佛利德曼:关于财富再分配

Youtube链接:Milton Friedman - Redistribution of Wealth - YouTube

一位学生向佛利德曼作出了关于财富再分配的问题,佛利德曼做以回复:

Q: Most of what I've heard you talking about has been about the distribution of income rather than about the distribution of wealth. You wouldn't argue, at least I hope you wouldn't that, the person in, let's say, India, is genetically inferior, say, to the person in America. It is rather through the purely arbitrary circumstance of birth that he's in the country with a less developed economy and or in a family that doesn't have as large a share of the capital and that's not something that he is to be blamed. Even if the free market system equitably works and everyone progresses an equal amount, that person who started out with a lesser share of the capital is still going to end up with a lesser share of the capital and there's nothing in the free market system that's going to enable him to make up for what was a purely arbitrary deficit in the first place. And given that the kind of people who become successful capitalists do not become that way by giving away their wealth voluntarily isn't it necessary to forcibly redistribute wealth before you can begin to operate under a capitalist system?
问:今天我听您讲座的大部分是关于对于收入的分配,而不是财富本身的分配。你不会说,至少我希望你不会,一个印度人在基因上劣于一个美国人。存粹是因为一个巧合他被生在一个更不发达的国家,或者被生在一个不拥有那么多资本的家庭,而这不应该是他自己的错。即使自由市场系统的运作是公平的,每个人都能获得同等大小的收获,那个从一开始就拥有更少的人在最后仍然会拥有更少,而自由市场没有任何机制能使他克服这个从一开始就是存粹巧合的劣势。鉴于成为成功资本家的人不是因为自愿捐献财富才成为资本家的,难道在使用资本主义系统之前先用暴力来强制进行财富再分配不是必须的么?

A: No, it is not. The only way in which you can redistribute effectively the wealth is by destroying the incentives to have wealth. And the question is what is the way, what is a system which will offer those people who are so unlucky as to be born without good positions, what is the system which will offer them the greatest opportunity.
答:不是的。可以有效再分配财富的唯一方法是摧毁获得财富的动机。我们应该问的问题是,怎么样才能,什么系统能让那些天生不幸的人,什么样的系统能提供给这些人最多的机会。

Q: One possible way of redistributing the wealth without affecting the incentives to earn as much income as possible is
simply to have a 100 percent inheritance tax since that won't affect the incentives it's only after the person
is dead anyway.
问:一个不摧毁获得财富动机的再分配手段是一个100%遗产税,这不会影响动机因为他只会在一个人死后生效。

A: I beg your pardon. I'm afraid I don't know the family you come from, I don't know, but as you grow up you will discover that this is really a family society and not an individual society. We tend to talk about an individualist society but it really isn't, it's a family society; and the greatest incentives of all, the incentives that have really driven people on have largely been the incentives of family creation, of family of pursuing of establishing their families on a decent system. What is the effect of 100% inheritance tax? An a hundred percent inheritance tax is to encourage people to dissipate their
wealth in high living.
答:不好意思。我恐怕不知道你的家庭,我虽然不知道但是随着你变得更年长你会发现我们的社会更像是一个家庭的社会,而不是一个个人的社会。我们倾向于吧我们的社会当作一个个人的社会,但是实际上它不是,这是个家庭的社会,而强大的动机,真正驱使人们的动机很大程度上都是对家庭的创造,是各个家庭为了使自己的家庭过得更好。一个100%遗产税的影响会是什么?一个100%遗产税会鼓励人们在死前以奢侈的生活消散他们的财富。

Q: And the harm in that?
问:这有什么害处?

A: The harm in that is, where do you get the factories, where do you get the machines, where do you get the capital investment, where do you get the incentive to improve technology if what you're doing is to establish a society in which the incentive is for people who, if they have by accident, accumulate some wealth to waste it in frivolous entertainment? 
you know the thing is, the thing that is amazing that people don't really recognize is the extent to which the market system has in fact encouraged people and enabled people to work hard and sacrifice in what I must confess I often regard as an irrational way for the benefit of their children. one of the most curious things to me in observation is that almost all people value the utility which their children will get from consumption higher than they value their own. Here are parents who have every reason to expect that their children will have a higher income than they ever had and they scrimp and save in order to be able to leave something for their children. I think you are sort of like a bull in a china shop if you talk about the 100% inheritance tax having no incentive effects, it would destroy a continuing society, it would destroy a society.
答:害处是,你从哪得到工厂,你从哪里得到机械,你从哪里得到投资,你从哪里得到改进科技的动力,如果在你的社会中,如果一个人即使只是因为巧合获得了一些财富,他的动机是把它浪费在轻浮的娱乐中?一个很让我感到好奇的观察是几乎所有人都视他们的孩子所消费的效用要高于他们自己消费的效用。这里有一群父母,他们有所有理由去认为自己的孩子会有一个比自己更高的收入,然而他们仍然节省并存蓄,为了更自己的孩子留下一些东西。我觉得你像陶瓷店里的一斗公牛一样如果你认为一个100%遗产税没有对动机的印象,它会摧毁一个持续的社会,它会摧毁一个社会。


ps:
1. 通货膨胀也会影响这种家庭创造的动机,因为存下来的钱贬值。
2. 美国自1960年之后家庭单位的摧毁可能不止有社会影响,而且还可能在一定程度上本质上改变了很大一部分美国人的经济行为。而我认为缺乏一定储蓄,只注重最大化消费力的经济体是不健康的。
3. 个人感到很有趣的一个paradox,左派有时抱怨资本家有太多财富,应该通过征税再分配财富;有时又抱怨单个资本家的财富不足以进行大规模投资,所以需要通过征税让政府来投资;所以到底是太多还是太少?我看都不是,只是想征税罢了。另外一个是平常抱怨资本家存蓄太多,太顾将来,使得短期的消费力不足;经济危机时又抱怨,都是因为资本家们平时太贪婪,只是看重短期利益,所以发生危机时没有资本来即时应对、稳定市场。所以到底是哪一个?
9
分享 2021-05-01

0 个评论

要发言请先登录注册

要发言请先登录注册

发起人

在下自由意志主义者,无政府资本主义者,奥地利经济学派;点踩传送:https://pincong.rocks/article/27804

状态

  • 最新活动: 2021-05-01
  • 浏览: 2065