来源：英文联播
Could it happen again？ | 还会发生吗？
To Hyman Minsky， a 20th-century economist as wise as he was overlooked， the answer was obvious： It could， and it would。 According to Minsky’s “financial instability hypothesis，” financial systems — and the free-market economies that rest on them — are by their nature unstable， tending toward what he called “Ponzi finance。”
海曼·明斯基是20世纪一位明智却被人忽视的经济学家，对他而言，答案显而易见：会发生，且将要发生。根据明斯基的“金融不稳定假设”，金融体系以及建立在其上的自由市场经济，究其本质而言是不稳定的，倾向于走向他所说的“庞氏金融”。
In boom times， companies take on too much debt， which gets them into trouble when profits fall， as they inevitably do， forcing them to sell assets to pay interest on those debts， causing asset prices to fall and triggering even more forced selling and market panic。
繁荣时期，公司过度举债，利润下滑时就遇到麻烦，这是不可避免的，于是他们被迫出售资产，偿还债务利息，这导致资产价格下降，并引发更多人被迫出清，导致市场恐慌。
Although Minsky’s theory found little resonance during the benign markets of the 1950s and ’60s， it seemed to perfectly describe the 2008 financial meltdown， whose anniversary we mark this month。 With corporate credit at an ominous all-time high and the stock market enjoying a record-breaking bull run， it’s a fair guess the United States is on the verge of another “Minsky moment。”
尽管明斯基的理论在五六十年代的良性市场中没有引发什么反响，但它却精准地描述了2008年金融危机。本月是金融危机10周年，如今公司信贷达到可怕的新高，股市持续了创纪录的牛市，美国又处在另一次“明斯基时刻”的边缘，这么想是正常的。
“Being a bank doesn‘t mean you can do everything。 If we stop learning， the game is over。”
“作为银行，并不意味着你可以为所欲为。如果我们停止学习，游戏就结束了。”
That’s not to say that steps taken by Congress， regulators or bankers themselves to prevent a replay of 2008 were in vain。 Banks are better capitalized and less vulnerable to a sudden loss of short-term funding， while some of their more speculative activities have been eliminated or curbed。 Consumer protections were strengthened， at least until the Trump crowd took over。
不是说国会、监管者或银行从业者自身，避免2008年重演的努力就白费了，毕竟银行资本充足率更高，对短期融资突然损失的耐受力更强，一些更具投机性的行为被取缔或遏制，而且消费者保护得到加强，至少特朗普这一伙儿上台之前是这样的。
At a more fundamental level， however， the financial system and American economy remain uniquely vulnerable to booms and busts because Americans have chosen a kind of capitalism that invites them， based largely on a set of flawed ideas embraced in the 1980s that persist to this day。
然而在更基本的层面，金融体系和美国经济仍然独一无二地受制于经济荣枯循环，因为美国人选择了那种资本主义，自八十年代至今以来，基本构建在一些错误的观念之上。
Too big， rich and powerful | 太大、太富、太强
The first of those flawed ideas is that “greed is good” — that the unbridled pursuit of wealth and commercial success by every worker， investor， consumer and firm is necessary to the success of a market economy。
这些错误观念首当其冲的是“贪婪是好的”，认为每一个工作者、投资者、消费者和公司都毫无约束地追逐财富和商业成功，这对市场经济的成功而言是必要的。
According to this morally vacuous logic， it is the lust for money and success that incentivizes hard work， innovation and risk-taking.Or as the fictional corporate raider Gordon Gekko famously put it in Oliver Stone’s movie “Wall Street，” “Greed is right。 Greed works。 Greed cuts through， clarifies and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit 。 。 。 [and] has marked the upward surge of mankind。”
根据这个道德空洞的逻辑，对钱和成功的欲望激励努力工作、创新和承担风险。或许正如虚构的公司掠夺者戈登·盖科在奥利弗·斯通导演的电影《华尔街》中著名的说法：贪婪是对的，贪婪奏效。贪婪行得通，明确了并抓住了进化精神的本质……标志着人类的上扬。
It is this veneration and celebration of unrestrained selfishness that is at the core of just about everything that people now find repugnant about American capitalism， starting with the misguided nostrum that companies must be run solely for the benefit of shareholders。
尊崇并推行这种没有节制的自私成为万事的核心，正是这一点让人们对美国资本主义感到反感，它开始于错误的药方，即公司必须完全为股东利益而运行。
Over the years， “maximizing shareholder value” has provided justification for the shabby treatment of loyal workers and consumers， the obscene compensation of corporate executives and fund managers， the thuggish demands of “activist investors” and the abusive and manipulative strategies of trading desks and hedge funds。
多年来，“让股东价值最大化”为工人和消费者走下坡路提供了理由，为公司高管和基金管理人大发横财提供了理由，为“激进投资者”的暴徒式的需求提供了理由，为交易柜台和对冲基金滥用操盘战略提供了理由。
It has been used to rationalize the incredible lengths that companies will go — including renouncing of U.S。 citizenship — to avoid paying their fair share of the taxes that are used to educate their workers， fund their basic research， protect their property and build the infrastructure that gets their goods to markets。 In recent years， it has been used to justify an orgy of debt- and tax-cut-financed stock buybacks that have inflated stock prices and discouraged business investment。
这一口号为公司无所不用其极地逃避纳税提供了理由，他们甚至不惜放弃美国公民身份，而这些税收本来要用于为工人提供教育、资助基础研究、保护产权，并建造基础设施从而把他们的产品推向市场。近年来，这一口号还用来为债务狂欢和减税资助下的股票回购正名，后者推高股价却抑制了商业投资。
It is no coincidence that these norms of business behavior have taken hold at the same time that the boom-and-bust cycle has reasserted itself in financial markets and in the economy， beginning with the S&L crisis of the 1980s and continuing through the Asian financial crisis of the 1990s， the tech and telecom bust of the early 2000s and the 2008 debacle。
正是这些商业行为准则树立起来时，荣枯循环在金融市场和经济体中才显著起来，它开始于八十年代的储贷危机，到九十年代的亚洲金融危机，再到二十一世纪初的技术和电信泡沫破灭以及2008年的大崩溃，这一切并非巧合。
They have resulted in a financial sector that has become too big， too rich and too powerful， one that distorts the behavior of businesses and investors and captures an excessive share of the national income。
这些准则让金融部门变得太大、太富、太强，扭曲了商业和投资者行为，过度占有了国民收入份额。
No longer content to efficiently allocate capital to the real economy， Wall Street has become the tail that wags the economic dog。 Until it is cut back in size and put back in its place， the frequency and severity of financial crises will remain higher than they need to be。
华尔街尾大不掉，喧宾夺主，不再满足于将资本有效分配到实体经济中去。除非削减其规模，让它们各归其所，金融危机的频率和严重性一直会很居高不下。
The ‘shadow’ banking system | 影子银行体系
The second flawed idea that animates American capitalism is that free markets are efficient and self-correcting。 We can agree that markets are the best way to set prices， allocate scarce resources and spur the technological innovation that raises productivity and living standards。
激励美国资本主义的第二个问题观念是，认为自由市场有效且可以自动纠错。我们同意市场是发现价格、分配稀缺资源和激发技术创新从而提高生产效率和生活水平的最好方式。
But it is quite another thing to assert， as free market fundamentalists do， that asset bubbles don’t exist or that markets can be relied on to punish firms that try to defraud customers or abuse workers， or that the $800 million earned last year by the Blackstone Group’s Steve Schwarzman was an objective measure of his economic contribution。 Those who experience American capitalism on a daily basis know that this is nonsense。
但自由市场原教旨主义认为根本不存在泡沫，可以依靠市场来惩罚那些欺骗消费者或虐待工人的公司，或去年黑石集团的史蒂夫·施瓦茨曼赚8亿美元是他经济贡献的客观评价，这就是另外一回事了。那些每天都和美国资本主义打交道的人明白，这完全是胡说八道。
Yet it is on the basis of such nonsense that we have hamstrung antitrust enforcement and allowed a handful of giant companies to dominate industry after industry， squeezing workers， customers and suppliers and buying up any upstarts that might jeopardize their dominance。
可正是基于这些胡说八道，我们叫停了反垄断执法，允许几个大公司一个个地垄断行业，压榨工人、消费者和供货商，买下任何可能威胁他们垄断地位的新公司。
It is on the basis of such nonsense that the business community has waged a decades-long crusade against every new regulation designed to protect society from its predations， mounting endless legal challenges， lavishing campaign cash on legislators who promise to nullify them and installing industry officials to top regulatory positions。
正是基于这些胡说八道，企业界对所有旨在保护社会不被掠夺的新法规开启一场长达数十年的战争，发起数不清的法律挑战，大笔花钱赞助议员竞选，让后者承诺取缔监管，将行业内部官员安插到监管机构高位上。
And it is on the basis of such nonsense that Congress and regulators have allowed the growth of an unregulated “shadow” banking system， with its opaque markets in asset-backed securities， collateralized debt obligations， credit derivatives and synthetic default swaps， that is now so much bigger and more economically significant than the old-fashioned banking system。
正是基于这种胡说八道，国会和监管者允许“影子”银行系统不受管制地增长，拓展资产担保证券、债务抵押债券、信用衍生品和合成违约掉期等不透明的市场，现在这些市场比传统的银行体系更大，经济上更加重要。
This shadow banking system has undermined the effectiveness of bank regulation， eroded lending standards， increased leverage in the economy and turbocharged market volatility。 Even those who wrote and implemented the reforms following the 2008 financial crisis worry aloud that their efforts have done little to reduce the risks it still poses to the economy and the global financial system。
这种影子银行体系危害了银行监管的有效性，破坏了放贷标准，给经济加杠杆，让市场极端不稳定。2008年金融危机后，连制定并推行改革的人都很担忧，他们的努力对降低经济体和全球金融体系中的风险作用不大。
More is not always better | 更多不总是更好
The third flawed idea is that a high level of inequality of wealth and income is necessary for economic growth and prosperity。
第三个问题观念认为财富和收入的高度不平等有利于经济增长和繁荣。
We all know the shortcomings of overly egalitarian economics。 Communism failed in Russia， and China， Europe and India have retreated from socialism， and the kibbutzim are no longer a significant factor in an otherwise booming Israeli economy。 Here at home， some of the most thriving companies and industries are those that offer significant rewards to hard work and innovation。
我们都知道过度平均主义的缺点。共产主义在俄罗斯失败了，欧洲和印度也不奉行社会主义了，基布兹不再是本来可以繁荣的以色列经济的重要成分。在美国，最成功的公司和行业，其中一些大力奖掖辛勤工作和创新。
But if some inequality is necessary， more is not always better。 There is a point at which the distribution of rewards becomes so unequal that it discourages individual hard work and innovation and undermines the trust and cooperation needed to grease the increasingly complex machinery of capitalism and the increasingly contentious machinery of democracy。
可要说某种程度上的不平等是必要的，过于不平等就过分了。总有一个限度，当奖励分配变得过于不平等，就会挫伤个人积极工作和创新的动力，危害信用与合作，资本主义日益复杂的机制和民主社会日益富有争议的机制需要信用与合作加以润滑。
Economists have a name for this trust and cooperation — it’s called social capital — and for advanced economies like ours， it turns out to be as important as the better-known forms of human， physical and financial capital。 Social capital gives us the confidence to take risks， make long-term investments and accept the inevitable dislocations caused by the gales of creative destruction。
经济学家对这种信用与合作有一个说法，它们被称为社会资本，对于我们这些发达经济体而言，这同人力、物力和财力等形式的资本同样重要。社会资本让我们有信心承担风险，进行长期投资并接受破坏性创新不可避免导致的紊乱。
Social capital provides the support not only for formal institutions of business and government but also the unwritten rules and norms of behavior that foster cooperation and compromise — between management and labor， between buyers and sellers， between business and government and among people of different races， creeds， classes and political beliefs。 Societies with more social capital are happier， healthier and wealthier。
社会资本不仅为有形的企业和政府提供支持，还为促进合作和妥协的潜规则和行为规范提供支持：资方和劳方之间、买家与卖家之间、企业与政府之间以及不同种族、信仰、阶层和政治信念之间。拥有更多社会资本的社会会更加幸福、健康和富有。
Decades of high and rising inequality have depleted our stock of social capital。 The signs are everywhere — in declining levels of employee engagement and in the way we segregate ourselves in like-minded communities， residentially and virtually， and in the appalling lack of civility on the Internet。 We see it in a politics that is increasingly polarized， partisan and paranoid， and in a government where consensus is elusive and compromise is equated with treason。
几十年来巨大并且不断拉开的不平等耗尽了社会资本储备。证据随处可见，雇员参与水平下降，我们有形无形地把自己隔离在思维一致的小圈子里，互联网上完全没有文明可言。日益极端化的政治、党派对立和偏执妄想、政府里难寻共识，妥协就等于背叛，这些都是其表现。
What does any of this have to do with financial crises？ More than you might think。
这些和金融危机有什么关系呢？比你想象的要多。
For there is evidence that as the national income has been concentrated at the top， middle- and working-class households have had to borrow more and more just to maintain their standard of living， while upper-income households find themselves with more and more savings with which to lend and invest。 The result has been a series of credit bubbles that， when they burst， leave the poor and middle class even further behind。
有证据显示，国民收入都集中在少数人手里，中产和工人阶级家庭不得不借越来越多的钱来维持生活水平，高收入家庭有越来越多的储蓄可供借贷和投资。结果造成了一系列信贷泡沫，泡沫破裂时，穷人和中产阶级就更赶不上了。
As a society， we are caught in a self-reinforcing dynamic in which rising inequality， economic insecurity， the erosion of social capital and political dysfunction are all feeding off one another， with more of one leading to more of the others。
作为一个社会，我们面临一种自我强化的循环——不平等上升、经济不安全、社会资本缩水、政治失序：它们相互促进，相互强化。
This vicious cycle was not inevitable。 Because of the laws and regulations we adopted and the business norms that we embraced， Americans have created a kind of capitalism that encourages the ruthless pursuit of self-interest， that over-relies on market competition to restrain anti-social behavior， that creates an oversize and overcompensated financial sector and generates world-beating levels of economic inequality.Because of these characteristics， it is also a kind of capitalism that tends more toward booms and bust。
这种恶性循环不可避免，正是因为我们通过的法规以及我们主张的商业规范，美国人才创造出一种鼓励自私自利的资本主义，过度依赖于市场竞争来限制反社会行为，创造处一个尾大不掉、过度受益的金融部门，导致了世界级的经济不平等。因为这些特征，这中资本主义倾向于导致荣枯循环。
Free market fundamentalists tell us that we should tolerate less economic stability and security because our kind of capitalism generates more innovation and higher productivity， and thus a higher standard of living。
自由市场原教旨主义者告诉我们，我们应该容忍经济不太稳定、不太安全，因为我们的资本主义可以促发更多创新和更高的生产力，因此提高了生活水准。
That may have been true in the early 1980s， when the competitiveness of the American economy was in jeopardy。 But there is now compelling evidence that American capitalism has evolved to the point that we no longer face a trade-off between economic fairness and stability on the one hand and economic growth on the other — that a bit more fairness and stability would actually result in higher growth and make the average American happier， healthier and richer。
这在八十年代初可能还说得通，当时美国经济的竞争力受到威胁。可现在有充分证据显示，美国资本主义已经发展到我们无需在经济公平稳定和经济增长之间做出妥协的地步。多一点公平和稳定事实上会促进增长，让普通美国人更加幸福、更加健康、更加富有。
As long as humans are motivated by fear and greed， market economies will have booms and bust — that was Minsky’s insight。 The question for us is how frequent and how severe these booms and busts will be。 Since 2008， we have done some small things to reduce the risks of a crisis like the last one。 But in continuing to embrace our more ruthless， unregulated and unfair model of capitalism， we have left most of the big things unchanged。
只要人们受恐惧和贪婪的驱使，市场经济就会有荣有枯，这是明斯基的洞见。我们的问题是这些荣枯循环发生的频率如何，严重程度如何。2008年以来，我们做了一点点事，降低了导致上一场危机的那些风险。但既然我们继续主张那种残酷的、不受管制的、不公平的资本主义模式，基本上什么都没有发生改变。
Pearlstein， a Post business and economics columnist， won the Pulitzer Prize for columns in 2007 anticipating and explaining the ensuing financial crisis。 He is also Robinson Professor of Public Affairs at George Mason University。 This essay is drawn from his new book， “Can American Capitalism Survive？，” which will be published later this month by St。 Martin’s Press。
本文作者系新浪国际旗下“地球日报”自媒体联盟成员，授权稿件，转载需获原作者许可。文章言论不代表新浪观点。
