Nathan Rothschild was the richest man in the world when he died in 1836. A list compiled by Forbes magazine, ranks him as the second richest man who ever lived – ahead of John D Rockefeller, and way ahead of Mexican telecoms mogul Carlos Slim and Bill Gates of Microsoft. (The richest was a Roman general who was the power behind Julius Caesar’s throne.) The figures used by Forbes are, of course, adjusted for inflation.
內森•羅斯柴爾德(Nathan Rothschild)于1836年去世，當時他是世界首富。在《福布斯》(Forbes)雜志編撰的一份榜單上，他被評為有史以來第二富有的人——排在約翰•D•洛克菲勒(John D. Rockefeller)之前，遠遠領先于墨西哥電信巨頭卡洛斯•斯利姆(Carlos Slim)和微軟(Microsoft)的比爾•蓋茨(Bill Gates)。（有史以來最富有的是一位羅馬將軍，是他把凱撒(Julius Caesar)推上皇位的。）當然，《福布斯》使用的數字經過了通脹調整。
But what does “adjusted for inflation” mean? Rothschild died of septicaemia following an abscess, and in spite of buying the best medical attention available in Europe at the time. He had never been in a car, a train or an aircraft, nor visited the Taj Mahal, heard recorded music, seen a film, made a phone call or used electric light. Nor (despite the legends about the killing he made from inside information) could he have heard about the outcome of Waterloo until many hours after the battle was won. And he was dead at the age of 58 from an illness that could today be cured by an antibiotic costing a few pence.
但“經過了通脹調整”是什么意思？盡管能夠享受當時歐洲最好的醫療條件，羅斯柴爾德仍死于膿腫引發的敗血癥。他從沒坐過汽車、火車、飛機，也沒到過泰姬陵(Taj Mahal)，沒聽過錄制音樂，沒看過電影，沒打過電話，也沒用過電燈。滑鐵盧戰役分出勝負幾小時后，他才有可能得知結果（盡管有傳聞稱他利用內幕消息發了大財）。他在58歲那年病逝，若換到今天，那種病只消花上幾便士買點抗生素便能治愈。
Was Rothschild really the second richest man in history? Was he, in fact, richer than me? True, he could hire a fleet of carriages and eat off gold plate; but I would happily trade both for still being alive , and I suspect that Rothschild would have felt the same.
羅斯柴爾德真的是歷史上第二富有的人嗎？那時的他，比現在的我富裕嗎？沒錯，他雇得起一整支馬車隊，用金盤子吃飯；但跟繼續活下來相比，我寧愿不要這兩者——我猜羅斯柴爾德也會這么想。
The question is prompted by a considerably more mundane event. Inflation in the eurozone has fallen to 0.3 per cent, arousing concerns that there might actually be deflation in the months ahead – and that Eurostat, Europe’s statistics agency, will soon declare that prices in Europe are lower than a year earlier.
我是由一件很普通的事情想到這個問題的。歐元區的通脹率已降至0.3%，令人擔憂未來幾個月可能真的發生通縮，而歐盟統計局(Eurostat)將在不久之后宣布，歐洲的物價低于一年前。
That worry is premised on the existence of a qualitative difference between inflation – that is, prices rising, even if slowly; and deflation – prices falling, however swiftly. It is also premised on an assumption that deflation is undesirable and that the goal should be gently rising prices; and on the belief that we are able to tell which state we are in.
人們之所以會產生這種擔心，一個前提是通脹與通縮性質不同——前者指物價上漲，哪怕上漲緩慢；后者指物價下降，無論降得有多么快。另一個前提是關于通縮是不可取的、應該以物價溫和上升為目標的觀念，以及我們能夠判斷通脹形勢的想法。
Contemplation of the antibiotics not available in 1836 casts doubt on all these premises. It is generally accepted medical costs rise faster than general inflation – and in the US, where they represent more than 20 per cent of consumer spending, they have contributed significantly to that general inflation. But medicine has become better – quite a lot better, even if too late for Rothschild.
考慮到1836年還沒有抗生素，這就令人對上述所有假設產生了懷疑。大家普遍認為，醫療成本上漲快于總體通脹率。在美國，醫療費用對總體通脹率的貢獻很大，因為它在消費者支出中的占比高于20%。然而，醫療技術已經進步，比以往好很多，盡管這對羅斯柴爾德來說已太遲了。
Price indices are compiled by measuring the changes in the cost of buying a fixed bundle of goods chosen to represent the consumption of an average household. But what the average household buys changes with the arrival of new goods; and with changes in relative prices; as well as with variations – good and bad – in quality. Antibiotics replace leeches, carriages become more expensive, computers become more powerful, and the service from a call-centre deteriorates. That is how modern economies evolve and grow.
統計人員選取能代表普通家庭消費狀況的一籃子物品，測算這些物品的價格變化，從而計算出物價指數。但普通家庭購買的物品組合會隨著新商品的問世而變化；也隨著相對價格的變化而變化；還隨著商品質量（優與劣）的變化而變化。抗生素取代了螞蟥，馬車價格變得更貴，計算機變得更強大，而呼叫中心的服務卻惡化了。這就是現代經濟演進與發展的方式。
But price indices are ill equipped to cope with these changes. The bundle of goods Rothschild bought in his day might now be prohibitively expensive, even for him – the carriages, the plate – and is certainly very different from the bundle of goods Mr Gates would want to buy. The difference in consumption patterns of an average household is more dramatic still.
但物價指標不能很好地適應這些變化。羅斯柴爾德當年買的一籃子物品，放在今天可能價格高不可攀，即便對他來說也是一樣——那些馬車、金盤子——當然跟蓋茨今天想買的一籃子物品也有很大不同。普通家庭消費模式的變化更是大得驚人。
There are techniques for measuring and incorporating quality improvements, which are used for many consumer goods – but in the case of medicine, it is the amount of attention received that has increased rather than the price of treatments.
如今有一些技術可以衡量并計入質量改進因素，這些技術已使用到許多消費品上——但就醫療而言，上升的是病人得到的護理服務總量，而非治療的價格。
Overall, there are probably more upward than downward biases in the way inflation is calculated. But to claim that we know that prices have risen by 0.3 per cent in the past year implies a degree of precision in our estimates to which we cannot lay claim nor realistically aspire.
總體而言，在計算通脹率過程中，高估的傾向可能要大于低估的傾向。但是，聲稱我們知道物價在過去一年里上漲了0.3%，等于暗示我們的估算有一定精確度——其實我們不可能達到那樣的精確度，那是不切實際的妄想。
評論
打印
