我们每年纪念美国独立日。对于移民来说，如果仅仅把这个日子用来休息、烤肉、看焰火，那就浪费了一个大好的认识美国的机会。如果一个移民不了解美国，特别是对于那个33岁的弗吉尼亚人在1776年宾夕法尼亚州费城的那个酷热的夏天，在Market街和第7街交界处的那个小客栈楼上，在没有任何参考书的情况下，写下来的美国纲领没有充分认识的话，那我们在美国的成功 ––– 无论是作为个人，还是作为一个群体 ––– 就会受到障碍。
当年英国政府一方面对美国人征税，另一方面不为美国人在英国下院安排席位，导致美国人强烈不满。双方僵持不下，结果终于导致决裂，1776年7月4日，十三个殖民地的代表一一在这个“掉头的营生”（第二任总统亚当斯语）上签字。杰弗逊起草的《独立宣言》宣布：“我们认为下列事实无需证明：人生来平等；造物者赋予了他们若干不可剥夺的权利，其中包括生命、自由、和对幸福的追求；为了保护上述权利，人民组成政府，并赋予其权力；如果任何政府形式破坏这些目的时，人民就有权将其改变或废除，进而建立新政府，并以这些原则为基础，安排政府权力的形式，使他们觉得最能够保障他们的安全和幸福。”
有了纲领还要实现，在麦迪逊（第四任总统）的领导下，1787年完成立宪。当时出使法国的杰弗逊回国后，觉得宪法需要明确列出老百姓的权利。他说服麦迪逊领导修宪。结果就是宪法第一到第十修正案，亦称权利法案。麦迪逊同时提出的一个有关国会议员薪水的议案于1992年批准后成为宪法第27修正案，另一个有关众议院人数的议案目前已无意义，但议案本身仍处于悬而未决的状态。）
记得有一次，我在回中国的飞机上给南京大学的一个教授解释美国立国时的一些文件，听后他感慨地说：“美国人其实是很革命的嘛。”所以，美国人把独立战争称之为革命战争，一点也不过分。因为国父们对政府极端不信任，所以美国政府的权力一直比较小。当第40任总统Ronald Reagan 1989年届满离任时，就对记者说过：“我愿意大家把我记忆成那个还政于民的总统。” 美国人从去年的陶醉于奥巴马，到今天的对奥巴马的不满，显示美国人对政府仍然高度不信任。
美国是一个人民的国家。这一点，从美国国歌里可以看得很清楚。国歌里把美国叫做“自由人的国土，勇敢者的家乡。” 仔细想一想，这两者之间实际上是有因果关系的，因为在自由人的国土上，不勇敢人生就不会有光芒。从1963年以来，在美国被动投资（即投资者不参与经营）的中间回报率，总是在9%上下。对于回报高的投资，分析一下，就会发现投资者所冒的风险高于基准线。
勇敢，就意味着敢于冒险。用居里先生（居里夫人的丈夫）的话说，就是敢做个梦，然后用具体行动将其实现。国庆期间，允许我向勇敢的人民，特别是移民致以敬意。
Monday, June 28, 2010
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
为什么美国政府赤字还没有触发通货膨胀？
WHY HASN’T THE FEDERAL SPENDING TRIGGER INFLATION?
According to the economic theories, when the government expands the spending, hot money will flood the Main Street, triggering more money chasing after relatively fewer products and services. The result was inflation. Now, the Obama government is waging unprecedented spending. The national debt has topped $13 trillion, which is 90.3% of GDP and $117,975 per taxpayer. However, there is no inflation. Why?
This is an interesting question, posted to me by a client. The answer is of critical importance to everyone as inflation impacts everything. For instance, if one can accurately predict the inflation, he could buy real-estate prior to its hitting, as inflation will become the most effective discount of the price that he pays. That is why inflation is known as borrowers stealing from savers, a bias that hurts the economy.
There are two ways that Obama gets the money to spend. First, he can borrow money from the market, i.e., bank, the Chinese government, private investors, etc., by issuing debt. Second, when nobody wants to lend to Obama, he can essentially print more money and keep on spending. The cost of first type of deficit spending is strangling private enterprises (because private enterprises will always lose in the competition as the government can always bit up the interest rate until it wins). The cost of the second type of deficit spending is inflation. Incidentally, the foreign entity’s purchase of the U.S. debt also has the inflationary effect.
Now, the heavy government borrowing coincides with the enormous tightening of the lending by the financial institutions after a financial crisis as they face an unpredictable financial reform bill. In other words, for now, the government spending is compensated by the financial institute’s tightening to the private enterprises, especially small business. The net effect is that, instead of the small business uses the money to create jobs, the government is using the same money to support its spending. The difference on Main Street is that people, when living on government benefit, are losing the skills that they have been relied upon to earn a good living. Obama’s bet is to build up people’s reliance on government welfare so he and the Democratic Party would build a stronger voting basis by creating a stratum of poor people.
A few weeks ago, Fed reported that the credit card lending standard continue to tighten after so many years. That makes the 11th quarter of continuous tightening. Over the past three months, 29% of banks reduced credit card limits, 27% raised interest rates, and 12% raised the minimum credit scores required for a credit card. Many truly small companies, such as small construction companies, heavily rely on their credit cards, typically with credit limit of $20,000, to run their business. They buy their materials on the credit cards and pay their workers and credit card company when they are paid. Now, people with that business model must figure out another way of doing business. Driving them out of market will force people to hire bigger, more unionized and more expensive companies. That is precisely another objective of Obama.
That is part of the reason that the current recovery is so much weaker than the normal recovery in history. Business, seeing opportunities, cannot undertake those opportunities because the finance is not there.
Let’s come back to the topic of deficit. The current government spending is unsustainable. The U.S. government debt as a percentage of GDP increased phenomenally under Obama. The administration’s hands will be forced to increase the middle class tax (because “soaking the rich” would not actually increase the government revenue). Since direct increase of income tax to the middle class is politically impossible. Some form of hidden tax, such as VAT (value-added tax, which is buried in the price of all products), is inevitable. The net effect of that is to take the money away from the middle class and pay for government bureaucracy, an undertaking that is not far better from simply borrow the money from the market.
Government is a monster. Once it gets money, it will build up vested interests, which will use the government, i.e., tax-payers, money to protect its interests. It is next to impossible for the unorganized “people” to defeat the concentrated and determined vested interests. That is the reason that the most basic educational reform is so difficult. That is also the reason that Fanny and Freddie become such monsters and still gobbling billions of dollars of the taxpayer’s money each month with no end in sight, as they pour some of those billions back to politicians to force their hands.
The critical moment is the people’s ability to vote in a government that will limit the spending and allow the banks to lend to individuals and businesses, rather than competing against the small business for the same money. There are enough laws on the book, e.g., the anti-monopoly law and the insurance law, for the government to break up the too-big-to-fail institutes, even when such too-big-to-fail is produced by CDS, conducted by AIG. Now, politicians are using the people’s frustration to build into the law, more ways for them to get the political donations from vested interests.
Before the high inflation hits an economy, typically there is a period of stagnation, where the investors’ confidence is low and the money is tight. With tight money, there would be no inflation. However, the mechanism of that is like a dam. Once the water burst out, nothing can stop it. That is the problem today. Greenspan used to make his influence behind the close doors to stop things from getting out of hand. Since Bernake took over, we have seen all kinds of problems in the financial system. All of them can be stopped by some phone calls.
The current path is obviously sustainable (just like a few years ago when the banks trying to loan money out regardless of the borrowers’ ability to pay, while few people seems to ask questions). If the government, including the White House, Congress, and the Federal Reserve, cannot make the change early next year, Greece today would be our tomorrow.
The breakout “moment” depends the moment that the water breaks out of the dam. That is always an impossible event to predict. However, the fact that breakout is going to take place, if we continue this path, is inevitable.
According to the economic theories, when the government expands the spending, hot money will flood the Main Street, triggering more money chasing after relatively fewer products and services. The result was inflation. Now, the Obama government is waging unprecedented spending. The national debt has topped $13 trillion, which is 90.3% of GDP and $117,975 per taxpayer. However, there is no inflation. Why?
This is an interesting question, posted to me by a client. The answer is of critical importance to everyone as inflation impacts everything. For instance, if one can accurately predict the inflation, he could buy real-estate prior to its hitting, as inflation will become the most effective discount of the price that he pays. That is why inflation is known as borrowers stealing from savers, a bias that hurts the economy.
There are two ways that Obama gets the money to spend. First, he can borrow money from the market, i.e., bank, the Chinese government, private investors, etc., by issuing debt. Second, when nobody wants to lend to Obama, he can essentially print more money and keep on spending. The cost of first type of deficit spending is strangling private enterprises (because private enterprises will always lose in the competition as the government can always bit up the interest rate until it wins). The cost of the second type of deficit spending is inflation. Incidentally, the foreign entity’s purchase of the U.S. debt also has the inflationary effect.
Now, the heavy government borrowing coincides with the enormous tightening of the lending by the financial institutions after a financial crisis as they face an unpredictable financial reform bill. In other words, for now, the government spending is compensated by the financial institute’s tightening to the private enterprises, especially small business. The net effect is that, instead of the small business uses the money to create jobs, the government is using the same money to support its spending. The difference on Main Street is that people, when living on government benefit, are losing the skills that they have been relied upon to earn a good living. Obama’s bet is to build up people’s reliance on government welfare so he and the Democratic Party would build a stronger voting basis by creating a stratum of poor people.
A few weeks ago, Fed reported that the credit card lending standard continue to tighten after so many years. That makes the 11th quarter of continuous tightening. Over the past three months, 29% of banks reduced credit card limits, 27% raised interest rates, and 12% raised the minimum credit scores required for a credit card. Many truly small companies, such as small construction companies, heavily rely on their credit cards, typically with credit limit of $20,000, to run their business. They buy their materials on the credit cards and pay their workers and credit card company when they are paid. Now, people with that business model must figure out another way of doing business. Driving them out of market will force people to hire bigger, more unionized and more expensive companies. That is precisely another objective of Obama.
That is part of the reason that the current recovery is so much weaker than the normal recovery in history. Business, seeing opportunities, cannot undertake those opportunities because the finance is not there.
Let’s come back to the topic of deficit. The current government spending is unsustainable. The U.S. government debt as a percentage of GDP increased phenomenally under Obama. The administration’s hands will be forced to increase the middle class tax (because “soaking the rich” would not actually increase the government revenue). Since direct increase of income tax to the middle class is politically impossible. Some form of hidden tax, such as VAT (value-added tax, which is buried in the price of all products), is inevitable. The net effect of that is to take the money away from the middle class and pay for government bureaucracy, an undertaking that is not far better from simply borrow the money from the market.
Government is a monster. Once it gets money, it will build up vested interests, which will use the government, i.e., tax-payers, money to protect its interests. It is next to impossible for the unorganized “people” to defeat the concentrated and determined vested interests. That is the reason that the most basic educational reform is so difficult. That is also the reason that Fanny and Freddie become such monsters and still gobbling billions of dollars of the taxpayer’s money each month with no end in sight, as they pour some of those billions back to politicians to force their hands.
The critical moment is the people’s ability to vote in a government that will limit the spending and allow the banks to lend to individuals and businesses, rather than competing against the small business for the same money. There are enough laws on the book, e.g., the anti-monopoly law and the insurance law, for the government to break up the too-big-to-fail institutes, even when such too-big-to-fail is produced by CDS, conducted by AIG. Now, politicians are using the people’s frustration to build into the law, more ways for them to get the political donations from vested interests.
Before the high inflation hits an economy, typically there is a period of stagnation, where the investors’ confidence is low and the money is tight. With tight money, there would be no inflation. However, the mechanism of that is like a dam. Once the water burst out, nothing can stop it. That is the problem today. Greenspan used to make his influence behind the close doors to stop things from getting out of hand. Since Bernake took over, we have seen all kinds of problems in the financial system. All of them can be stopped by some phone calls.
The current path is obviously sustainable (just like a few years ago when the banks trying to loan money out regardless of the borrowers’ ability to pay, while few people seems to ask questions). If the government, including the White House, Congress, and the Federal Reserve, cannot make the change early next year, Greece today would be our tomorrow.
The breakout “moment” depends the moment that the water breaks out of the dam. That is always an impossible event to predict. However, the fact that breakout is going to take place, if we continue this path, is inevitable.
Monday, June 14, 2010
突然想起批评和自我批评
在毛年代，党和国家最喜欢搞的莫过“批评与自我批评”。“批评与自我批评”是洗脑的一部分。当年，大小单位每个星期都要花一天的时间进行“政治学习”，包括学习政策，和讲个人自己的体会。这个体会，不是真的体会。例如，毛号召批林批孔（更准确地说，这是江青借毛等几句牢骚华搞起来的，矛头对向周恩来的一场群众运动），你觉得孔的思想没有什么问题，那在“政治学习”的时候，你是千万不能说出来的，因为一说出来，那就是反党，反毛，反“革命”。按照法律，这个当局从来没有定义清楚的反革命罪是可以判死刑的。换句话说，每周一次，在宣讲党的政策（多半是读政府文件和报纸）之后，大家就要开始联系自己的具体情况，讲讲党的这个方针，如何正确，如何解决了本单位的所有问题。
至于那些胆敢唱反调，与党叫板的人来说，毛所用的，就是这个被称之为“批评与自我批评”的武器。对于毛或者党的干部来说，“批评”是对毛或者党的干部说的，也就是说毛或者党的干部可以批评你。“自我批评”是指的是哪些唱反调的人。他们自然只能“自我批评”，也就是说你们只能批评自己。不能批评毛或者党的干部。
我不是历史学家，不知道毛是从怎么想出这个阴着来的。可能和天主教的忏悔有点关系吧。对于天主教徒来说，人人都是罪人（大家都要以“老子反动儿混蛋”的原则承担原罪）。罪恶的念头，都要通过向牧师忏悔而得到上帝的宽恕（这种手续，自然也是牧师得以挣饭饭吃的手段）。
我到了美国，才发觉，真正的自我批评不是忏悔形式的。对于最喜欢自我批评的美国人来说，他们的自我批评都是直着嗓子说出来的，绝没有忏悔的意味。
例如，最近George Mason大学的Daniel Klein教授和Zogby的Zelika Buturovic搞了一个调查，这个调查问了8个非敏感的基本经济学问题，调查答错的题目数量，而不是答对的数量（换句话说，如果回答模棱两可，就算不错）。结果让人跌破眼镜：保守派答错20%以下，左派答错60%以上。联想到当今奥巴马极左主义统治，他的极左根源，自然都是一些极左派，其中包括很多年轻人。而奥巴马政治的两个支柱之一，就是在美国搞社会主义（另一个支柱是把奥巴马日益搞得灰头土脸的全球道歉外交）。闹来闹去，奥巴马社会主义的政治基础，是那些被奥巴马蛊惑的经济学白痴。
这也就是民主的一个问题。当少数人明白一件事情的时候，一个民主制度很可能将权力交给一个会蛊惑广大不了解情况的老百姓的人。这样，民主国家很可能会采取很荒唐的政策。也就是说，Klein证明奥巴马的这场试图将美国变成欧洲的革命，实际上是以美国愤青为基础的革命。
回过头来讲批评和自我批评，像Klein这样的理直气壮的批评，才是真正的自我批评。毛时代的人所做的所谓自我批评，实际上都是违心的。而且后来的事实证明，那些人违心的“自我批评”针对的思想，最后都证明是对的。美国现在自然是在走弯路。但是，弯路才刚刚走了两年，批评的声浪，就已经一浪高过一浪。就一个民族来说，像Klein所做的调查，就是最好的自我批评。这样的自我批评，才会使美国人开始思考，开始改变。换句话说，那些支持奥巴马的人就可能会想，是不是中了奥巴马言论的圈套了。这就是社会进步的条件，也就是说：教育大众无罪（即便是以反政府为目的的）。
三十年改革开放，不大张旗鼓地抓右派了，但是右派真的还没有摘帽的，也就是屈指可数的三四个人。据说留几个人不摘帽的原因是这样右派就是一个扩大化的问题，凡有本身没有错（告诉那些已经忘却了本朝历史的人们一个史实：反右总指挥是邓）。但是在新的时期，胡耀邦和赵紫阳就是新的右派。他们对中国的改革开放，实际上起到了奠基的作用。在他们政治生涯的后期，他们觉得应该开放言论（虽然其尺度非常保守），受到邓和保守派的反对。最终导致六四。最后，这样两个重要的名字，在中学生课文里是不出现的。
大家都说最近中国强大了，但是我没有看到有哪个正经国家，真正地和中国站在一边。中国扮演的，经常是反面角色。例如，各国想制裁伊朗（一个宗教激进政府试图开发核武器），最大的障碍是中国。也就是说，在国际上中国的确很有影响力，但是大家有没有想想是什么影响？而且，中国的经济影响靠的是廉价劳工。最近的一个美国调查发现，美国的生意几乎都有知识产权部分（也就是说美国没多少企业是纯粹靠价格竞争取胜的）。廉价劳工的问题就是剥削，一方面是进口国货方（如美国）对廉价劳动力的剥削，另一方面是中国人对这些廉价劳工的剥削。中国常有“汉奸”、“洋奴”、“狗腿子”这类词汇（这类词是没有英文对应的），这些词反映的，就是中国人对那些帮助洋人剥削中国廉价劳动力的那些人的憎恨情绪。
目前，新一代的廉价劳动力，对这件事情开始反思，搞得当局心惊肉跳。问题是，涨工资不是解决这个问题的办法，解决这个问题的办法是从依靠廉价劳动力这个模式中走出来。我是专利律师，时时会遇到中国专利问题。中国的专利，常常让人哭小不得。而真正地从出售廉价劳动力的阴影里走出来，靠的还是解放思想，放开禁锢。而解放思想，放开禁锢的第一步，就是平反胡耀邦、赵紫阳、六四。当局就是有这个心（温家宝要让大家活得有尊严的言论，和《人民日报》2010年04月15日刊登的他写的《再回兴义忆耀邦》），也没这个胆气。
中国和美国各有各的问题，因为美国有公开自我批评，我打赌这次解决美国的大政府的问题，不会在需要三十年，快的话，今年就可以开始扭转方向。而中国走出的单纯出售廉价劳动力的模式，要在美国走出奥巴马阴影之后。
至于那些胆敢唱反调，与党叫板的人来说，毛所用的，就是这个被称之为“批评与自我批评”的武器。对于毛或者党的干部来说，“批评”是对毛或者党的干部说的，也就是说毛或者党的干部可以批评你。“自我批评”是指的是哪些唱反调的人。他们自然只能“自我批评”，也就是说你们只能批评自己。不能批评毛或者党的干部。
我不是历史学家，不知道毛是从怎么想出这个阴着来的。可能和天主教的忏悔有点关系吧。对于天主教徒来说，人人都是罪人（大家都要以“老子反动儿混蛋”的原则承担原罪）。罪恶的念头，都要通过向牧师忏悔而得到上帝的宽恕（这种手续，自然也是牧师得以挣饭饭吃的手段）。
我到了美国，才发觉，真正的自我批评不是忏悔形式的。对于最喜欢自我批评的美国人来说，他们的自我批评都是直着嗓子说出来的，绝没有忏悔的意味。
例如，最近George Mason大学的Daniel Klein教授和Zogby的Zelika Buturovic搞了一个调查，这个调查问了8个非敏感的基本经济学问题，调查答错的题目数量，而不是答对的数量（换句话说，如果回答模棱两可，就算不错）。结果让人跌破眼镜：保守派答错20%以下，左派答错60%以上。联想到当今奥巴马极左主义统治，他的极左根源，自然都是一些极左派，其中包括很多年轻人。而奥巴马政治的两个支柱之一，就是在美国搞社会主义（另一个支柱是把奥巴马日益搞得灰头土脸的全球道歉外交）。闹来闹去，奥巴马社会主义的政治基础，是那些被奥巴马蛊惑的经济学白痴。
这也就是民主的一个问题。当少数人明白一件事情的时候，一个民主制度很可能将权力交给一个会蛊惑广大不了解情况的老百姓的人。这样，民主国家很可能会采取很荒唐的政策。也就是说，Klein证明奥巴马的这场试图将美国变成欧洲的革命，实际上是以美国愤青为基础的革命。
回过头来讲批评和自我批评，像Klein这样的理直气壮的批评，才是真正的自我批评。毛时代的人所做的所谓自我批评，实际上都是违心的。而且后来的事实证明，那些人违心的“自我批评”针对的思想，最后都证明是对的。美国现在自然是在走弯路。但是，弯路才刚刚走了两年，批评的声浪，就已经一浪高过一浪。就一个民族来说，像Klein所做的调查，就是最好的自我批评。这样的自我批评，才会使美国人开始思考，开始改变。换句话说，那些支持奥巴马的人就可能会想，是不是中了奥巴马言论的圈套了。这就是社会进步的条件，也就是说：教育大众无罪（即便是以反政府为目的的）。
三十年改革开放，不大张旗鼓地抓右派了，但是右派真的还没有摘帽的，也就是屈指可数的三四个人。据说留几个人不摘帽的原因是这样右派就是一个扩大化的问题，凡有本身没有错（告诉那些已经忘却了本朝历史的人们一个史实：反右总指挥是邓）。但是在新的时期，胡耀邦和赵紫阳就是新的右派。他们对中国的改革开放，实际上起到了奠基的作用。在他们政治生涯的后期，他们觉得应该开放言论（虽然其尺度非常保守），受到邓和保守派的反对。最终导致六四。最后，这样两个重要的名字，在中学生课文里是不出现的。
大家都说最近中国强大了，但是我没有看到有哪个正经国家，真正地和中国站在一边。中国扮演的，经常是反面角色。例如，各国想制裁伊朗（一个宗教激进政府试图开发核武器），最大的障碍是中国。也就是说，在国际上中国的确很有影响力，但是大家有没有想想是什么影响？而且，中国的经济影响靠的是廉价劳工。最近的一个美国调查发现，美国的生意几乎都有知识产权部分（也就是说美国没多少企业是纯粹靠价格竞争取胜的）。廉价劳工的问题就是剥削，一方面是进口国货方（如美国）对廉价劳动力的剥削，另一方面是中国人对这些廉价劳工的剥削。中国常有“汉奸”、“洋奴”、“狗腿子”这类词汇（这类词是没有英文对应的），这些词反映的，就是中国人对那些帮助洋人剥削中国廉价劳动力的那些人的憎恨情绪。
目前，新一代的廉价劳动力，对这件事情开始反思，搞得当局心惊肉跳。问题是，涨工资不是解决这个问题的办法，解决这个问题的办法是从依靠廉价劳动力这个模式中走出来。我是专利律师，时时会遇到中国专利问题。中国的专利，常常让人哭小不得。而真正地从出售廉价劳动力的阴影里走出来，靠的还是解放思想，放开禁锢。而解放思想，放开禁锢的第一步，就是平反胡耀邦、赵紫阳、六四。当局就是有这个心（温家宝要让大家活得有尊严的言论，和《人民日报》2010年04月15日刊登的他写的《再回兴义忆耀邦》），也没这个胆气。
中国和美国各有各的问题，因为美国有公开自我批评，我打赌这次解决美国的大政府的问题，不会在需要三十年，快的话，今年就可以开始扭转方向。而中国走出的单纯出售廉价劳动力的模式，要在美国走出奥巴马阴影之后。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)