評論
打印
But what if the sought-after thing was $100 itself?
但是，如果孜孜以求的是100美元自己呢？
What if people produced goods to obtain money, not merely as a transactional device to be swiftly exchanged for other things, but as a store of value, to be held indefinitely?
如果人們生產商品是為了得到錢，不僅是把它作為一種能被迅速用來交換其他東西的交易手段，而且是作為一種可以無限期持有的價值儲備手段？
A widespread propensity to hoard money posed a problem for Say's vision.
一種廣泛的囤錢傾向給薩伊的愿景帶來了一個問題。
It interrupted the exchange of goods for goods on which his theory relied.
它中斷了他的理論一直為依據的物物交換。
Unlike the purchase of newly created products, the accumulation of money provides no stimulus to production (except perhaps the mining of precious metals under a gold or silver standard).
與對剛生產出來的產品的購買所不同的是，錢的累積對生產提供不了任何刺激（也許在金本位制或者銀本位制之下的貴金屬開采是個例外）。
And if, as he had argued, an oversupply of some commodities is offset by an undersupply of others, then by the same logic, an undersupply of money might indeed entail an oversupply of everything else.
再者，如其所言，如果某些商品的供給過剩因為其他商品的供給不足而得以抵消；那么，據此邏輯，錢的供給不足或許真就造成其他所有東西的供給過剩。
Say recognised this as a theoretical danger, but not a practical one.
薩伊承認，這是一種理論上的，而不是實踐中的風險。
He did not believe that anyone would hold money for long.
他不相信人們會長久地持有貨幣。
Say's own father had been bankrupted by the collapse of assignats, paper money issued after the French Revolution.
薩伊的父親曾經因為法國大革命后發行的紙幣——紙券的崩潰而破產。
Far from hoarding this depreciating asset, people were in such a rush to spend it, that “one might have supposed it burnt the fingers it passed through.”
人們當時不僅不囤積這種日復一日地貶值的資產，而且還如此匆忙地把它花掉，以至于“人們可能會認為這種錢過手就會燒了手指一樣?！?/div>
In principle, if people want to hold more money, a simple solution suggests itself: print more.
從理論上來說，如果人們想持有更多的錢，一種簡單的解決辦法就自己浮出水面：印制更多的錢。
In today's world, unlike Say's, central banks can create more money (or ease the terms on which it is obtainable) at their own discretion.
在當今世界，與薩伊的世界所不同的是，央行能夠自行決定印制更多的錢（或者是放寬其賴以得到的各種條款）。
This should allow them to accommodate the desire to hoard money, while leaving enough left over to buy whatever goods and services the economy is capable of producing.
這應當能讓它們在化解囤錢的渴望的同時，留出足夠的錢去購買經濟體能夠生產的任何商品和服務。
But in practice, even this solution appears to have limits, judging by the disappointing results of monetary expansions since the financial crisis of 2007-08.
但是，在實踐中，根據2007-08年的金融危機以來的令人大失所望的貨幣擴張結果來判斷，即便是這種解決方案似乎也有限的。
Today, many people scoff at Say's law even before they have fully appreciated it.
如今，許多人甚至在全面理解薩伊定律之前就嘲笑它。
That is a pity.
這既可悲又可嘆。
He was wrong to say that economy-wide shortfalls of demand do not happen.
薩伊錯就錯在認為經濟體的全面需求不足不會發生這件事上。
But he was right to suggest that they should not happen.
但是，在指出它們不應當發生這方面，他是對的。
Contrary to popular belief, they serve no salutary economic purpose.
與大眾信念相反的是，它們服務于一無益處的經濟目的。
There is instead something perverse about an economy impoverished by lack of spending.
反而倒是有經濟體因為開支缺乏而致貧這種拙拙怪事。
It is like a subsistence farmer leaving his field untilled and his belly unfilled, farming less than he'd like even as he eats less than he'd choose.
這就像是自給自足經濟下的農民縱然吃不上想吃的也會讓田地荒在那里、讓肚子填不飽一樣。
When Say's law fails to hold, workers lack jobs because firms lack customers, and firms lack customers because workers lack jobs.
當薩伊定律站不住腳的時候，工人因為公司缺乏客戶而缺乏工作，公司因為工人缺乏工作而缺乏客戶。
Say himself faced both a ruinous shortage of demand for his cotton and excess demand for his treatise.
薩伊自己就同時遇上了對他棉布需求的嚴重短缺和對他著作的過度需求這兩件事。
The first edition sold out quickly; Napoleon blocked the publication of a second.
他的著作的第一版很快銷售一空；拿破侖阻止了第二版的發行。
Eventually, Say was able to adapt, remixing his activities as his own theory would prescribe.
最后，薩伊能夠適應形勢，按照他自己的理論所說，重新調整了他的行為。
He quit his cotton mill in 1812, notes Mr Schoorl.
斯庫爾寫道，1812年，他賣掉了棉紡廠。
And within weeks of Napoleon's exile in 1814, he printed a second edition of his treatise (there would be six in all).
1814年，在拿破侖被流放的幾周內，他刊印了自己著作的第二版（總共會有6版）。
In 1820 he began work once again at the Conservatory in Paris—not this time as a student of spinning, but as France's first professor of economics, instructing students in the production, distribution and consumption of wealth.
1820年，他再次開始在巴黎工藝美院工作——這次不是以一名紡織學生的身份，而是作為法國的首席經濟學教授，在財富的生產、分配和消費等方面指導學生。
He considered it a “new and beautiful science”.
他認為這是一門“全新、美麗的科學”。
And, in his hands, it was.
在他手里，的確如此。
譯文來源考研英語時事閱讀
