likely, order someone shot. – jmc 1985(more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
THE SAYINGS OF JOHN MCCARTHY
约翰·麦卡锡语录 Vol.1
作者:John McCarthy
译者:斑马(@鹿兔马朦)
校对:慕白(@李凤阳他说)
来源:John McCarthy’s Home Page,http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/sayings.html
Mankind will probably survive even if it doesn’t take my advice. – jmc
即便不采纳我的建议,人类大概也能活下去。
Equality of the sexes is more important than equality of the genders. – jmc 1985
雌雄平等比男女平等更重要。
As the Chinese say, 1001 words is worth more than a picture. – jmc
正如中国人所说,一千零一言胜一图。【译注:此处麦卡锡好像是在拿“一图胜千言”这句话开玩笑,笑点请自己找。】
During the second millennium, the Earthmen complained a lot. – jmc
在第二个千年间,地球人抱怨连连。
When there’s a will to fail, obstacles can be found. – jmc 1983 March
如果你想失败的话,障碍总是找得到的。
There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come. – Victor Hugo
Yes, even if it’s a bad idea.- jmc
如果一种理念得逢其时,那么它将无往不胜。。——维克多·雨果
是啊,即便是个糟糕的理念。——约翰·麦卡锡
Everyone needs computer programming. It wil(more...)
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
The Future of Democracy, Freedom, and Prosperity
民主、自由与繁荣的未来
作者:Arnold Kling @ 2015-7-14
译者:迈爸(@麦田的字留地)
校对:小聂
来源:askblog,http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-future-of-democracy-freedom-and-prosperity/
A simple topic for four of us to spend an hour discussing. The conclusion of my opening remarks:
一个简单的话题,我们四个花一小时讨论。我的开场白:
one sort of maybe fictional type scenario would be that you would get a sudden sovereign debt crisis in the United States that would take place in an environment where the political feelings are frayed–there’s a lot of controversy; people no longer see the legislators and the executive as having legitimacy for solving their problems(more...)
one sort of maybe fictional type scenario would be that you would get a sudden sovereign debt crisis in the United States that would take place in an environment where the political feelings are frayed–there’s a lot of controversy; people no longer see the legislators and the executive as having legitimacy for solving their problems.They take to the streets. There’s fighting; there’s violence. 或许可以设想这样一幕虚构场景:美国将陷入一场突如其来的主权债务危机,而那时候的政治环境已经大变,政治氛围变得焦躁好斗——总是争吵不休;人民不再认为立法和行政机构拥有解决他们的问题所需要的合法性。他们走上街头,诉诸武力和暴力。 And at that point the people are ready to turn to some kind of dictator to resolve the violence. So that’s kind of a fictional scenario. There’s certainly you can see either economic or political ways to avoid it. But that would be sort of my one pessimistic scenario relative to maintaining our open access order. Which, if we do maintain our open access order, I think eventually we do recover prosperity and we sort of maintain freedom. 这个时候,人们就准备好转而接受某种独裁者来解决暴力问题了。这是一种虚构场景。当然你可能会说,有经济或政治的方法来避免它。但是,和我们的开放秩序能够得以维持的前景相比,我也看到了类似这样的一幅悲观图景。当然,只要我们能够保持开放秩序,我想最终我们仍将恢复繁荣,并保证一部分的自由。John Cochrane worries about John Cochrane则担心:
the vast attempt of our government to control economics from the big Dodd-Frank and Obamacare down to the small regulations against Uber and occupational licensing for hairdressers, and so forth. 政府对经济的管控已无所不用其极,大至多德-弗兰克法案(Dodd-Frank Act)【译注:全称《多德—弗兰克华尔街改革和消费者保护法》,2010年制订,旨在加强金融市场监管,有关其实施效果,海德沙龙将在今后译介更多文章】、奥巴马医改,小至对Uber的管制,甚至理发师都需要职业许可证。 This enterprise has vast power. It’s increasingly politicized. And right now it’s used already to silence opposition to the regulatory fiefdoms. What bank dares to speak out against the Dodd-Frank Act? What health insurer dares to speak out against Obamacare? 这门行当权力巨大,且日益政治化。现在它已经可以在管制的领域让反对的声音消失。哪家银行敢公开反对多德-弗兰克法案?哪家医疗保险公司敢公开反对奥巴马的医改方案?It seems to me that strong regulation often has the support, or at least the acquiescence, of incumbent business interests. The question is whether potential new competition is thwarted. Lee Ohanian, another speaker in this session, is pessimistic on that score. 在我看来,强监管政策常常能在市场现有的利益相关企业中找到支持者,或者至少是默许。问题是,这是否阻碍了潜在的新竞争者进入。这次会议的另一位发言者Lee Ohanian在这点上是悲观的:
Another recent study found that the decline in community banking accelerated considerably in the last few years, reflecting economies of scale in managing new regulation associated with Dodd-Frank. Small Business Administration says that lending to small businesses has declined by about 20% since 2008, which was of course the year of the Great Recession. And in 2013 only 1 new bank entered the banking industry. 最近的另一项研究发现,在过去几年中,社区银行业的衰退明显加速,反映了规模经济与实施多德-弗兰克法案有关的管制之间的关系【译注:这里隐含逻辑是:强监管带来更高的合规成本,而小企业在摊薄这项成本上不具规模经济,因而强监管政策实际上起到了削弱小企业竞争优势的作用】。据小企业管理局说,自2008以来,也就是经济大衰退的那一年,贷给小企业的钱已经下降了大约20%。而在2013年只有一家银行进入银行业。 So you look at the outcome of Dodd-Frank–declining competition, fewer banks, lack of entry, higher costs, regulators with broad mandates who make vague and far-reaching rules–this represents a sharp departure from the clear and specific limits on government. 所以多德-弗兰克法案的结果就是,竞争的趋弱、银行的减少、新入行者的稀缺和更高的成本。大权在握的监管机构制定的规则模糊却影响深远——它表明我们又一次急剧偏离了清晰而具体地限制政府权力这一原则。【编者按:这次对话的视频和录音在这个网页上可以找到:http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2015/07/lee_ohanian_arn.html 】 (编辑:@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。
——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——
【2015-08-06】
@海德沙龙 自去年奥巴马开始发起提高最低工资的运动以来,康涅狄格率先响应,立法要求最低时薪两年内提高至$10.10,此后一些城市也迅速跟进,其中以加州城市最为积极,目前流行的口号是15美元,西雅图也于去年6月通过了法案,本文介绍了最低工资法的一种荒唐后果 http://t.cn/RLYmuRB
@whigzhou: 最低工资法是常见干预措施中最恶劣的一种(我本来想用恶毒/卑劣/无耻等道德意味更明确的词汇,不过想想还是算了,总不能完全排(more...)