評論
打印
Every parent I know, liberal or conservative, complains about the coarsening of the culture, the promotion of easy materialism and instant gratification, the severing of sexuality from intimacy. They may not want government censorship, but they want those concerns recognized, their experiences validated. When, for fear of appearing censorious, progressive political leaders can't even acknowledge the problem, those parents start listening to those leaders who will-leaders who may be less sensitive to constitutional constraints.
但是我所知道的每位家長，不管是自由主義者還是保守主義者，都對文化的粗俗化，物質追求和及時享樂，逢場作戲的性行為等現象深惡痛絕，怨聲載道。這些人并不要求政府對此進行審查，但是他們希望他們的擔憂得到認可，他們的感受得到證實。由于擔心顯得吹毛求疵，熱衷改革的政治領導人甚至不承認這一問題，當出現這一情況時，家長們開始將注意力轉向那些承認該問題的領導，可這些領導可能對憲法的局限性認識不足。
Of course, conservatives have their own blind spots when it comes to addressing problems in the culture. Take executive pay. In 1980, the average CEO made forthy-two times what an average hourly worker took home. By 2005, the ratio was 262 to 1. Conservative outlets like The Wall Street Journal editorial page try to justify outlandish salaries and stock options as necessary to attract top talent, and suggest that the economy actually performs better when America's corporate leaders are fat and happy. But the explosion in CEO pay has had little to do with improved performance. In fact, some of the country's most highly compensated CEOs over the past decade have presided over huge drops in earnings, losses in shareholder value, massive layoffs, and the underfunding of their workers'pension funds.
當然，保守人士在討論文化問題時可能會有他們自己的盲點。以公司執行官薪酬為例。1980年首席執行官的平均薪酬是每個小時工平均實得工資的42倍。2005年是262倍。一些保守派代言人，如《華爾街日報》社論版，試圖為高得出奇的薪水和股票內購權做辯護，認為這是吸引高端人才之必需。他們甚至放出謬論，當美國大公司的老板身寬體胖、心曠神怡之際，便是美國經濟運作良好之時。但是首席執行官工資的激增與業績提高沒有什么關系。事實上，在過去的十年里，一些全國收入最多的總裁，其公司主要表現是贏利陡降、股票貶值、失業率增升、員工養老金匱乏。
What accounts for the change in CEO pay is not any market imperative. It's cultural. At a time when average workers are experiencing little or no income growth, many of America's CEOs have lost any sense of shame about grabbing whatever their pliant, handpicked corporate boards will allow. Americans understand the damage such an ethic of greed has on our collective lives; in a recent survey, they ranked corruption in government and business, and greed and materialism, as two of the three most important moral challenges facing the nation ("raising kids with the right values" ranked first). Conservatives may be right when they argue that the government should not try to determine executive pay packages. But conservatives should at least be willing to speak out against unseemly behavior in corporate boardrooms with the same moral force, the same sense of outrage, that they direct against dirty rap lyrics.
造成首席執行官工資變化的不是市場規則，原因在文化。工人的平均工資曾經一度很少或沒有漲幅，而美國許多首席執行官在攫取和利用圓滑、溫順的公司董事會方面幾乎到了厚顏無恥的地步。美國人懂得這種貪婪的道德觀念對我們集體生活的危害；在最近的一份調查中，他們將政府和商業腐敗以及貪婪和物質至上作為國家所面臨的三項最重要的道德挑戰中的兩項（“用正確的價值觀撫育孩子”居第一位）。如果保守人士認為政府不應該試圖決定公司領導人一攬子工資，他們可能是對的。但是，他們至少應該愿意在董事局會議室里暢敘己見，如同將矛頭對準骯臟的攻擊話語一樣，以同樣的道德力量、同樣的憤怒態度，抨擊不合時宜的行為。
