金融時(shí)報(bào):經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義地基牢固

經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義地基牢固

金融危機(jī)讓經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義受到打擊，但是大廈的地基依然牢固。經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義的有其好處，也有缺陷。FT經(jīng)濟(jì)評(píng)論員塞繆爾·布里坦(Samuel Brittan)分析了它的前景和挑戰(zhàn)。

測(cè)試中可能遇到的詞匯和知識(shí)：

neoliberalism 新自由主義，是興起于上世紀(jì)70年代的一種意識(shí)形態(tài)，基于古典自由主義，主張小政府，強(qiáng)調(diào)私有制和交易自由，與"福利國(guó)家"和凱恩斯主義針?shù)h相對(duì)。

pejorative [p?'d??r?t?v] n./adj.輕蔑的，輕蔑的話(huà)

Ludwig Erhard 路德維希·艾哈德，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，聯(lián)邦德國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)部長(zhǎng)、總理，“社會(huì)市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)之父”。 malign [m?'la?n] v./adj.誹謗，污蔑

coercion [k??'???(?)n] n.強(qiáng)迫

externalities 外部性，指一個(gè)人的行為直接影響他人的福祉，卻沒(méi)有承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的義務(wù)或獲得回報(bào)。

political failure 政治失靈，政府失靈，也稱(chēng)Government failure，是一種由政府干預(yù)而引發(fā)的一系列無(wú)效率資源分配，其作用往往會(huì)惡化其市場(chǎng)失靈的結(jié)果。一般認(rèn)為人性自私和行政體制的缺陷是其原因。

A case remains for economic liberalism (814 words)

This is a good time to ask what is left of an outlook known to its enemies as neoliberalism and by at least some of its friends as just economic liberalism. One cannot be too careful in choice of wording. For neoliberalism was originally the self-chosen name for a group formed just before the second world war around the US commentator Walter Lippmann and which advocated, among other things, making greater use of market forces in economic policy. It has only more recently acquired pejorative associations.

Roughly speaking, the quarter century after 1945 was not a promising time for economic liberalism – except perhaps in West Germany where Ludwig Erhard was the guiding spirit of the so-called economic miracle. The tide turned towards economic liberalism in the last quarter of the century, symbolised by the leadership of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. The approach lingered on even after the departure of these charismatic leaders. While Tony Blair and Bill Clinton may have come from a different end of the political spectrum, they made no attempt to reverse course. The traumatic event was of course the financial crisis that broke out in 2007-08 and administered a fatal blow to economic liberalism.

Or did it? As far as normal goods and services are concerned, there is still a great deal to be said for giving a leading role to prices and profits. But for financial markets economic liberalism, at least in the form we have known it, has proved fatally flawed. The tendency of capitalist economies to boom and bust is intimately connected with that failure. As almost every government and central bank is committed to its reform, I would for the present concentrate on other aspects.

The basic case for competitive markets is, first, that they provide consumers with what they wish to have rather than with what some authority thinks would be good for them. Second, they provide some guidance on how goods and services should be produced. It would not have been sensible to build the Great Wall of China with 21st-century electronic equipment when there were millions of underemployed labourers ready to hand. Thirdly, allowing innovators to keep some of the fruits of their activities may provide some incentive to progress. In a priori theory, competitive markets do not have to be capitalist ones. There have been numerous blueprints, from market economies based on state ownership to workers’ co-operatives. But they have not really got off the ground.

An example of misunderstanding is a book that appeared this year with the strange title Masters of the Universe by Daniel Stedman Jones. It was about free-market economists, such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman and their supposedly malign influence over governments. It is very thorough, honest according to its lights, but thoroughly misleading. For the thinkers in question are not just politicians in disguise. So far as they had an overriding policy or agenda, it was to reduce the influence of coercion in human affairs. What they certainly did not wish to do was to rule the universe either directly or through their political disciples.

There are, of course, numerous examples of market failures. There are the famous “externalities”. Factories do not have to pay for the damage caused by smoking chimneys. Owners of smart front gardens receive no benefit from the enjoyment conferred on passers-by.

There is also always the temptation of successful capitalists to try to become monopolists. There are correctives using markets and prices. Examples range from the auctioning of planning permits to anti-cartel legislation. Free trade is often the most effective corrective. Above all, however, critics of market failures are offset by political failures. Governments often have neither the incentive nor the knowledge to impose effective correctives.

The biggest flaw in market liberalism is in the distribution of income and wealth. For a long time the degree of concentration fluctuated around a fairly stable rate. But in the past two or three decades it has increased markedly, making it much more difficult for supporters of capitalism to argue that a rising tide floats all boats. We could live with this situation in which the top 1 per cent of US families owned 7-8 per cent of US incomes, as in the early 1980s, but hardly when they are getting 18 per cent as they are said to do now. The respectable academic response is to try to correct the situation through the tax and social security systems. But this may be more difficult in a world struggling to achieve genuine mobility of labour where emigrants could overwhelm the redistributive apparatus.

This has not happened yet. But we need to prepare. The hard truth is that tensions can develop between free migration and other economic freedoms. But for all the looming problems, it is still untrue that the nanny state knows best.

請(qǐng)根據(jù)你所讀到的文章內(nèi)容，完成以下自測(cè)題目：

1.Who was the champion of economic liberalism in its bad times?

A. German Chancellor Ludwig Erhard.

B. US President Ronald Reagan.

C. British PM Margaret Thatcher.

D. British PM Tony Blair.

答案(1)

2.Why competitive markets are necessary?

A. Consumers need nanny state to decide what they really need.

B. Markets provide signals guiding resource allocation to produce goods and services.

C. Innovators can do well outside a market economy at least in the form we know it.

D. All of above.

答案(2)

3.What can we learn about free-market economists?

A. They deny the existence of externalities.

B. They are politicians in disguise who exert a bad influence over governments.

C. They oppose the idea that a rising tide floats all boats.

D. They do not like state ownership or planned economy.

答案(3)

4.According to the passage, what's "the biggest flaw" of economic liberalism?

A. Critics of market failures are offset by political failures.

B. The distribution of income and wealth is becoming unbearable.

C. There is always the temptation of successful capitalists to try to become monopolists.

D. Tensions can develop between free migration and other economic freedoms.

答案(4)

* * *

(1) 答案：A.German Chancellor Ludwig Erhard.

解釋?zhuān)哼@四人都踐行經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義的政策。

作者說(shuō)，1945年以后四分之一個(gè)世紀(jì)，也就是到80年代之前，經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義式微，似乎只有艾哈德一個(gè)例外。 而80年代的“里根-撒切爾革命”一直影響至今。西方學(xué)界一般認(rèn)為中國(guó)的改革開(kāi)放也是這一去管制化、私有化、自由化浪潮的一部分。 90年代的克林頓和布萊爾，雖然來(lái)自左翼黨，但是made no attempt to reverse course.

(2) 答案：B.Markets provide signals guiding resource allocation to produce goods and services.

解釋?zhuān)篈C與作者的總結(jié)剛好相反。 消費(fèi)者最有權(quán)判斷產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)如何、資源該用來(lái)生產(chǎn)什么，而創(chuàng)新者和企業(yè)家只有在能將自己才能變現(xiàn)的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)中，才有動(dòng)力進(jìn)行創(chuàng)新。

(3) 答案：D.They do not like state ownership or planned economy.

解釋?zhuān)篈BC都與事實(shí)相反。A:自由市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家并不否認(rèn)外部性，也不否認(rèn)市場(chǎng)的失靈，但是指出政府失靈可能更嚴(yán)重。

B:他們想要making greater use of market forces，也就是說(shuō)希望減少人為的、權(quán)力的干預(yù)，因此作者說(shuō)《宇宙的主宰》這本書(shū)錯(cuò)的離譜。

C:他們贊同這一觀(guān)點(diǎn)，認(rèn)為“一部分人先富起來(lái)”可以帶動(dòng)“共同富裕”。

(4) 答案：B.The distribution of income and wealth is becoming unbearable.

解釋?zhuān)?%最富的美國(guó)人擁有的收入在30年間從7%上漲到18%。不管收入更加集中是否合理，在公眾看來(lái)這多少有點(diǎn)難以接受。A提到了市場(chǎng)失靈，但是對(duì)市場(chǎng)失靈的矯正，常常帶來(lái)更糟的政府失靈。CD算是經(jīng)濟(jì)自由主義面臨的問(wèn)題和挑戰(zhàn)，但不是“最大的缺陷”。