評(píng)論
打印
Economics brief: Fiscal multipliers
經(jīng)濟(jì)概要：財(cái)政乘數(shù)
Where does the buck stop?
責(zé)任到哪里為止？
Fiscal stimulus, an idea championed by John Maynard Keynes, has gone in and out of fashion.
由凱恩斯首倡的財(cái)政刺激思想經(jīng)歷了大起大落。
At the height of the euro crisis, with government-bond yields soaring in several southern European countries and defaults looming, the European Central Bank and the healthier members of the currency club fended off disaster by offering bail-outs.
在歐元危機(jī)高峰時(shí)，鑒于多個(gè)南歐國(guó)家的政府債券收益率瘋漲，違約近在眼前，歐洲央行和這個(gè)貨幣俱樂部中較為健康的幾個(gè)成員國(guó)通過提供救助的方式抵御了災(zāi)難。
But these came with conditions, most notably strict fiscal discipline, intended to put government finances back on a sustainable footing.
但是，這些救助是有條件的，最引人注目的是嚴(yán)格的財(cái)政紀(jì)律，意在讓政府財(cái)政回歸一種可持續(xù)的基礎(chǔ)。
Some economists argued that painful budget cuts were an unfortunate necessity.
有的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家認(rèn)為，痛苦的預(yù)算削減是一種不幸的必然。
Others said that the cuts might well prove counterproductive, by lowering growth and therefore government revenues, leaving the affected countries even poorer and more indebted.
有的則認(rèn)為，預(yù)算削減極有可能被證明適得其反，因?yàn)樗土嗽鲩L(zhǎng)，進(jìn)而減少了政府收入，使得受其影響的國(guó)家窮上加窮，債務(wù)越來越重。
In 2013 economists at the IMF rendered their verdict on these austerity programmes: they had done far more economic damage than had been initially predicted, including by the fund itself.
2013年，國(guó)際貨幣基金組織的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家拿出了他們對(duì)這些緊縮計(jì)劃的看法：它們已經(jīng)造成了遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)高于最初預(yù)期——包括國(guó)際貨幣基金組織自己的最初預(yù)期——的經(jīng)濟(jì)破壞。
What had the IMF got wrong when it made its earlier, more sanguine forecasts?
那么，國(guó)際貨幣基金組織做出其較早的、更加樂觀的預(yù)期時(shí)錯(cuò)在哪里了呢？
It had dramatically underestimated the fiscal multiplier.
它大大低估了財(cái)政乘數(shù)。
The multiplier is a simple, powerful and hotly debated idea.
財(cái)政乘數(shù)是一種簡(jiǎn)單、有力且爭(zhēng)論激烈的思想。
It is a critical element of Keynesian macroeconomics.
它是凱恩斯宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的一個(gè)重要組成部分。
Over the past 80 years the significance it has been accorded has fluctuated wildly.
在過去的80年中，它被賦予的重要性大起大落。
It was once seen as a matter of fundamental importance, then as a discredited notion.
它一度被視為一件具有根本重要性的事情，之后，又被看成是一種信譽(yù)掃地的觀念。
It is now back in vogue again.
如今，它再度風(fēng)靡一時(shí)。
The idea of the multiplier emerged from the intense argument over how to respond to the Depression.
財(cái)政乘數(shù)的思想出自如何應(yīng)對(duì)大蕭條的激烈爭(zhēng)論。
In the 1920s Britain had sunk into an economic slump.
上世紀(jì)20年代，英國(guó)陷入了一場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退。
The first world war had left prices higher and the pound weaker.
第一次世界大戰(zhàn)讓物價(jià)節(jié)節(jié)攀升，英鎊日漸疲軟。
The government was nonetheless determined to restore the pound to its pre-war value.
然而，政府仍然決心讓英鎊回到其戰(zhàn)前的價(jià)值。
In doing so, it kept monetary policy too tight, initiating a spell of prolonged deflation and economic weakness.
在做這件事的過程中，英國(guó)政府把貨幣政策收得太緊，引發(fā)了一場(chǎng)曠日持久的通縮和經(jīng)濟(jì)疲軟。
The economists of the day debated what might be done to improve conditions for suffering workers.
當(dāng)時(shí)的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家曾就如何改善深受其苦的工人的狀況進(jìn)行過一番討論。
Among the suggestions was a programme of public investment which, some thought, would put unemployed Britons to work.
在各種建議當(dāng)中，其中就有一項(xiàng)有人認(rèn)為會(huì)讓失業(yè)的英國(guó)人去工作的公共投資計(jì)劃。
The British government would countenance no such thing.
英國(guó)政府是不會(huì)贊成任何這種事情的。
It espoused the conventional wisdom of the day—what is often called the “Treasury view”.
它站在了當(dāng)時(shí)的傳統(tǒng)智慧，也就是常說的“財(cái)政部觀點(diǎn)”一邊。
It believed that public spending, financed through borrowing, would not boost overall economic activity, because the supply of savings in the economy available for borrowing is fixed.
它堅(jiān)信，由于經(jīng)濟(jì)體中可用于舉債的儲(chǔ)蓄供給是固定的，透過舉債資助的公共開支不會(huì)推動(dòng)整體經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)。
If the government commandeered capital to build new roads, for instance, it would simply be depriving private firms of the same amount of money.
例如，如果政府強(qiáng)制資本去建造新的道路，這只會(huì)搶走私人企業(yè)同等數(shù)量的錢。
Higher spending and employment in one part of the economy would come at the expense of lower spending and employment in another.
經(jīng)濟(jì)體某一部分的更高的開支和就業(yè)的到來，會(huì)以另一部分的更低的開支和就業(yè)為代價(jià)。
As the world slipped into depression, however, and Britain's economic crisis deepened, the voices questioning this view grew louder.
然而，隨著世界滑入衰退，英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)日漸加深，質(zhì)疑這一觀點(diǎn)的聲音越來越大。
In 1931 Baron Kahn, a British economist, published a paper espousing an alternative theory: that public spending would yield both the primary boost from the direct spending, but also “beneficial repercussions”.
1931年，英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家卡恩男爵發(fā)表了一篇支持某種替代理論的論文：公共開支除了會(huì)產(chǎn)生來自直接開支的主要推動(dòng)之外，還會(huì)帶來“受益反應(yīng)”。
If road-building, for instance, took workers off the dole and led them to increase their own spending, he argued, then there might be a sustained rise in total employment as a result.
他指出，例如，如果建造道路讓工人擺脫了失業(yè)救濟(jì)，進(jìn)而又導(dǎo)致他們?cè)黾幼陨砘ㄤN，那么，其結(jié)果可能是一種總就業(yè)的持續(xù)上升。
Kahn's paper was in line with the thinking of John Maynard Keynes, the leading British economist of the day, who was working on what would become his masterpiece, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money”.
卡恩的論文與當(dāng)時(shí)正在撰寫會(huì)成為其代表作的《就業(yè)、利息和貨幣通論》的著名英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家約翰·梅納德·凱恩斯的思考一脈相承。
In it, Keynes gave a much more complete account of how the multiplier might work, and how it might enable a government to drag a slumping economy back to health.
《在通論》中，凱恩斯對(duì)財(cái)政乘數(shù)可能如何發(fā)揮作用以及它如何能讓政府把處于下滑中的經(jīng)濟(jì)體回歸健康給出了一個(gè)遠(yuǎn)為完整的描述。
Keynes was a singular character, and one of the great thinkers of the 20th century.
凱恩斯是一位非凡之人，是20世紀(jì)偉大思想家之一。
He looked every inch a patrician figure, with his tweed suits and walrus moustache.
從外表上看，他的花呢外套和海象式胡子無不表明他是一位達(dá)官貴人。
Yet he was also a free spirit by the standards of the day, associating with the artists and writers of the Bloomsbury Group, whose members included Virginia Woolf and E.M.Forster.
然而，根據(jù)當(dāng)時(shí)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，他還是一位思想開明的人，與成員包括弗吉尼亞·伍爾夫和E·M·福斯特在內(nèi)的布魯姆斯伯里團(tuán)體的作家和藝術(shù)家關(guān)系密切。
