透过科幻片看未来经济

Imagine a time when all undesirable work is done by automated systems or robots. What would it mean? Would there be a financial crisis? What would happen to labour and capital?

想象一下，假如有一天，自动化系统或机器人承担了所有人类不愿意做的工作。那将意味着什么？到那个时候，还会发生金融危机吗？劳动力和资本将发生怎样的变化？

These are some of the deeper questions economists are asking when not preoccupied by short-term worries about the fiscal cliff, a Chinese slowdown or the eurozone.

在为美国的财政悬崖、中国的经济减速、欧元区危机等近忧操心之余，经济学家会思考一些更深刻的问题，比如上述那些。

At the heart of their inquiry lies an assumption: that technology will improve no matter what. Ever since Gordon Moore predicted in 1965 that the number of transistors on a microchip would double every two years, it has been a hard presumption to ignore. The theory, which was dubbed Moore’s law on account of its accuracy, is still to be disproved.

这些问题的核心是一个假设，即：技术无论如何都会不断进步。戈登·摩尔(Gordon Moore)在1965年曾预言，每一个微芯片上集成的晶体管数量每两年将翻一番。自那以后，“技术无论如何都会不断进步这个假设就一直不容忽视。摩尔的预言因其准确性而被称为“摩尔定律，这一定律迄今为止仍然未被推翻。

Yet some believe it won’t be long before it – and the technological rate of progress it stands for – fails.

然而，一些人相信，用不了多长时间，摩尔定律就会失效，这一定律所代表的技术进步速度也会不复如前。

Robert Gordon of Northwestern University argues that the technological progress of the past 250 years could be a unique historical episode. He cites falling productivity levels and rising inequality as evidence that living standards are no longer improving as quickly. My colleague Martin Wolf shares some of these concerns, asking in an October column whether unlimited growth may be a thing of the past.

西北大学(Northwestern University)教授罗伯特·戈登(Robert Gordon)提出，过去250年间人类取得的技术进步可能是历史上的一段绝唱。他的理由是，生产力水平不断下降、社会不平等不断加剧，证明人类生活水平提高的速度不会再像过去那样快。我的同事马丁·沃尔夫(Martin Wolf)也有一些相同的担忧。他在今年10月的一篇专栏文章中提出过一个问题：无限的增长是否已成为过去？

A novel interpretation of this trend is starting to gain credibility among some economists: it is not that technology is stagnating but that monopoly interests are suppressing innovation. And the incentives for them to do so are increasing.

对这种趋势有一种全新的解读，并且这种解读逐渐得到一些经济学家的认同。这种观点认为：并非科技发展在停滞，而是垄断利益集团在压制创新。促使垄断利益所有者压制创新的因素也在增多。

Put a different way, companies have an interest in sabotaging progress and efficiency because not doing so could lead to the sort of abundance that might make it impossible to monetise anything. After all, how can you mark up manna that falls from heaven?

换句话说，阻挠技术进步和破坏效率对企业有利，因为不这样做就可能导致一种物质充裕的状态，这种状态可能导致任何东西都不可能赚钱。毕竟，天上掉下来的馅饼怎么标价出售呢？

As Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff noted recently: “I worry about how overweening monopolies stifle ideas, and how recent changes extending the validity of patents have exacerbated this problem.

哈佛大学(Harvard)的肯尼斯·罗格夫(Kenneth Rogoff)最近指出：“我担心过度的垄断扼杀思想，最近一些延长专利有效期的变化令这个问题更加突出。

Rising incidents of patent battles and a general corporate reluctance to reinvest cashpiles lend some support to this thesis. Take Apple. Its cashpile – now more than $120bn – has been growing at a near parabolic rate since 2008. Until March, when it bowed to shareholder pressure to pay a dividend, the joke had become that Apple shares were as good as gold. And take another of the company’s exploits this year: its aggressive pursuit of competitor Samsung through the patent courts.

专利战的例子与日俱增、企业普遍不愿意将储备的现金用作再投资，这些现象为上述理论提供了一些支撑。以苹果(Apple)为例。苹果的现金储备自2008年起一直高速增长，如今已超过1200亿美元。在今年3月苹果迫于股东压力而分红之前，坊间流传一个笑话：苹果股票堪比黄金。再看看苹果今年的另一项事迹：大张旗鼓地起诉其竞争对手三星(Samsung)专利侵权。

As economists continue to scratch their heads over the implications of such technological trends, it is interesting to note that the world of science fiction may have long anticipated almost all of them.

就在经济学家继续为技术领域的这些趋势可能产生的影响挠头之际，有一个有意思的现象值得我们注意：科幻界或许早已预想到了几乎所有这些情况。

In Star Trek, for example, Captain Kirk lives in what can be described as a “post capital economy. Money no longer has a role because technological advances such as replicators, artificial intelligence, teleportation and warp speed travel have ensured a consistent level of material abundance that has rendered currency meaningless.

例如，在《星际迷航》(Star Trek)中，柯克船长(Captain Kirk)所生活的世界可以称为“后资本经济体。在那个世界里，金钱不再有用，因为复制器、人工智能、心灵传输(teleportation)和翘曲飞行(warp speed travel)等新技术的出现，保证了人类可以维持物质极大丰富的状态，从而使货币失去了存在的意义。

The crew of the Starship Enterprise don’t “boldly go where no man has gone before because they are paid to do so. They go because they are driven by a sense of purpose and adventure.

联邦星舰进取号(Starship Enterprise)上的船员们“勇敢地驶向从没有人类到达过的地方，不是因为可以获得酬劳，而是因为受到使命感和探险精神的驱使。

Contrast Star Trek’s universe with the Manichean dystopia of Star Wars. Technology is arguably equally advanced but it seems to be accessible only to certain factions. Scarcity, crime and inequality are rife. Money and profit continue to be the primary motivating factors for most galactic citizens. A case in point: Han Solo’s financial demands for transporting Luke Skywalker to Alderaan in the first Star Wars film

比较一下《星际迷航》中所刻画的世界与《星球大战》(Star Wars)中摩尼教的“反乌托邦世界。在《星球大战》中，科技可以说同样进步，但似乎只有一小部分人能够享受科技进步的成果。在那个世界中，物质匮乏，罪案频发，社会不平等现象随处可见。大多数宇宙居民做事情主要仍然是为了获得金钱和利润。比如，在首部《星战》中，汉·索洛(Han Solo)送卢克·天行者(Luke Skywalker)去奥德朗(Alderaan)就是为了钱。

That the Sith have ended up controlling the patent rights to the ultimate technology in the galaxy, the Death Star, meanwhile, is hardly surprising when you consider their path to power. As Star Wars aficionados will tell you, gaining control of the Trade Federation, a galactic cartel that held a monopolistic grip over the galaxy’s resources and technology for the longest time, proved to be a critical stepping stone in that journey.

另一方面，考虑到西斯（Sith，《星球大战》中虚构的一个族群）获取权力经历了怎样的过程，这个族群最终控制了宇宙终极技术——死星(Death Star)的专利权并不令人意外。星战迷会告诉你，控制贸易联盟(Trade Federation)是西斯获得权力道路上的关键一步。贸易联盟是一个宇宙卡特尔，该联盟垄断宇宙各种资源和技术的时间最长。

What do these fictional worlds have to do with our reality? It may be a stretch but perhaps they once resembled earth today: a place of abundance faced with a choice. Should technology and resource rights be democratised or should they be held in ever fewer hands?

这些虚构的世界与我们的现实有何关联？尽管这样说有些牵强——不过，这些世界或许曾经与如今的地球有些相像：这个物质丰富的世界正面临一个选择。应该让技术和资源归大众所有，还是应该让这些东西的所有权越来越集中地掌握在少数人手中？

As Paul Krugman, the economist, argued, too much market power can easily end up raising average rents to capital while reducing the return on investment perceived by corporations.

保罗·克鲁格曼(Paul Krugman)曾说，过大的市场力量最终很可能提高平均资本租金，同时降低企业所理解的投资回报。

This notion resonates well with today’s crisis because it is consistent with the paradox of rapidly rising profits amid low real interest rates, stagnant real wages and persistent unemployment.

当前的危机验证了这个说法，因为在危机中我们确实遇到了看似矛盾的现象：在实际利率极低、实际工资停滞不前和失业率居高不下的情况下，利润水平迅速上升。

It also explains rising inequality. After all, when human capital is replaced by physical capital, the fruits of innovation have to flow to the owners of the technology that produced it. A new rentier class is born and the economic problem, rather than be resolved, continues.

克鲁格曼的上述说法也为社会不平等的不断加剧提供了解释。毕竟，当人力资本被物质资本所取代时，创新的成果就必须流向导致创新的相关技术的所有者。一个新的食利阶层诞生了，而上述经济问题仍然没有得到解决。

Yet, as Mr Spock might say, isn’t that ultimately illogical?

不过，斯波克（Spock，《星际迷航》中的虚构人物）可能会说，这追根究底不是不合逻辑的吗？

The writer is a reporter for FT Alphaville