Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • Value creation.

    譯者: Pei-Chen Benson Liu 審譯者: Helen Chang

  • Wealth creation.

    創造價值

  • These are really powerful words.

    創造財富

  • Maybe you think of finance, you think of innovation,

    都是很有份量的詞

  • you think of creativity.

    也許你聯想到金融、創新

  • But who are the value creators?

    或是創意

  • If we use that word, we must be implying that some people aren't creating value.

    但究竟誰創造了價值?

  • Who are they?

    說這話的意思就是

  • The couch potatoes?

    並非所有人都在創造價值

  • The value extractors?

    誰沒貢獻價值?

  • The value destroyers?

    整天窩在沙發看電視的人?

  • To answer this question, we actually have to have a proper theory of value.

    萃取價值的人?

  • And I'm here as an economist to break it to you

    破壞價值的人?

  • that we've kind of lost our way on this question.

    要解答這問題

  • Now, don't look so surprised.

    我們先要有一個像樣的價值理論

  • What I mean by that is, we've stopped contesting it.

    今天我以經濟學家的身分

  • We've stopped actually asking really tough questions

    為各位解答

  • about what is the difference between value creation and value extraction,

    我們迷失在這個問題上了

  • productive and unproductive activities.

    別這麼驚訝

  • Now, let me just give you some context here.

    我的意思是說

  • 2009 was just about a year and a half after

    我們已經全盤接受

  • one of the biggest financial crises of our time,

    也不再強硬質疑

  • second only to the 1929 Great Depression,

    創造價值和萃取價值的不同

  • and the CEO of Goldman Sachs said

    生產活動和非生產活動的差異

  • Goldman Sachs workers are the most productive in the world.

    我給各位講講背景知識

  • Productivity and productiveness, for an economist,

    2009 年當時

  • actually has a lot to do with value.

    近代最嚴重的其中一次金融危機

  • You're producing stuff,

    才解除不到一年半

  • you're producing it dynamically and efficiently.

    僅次於 1929 年的大蕭條

  • You're also producing things that the world needs, wants and buys.

    高盛集團執行長聲稱

  • Now, how this could have been said just one year after the crisis,

    他們的員工世上最有生產力

  • which actually had this bank as well as many other banks --

    經濟學家認為生產力高低

  • I'm just kind of picking on Goldman Sachs here --

    實際上和價值有很大關係

  • at the center of the crisis, because they had actually produced

    你生產東西

  • some pretty problematic financial products mainly but not only related to mortgages,

    用的是動態、有效率的方法

  • which saw many thousands of people actually lose their homes.

    那些東西也是大家

  • In 2010, in just one month, September,

    所需、所想、所買

  • 120,000 people lost their homes through the foreclosures of that crisis.

    危機才過短短一年半

  • Between 2007 and 2010,

    那樣的說辭從何而生

  • 8.8 million people lost their jobs.

    而且這家銀行

  • The bank also had to then be bailed out by the US taxpayer

    我只是拿高盛舉例

  • for the sum of 10 billion dollars.

    當然還有其他很多銀行

  • We didn't hear the taxpayers bragging that they were value creators,

    跟金融危機一點也脫不了關係

  • but obviously, having bailed out

    因為這些銀行製造出

  • one of the biggest value-creating productive companies,

    一些出問題的金融產品

  • perhaps they should have.

    主要是抵押貸款

  • What I want to do next is kind of ask ourselves

    讓成千上萬人失去房產

  • how we lost our way,

    2010 年 9 月,僅僅這一個月內

  • how it could be, actually,

    有 120,000 人因為這次危機

  • that a statement like that could almost go unnoticed,

    房子遭銀行徵收而無家可歸

  • because it wasn't an after-dinner joke; it was said very seriously.

    2007 至 2010 年間

  • So what I want to do is bring you back 300 years in economic thinking,

    880 萬人失業

  • when, actually, the term was contested.

    這家銀行更是用了

  • It doesn't mean that they were right or wrong,

    美國納稅人 100 億美金

  • but you couldn't just call yourself a value creator, a wealth creator.

    才脫離險境

  • There was a lot of debate within the economics profession.

    納稅人可沒自詡他們創造了價值

  • And what I want to argue is, we've kind of lost our way,

    但很明顯的

  • and that has actually allowed this term, "wealth creation" and "value,"

    納稅人應以自己為榮

  • to become quite weak and lazy

    拯救了這些

  • and also easily captured.

    創造價值、又有生產力的大公司

  • OK? So let's start -- I hate to break it to you --

    我接著想問大家

  • 300 years ago.

    我們如何迷失了方向

  • Now, what was interesting 300 years ago

    我們怎麼會對那樣的陳述

  • is the society was still an agricultural type of society.

    幾乎毫無所覺

  • So it's not surprising that the economists of the time,

    因為那席話十分認真

  • who were called the Physiocrats,

    並非只是玩笑

  • actually put the center of their attention to farm labor.

    我想帶大家回顧

  • When they said, "Where does value come from?"

    經濟概念的 300 年歷史

  • they looked at farming.

    當時,光是名稱本身就備受爭議

  • And they produced what I think was probably the world's first spreadsheet,

    那些公司並無對錯

  • called the "Tableau Economique,"

    但不能無憑無據

  • and this was done by François Quesnay, one of the leaders of this movement.

    給自己冠上價值、財富創造者的名號

  • And it was very interesting,

    這個問題也曾激起經濟學界熱烈討論

  • because they didn't just say, "Farming is the source of value."

    我認為我們已經迷失方向了

  • They then really worried about what was happening to that value

    才讓「創造財富」、「價值」這些字

  • when it was produced.

    失其份量,得來全不費工夫

  • What the Tableau Economique does --

    可以脫口而出

  • and I've tried to make it a bit simpler here for you --

    我很不想提起這件事

  • is it broke down the classes in society into three.

    300 年前

  • The farmers, creating value, were called the "productive class."

    300 年前,特別的是

  • Then others who were just moving some of this value around

    整個社會仍然奉行農業

  • but it was useful, it was necessary,

    想當然耳

  • these were the merchants;

    我們稱那時的經濟學家是重農主義者

  • they were called the "proprietors."

    他們把重心擺在農業勞力

  • And then there was another class that was simply charging the farmers a fee

    當他們問:「價值從何來?」

  • for an existing asset, the land,

    考慮的是農事

  • and they called them the "sterile class."

    魁奈 (François Quesnay) 帶領其他人

  • Now, this is a really heavy-hitting word if you think what it means:

    畫了可能是史上第一張表格

  • that if too much of the resources are going to the landlords,

    稱作「經濟表」

  • you're actually putting the reproduction potential of the system at risk.

    有趣的是

  • And so all these little arrows there were their way of simulating --

    他們不只認為「農事創造價值」

  • again, spreadsheets and simulators, these guys were really using big data --

    還很苦惱這些價值究竟是如何產生的

  • they were simulating what would actually happen under different scenarios

    經濟表的功用便是

  • if the wealth actually wasn't reinvested back into production

    我會試著不說得那麼難

  • to make that land more productive

    經濟表將社會分為三個等第

  • and was actually being siphoned out in different ways,

    創造價值的農民

  • or even if the proprietors were getting too much.

    也叫作「生產階級」

  • And what later happened in the 1800s,

    其他人便只是四處搬動這些價值

  • and this was no longer the Agricultural Revolution

    但這種行為很有用且必要

  • but the Industrial Revolution,

    這些人是商人

  • is that the classical economists,

    稱作「業主」

  • and these were Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, the revolutionary,

    還有另一階級

  • also asked the question "What is value?"

    他們只用現有資產

  • But it's not surprising that because they were actually living

    也就是土地,向農民收錢

  • through an industrial era with the rise of machines and factories,

    稱為「不事生產階級」

  • they said it was industrial labor.

    仔細想想的話

  • So they had a labor theory of value.

    這詞其實很沈重,意思是:

  • But again, their focus was reproduction,

    如果地主得到太多資源

  • this real worry of what was happening to the value that was created

    則事實上整個系統 生生不息的潛力將受到威脅

  • if it was getting siphoned out.

    這些箭號是當時經濟學者在模擬

  • And in "The Wealth of Nations,"

    看到空白表格和模型

  • Adam Smith had this really great example of the pin factory where he said

    不得不說他們運用了大數據

  • if you only have one person making every bit of the pin,

    他們模擬不同情境

  • at most you can make one pin a day.

    如果財富不再投入生產 讓土地更有生產力

  • But if you actually invest in factory production and the division of labor,

    而是以不同方法分離出去

  • new thinking --

    或如果甚至是業主獲利太多

  • today, we would use the word "organizational innovation" --

    之後 1800 年代

  • then you could increase the productivity

    農業革命已不復存在

  • and the growth and the wealth of nations.

    工業革命取而代之

  • So he showed that 10 specialized workers

    古典經濟學者

  • who had been invested in, in their human capital,

    像是 Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx

  • could produce 4,800 pins a day,

    開創新制

  • as opposed to just one by an unspecialized worker.

    也想瞭解「價值是什麼?」

  • And he and his fellow classical economists

    但他們實際生活在工業化時代

  • also broke down activities into productive and unproductive ones.

    機械、工廠到處林立

  • (Laughter)

    他們的答案是工業勞力

  • And the unproductive ones weren't --

    一點也不足為奇

  • I think you're laughing because most of you are on that list, aren't you?

    他們提出勞動價值說

  • (Laughter)

    重點仍是再生產

  • Lawyers! I think he was right about the lawyers.

    他們極力想找出

  • Definitely not the professors, the letters of all kind people.

    若價值分離到其他地方

  • So lawyers, professors, shopkeepers, musicians.

    創造價值時會發生什麼事

  • He obviously hated the opera.

    Adam Smith 在《國富論》提到

  • He must have seen the worst performance of his life

    大頭針工廠這個很好的例子

  • the night before writing this book.

    如果要一個人負責全部的步驟

  • There's at least three professions up there

    一天最多就產一根大頭針

  • that have to do with the opera.

    但如果有資源

  • But this wasn't an exercise of saying, "Don't do these things."

    投入到工廠生產和勞力分工

  • It was just, "What's going to happen

    這是新的想法

  • if we actually end up allowing some parts of the economy to get too large

    我們現在稱之為「組織創新」

  • without really thinking about how to increase the productivity

    這樣生產力便會增加

  • of the source of the value that they thought was key,

    國家也會成長、更加富裕

  • which was industrial labor.

    他提到了 10 位專業化的工人

  • And again, don't ask yourself is this right or is this wrong,

    他們的人力資本獲得資源

  • it was just very contested.

    一天可以生產 4,800 根大頭針

  • By making these lists,

    跟一名工人包攬全部工作的結果迥異

  • it actually forced them also to ask interesting questions.

    Adam Smith 和其他古典經濟學家

  • And their focus, as the focus of the Physiocrats,

    也把各類活動分為

  • was, in fact, on these objective conditions of production.

    生產活動和非生產活動

  • They also looked, for example, at the class struggle.

    (笑聲)

  • Their understanding of wages

    這些非生產活動

  • had to do with the objective, if you want, power relationships,

    你們在笑是因為自己也上榜了,對吧?

  • the bargaining power of capital and labor.

    (笑聲)

  • But again, factories, machines, division of labor,

    律師!我想他把律師放上榜是對的

  • agricultural land and what was happening to it.

    教授真不該在榜上

  • So the big revolution that then happened --

    其他職業也是

  • and this, by the way, is not often taught in economics classes --

    律師、教授、店主、音樂家

  • the big revolution that happened with the current system

    他一定很討厭聽歌劇

  • of economic thinking that we have,

    他寫這本書前一晚

  • which is called "neoclassical economics,"

    一定聽了最差勁的歌劇

  • was that the logic completely changed.

    名單中至少有三種職業

  • It changed in two ways.

    跟歌劇有關

  • It changed from this focus on objective conditions to subjective ones.

    但這份名單並非要人們

  • Let me explain what I mean by that.

    「不要去從事這些職業」

  • Objective, in the way I just said.

    而是在說

  • Subjective, in the sense that all the attention went to

    「如果我們真的讓經濟的一部份

  • how individuals of different sorts make their decisions.

    發展的太壯大

  • OK, so workers are maximizing their choices of leisure versus work.

    還不設法增加這些價值來源的生產力

  • Consumers are maximizing their so-called utility,

    會發生什麼事?」

  • which is a proxy for happiness,

    這裡價值來源指的是工業勞力

  • and firms are maximizing their profits.

    不要太斟酌其中的對錯

  • And the idea behind this was that then we can aggregate this up,

    列這份名單本來就很有爭議

  • and we see what that turns into,

    也讓他們提出一些很有趣的問題

  • which are these nice, fancy supply-and-demand curves

    他們和重農主義者其實都想知道

  • which produce a price,

    生產的客觀條件

  • an equilibrium price.

    他們也研究其他事情,像是階級鬥爭

  • It's an equilibrium price, because we also added to it

    他們認定工資

  • a lot of Newtonian physics equations

    跟這些客觀的權力階級有關係

  • where centers of gravity are very much part of the organizing principle.

    資方和勞方在工資上討價還價的能力

  • But the second point here is that that equilibrium price, or prices,

    工廠、機器、勞力分工

  • reveal value.

    農業用土地,才是重點

  • So the revolution here is a change from objective to subjective,

    重大變革接著發生

  • but also the logic is no longer one of what is value,

    順道一提

  • how is it being determined,

    經濟學課堂裡通常不提這個

  • what is the reproductive potential of the economy,

    現今我們的經濟思想

  • which then leads to a theory of price

    稱作新古典經濟學派

  • but rather the reverse:

    發生重大變革

  • a theory of price and exchange

    改變了整套邏輯思想

  • which reveals value.

    變動了兩個方面

  • Now, this is a huge change.

    人們開始更關心主觀條件 而不是客觀條件

  • And it's not just an academic exercise, as fascinating as that might be.

    讓我解釋一下

  • It affects how we measure growth.

    客觀,就像我剛說的

  • It affects how we steer economies to produce more of some activities,

    主觀,大家更關注

  • less of others,

    不同類型的人如何做決定

  • how we also remunerate some activities more than others.

    勞工試圖在工作 和休閒中找到最大效益

  • And it also just kind of makes you think,

    消費者也想得到最多所謂的效用

  • you know, are you happy to get out of bed if you're a value creator or not,

    效用是幸福的代名詞

  • and how is the price system itself if you aren't determining that?

    企業也想賺到最多的利益

  • I mentioned it affects how we think about output.

    我們可以累積這些效益

  • If we only include, for example, in GDP,

    看看會有什麼結果

  • those activities that have prices,

    就是背後的機制

  • all sorts of really weird things happen.

    是這些完美、花俏的供需曲線

  • Feminist economists and environmental economists

    可以計算出一個價格

  • have actually written about this quite a bit.

    一個均衡價格

  • Let me give you some examples.

    交叉點是一個均衡價格

  • If you marry your babysitter, GDP will go down, so do not do it.

    因為我們也納入許多牛頓的物理等式

  • Do not be tempted to do this, OK?

    重心就是組織原則的一部分

  • Because an activity that perhaps was before being paid for is still being done

    第二點是由均衡價格揭示價值

  • but is no longer paid.

    此(經濟理論)變革 不只從客觀變為主觀觀點

  • (Laughter)

    邏輯也變為

  • If you pollute, GDP goes up.

    不再考慮什麼有價值

  • Still don't do it, but if you do it, you'll help the economy.

    如何決定價值

  • Why? Because we have to actually pay someone to clean it.

    經濟體系的再生產潛力有多大

  • Now, what's also really interesting is what happened to finance

    (上述不再)決定價格

  • in the financial sector in GDP.

    反而是正好相反:

  • This also, by the way, is something I'm always surprised

    由價格和交換理論揭示其價值

  • that many economists don't know.

    這是個重大的變化

  • Up until 1970,

    因為這不只跟學術有關

  • most of the financial sector was not even included in GDP.

    雖然學術上很有趣

  • It was kind of indirectly, perhaps not knowingly,

    還會影響我們如何量測發展

  • still being seen through the eyes of the Physiocrats

    會影響我們如何操縱經濟

  • as just kind of moving stuff around, not actually producing anything new.

    增加或減少某些生產活動

  • So only those activities that had an explicit price were included.

    為何給予某些活動較多酬勞

  • For example, if you went to get a mortgage, you were charged a fee.

    還會令你思考

  • That went into GDP and the national income and product accounting.

    如果你沒創造價值的話 是否還願意起床工作

  • But, for example, net interest payments didn't,

    如果你沒參與決定 那麼價格體系本身會如何?

  • the difference between what banks were earning in interest

    我剛剛說了

  • if they gave you a loan and what they were paying out for a deposit.

    我們對生產的看法會受到影響

  • That wasn't being included.

    如果我們只把定了價的行為

  • And so the people doing the accounting started to look at some data,

    舉例來說,納入 GDP

  • which started to show that the size of finance

    很多奇怪的事會發生

  • and these net interest payments

    女性主義經濟學家和環境經濟學家

  • were actually growing substantially.

    其實發表了很多相關研究

  • And they called this the "banking problem."

    這邊有幾個例子

  • These were some people working inside, actually, the United Nations

    如果你娶了你家的褓姆

  • in a group called the Systems of National [Accounts], SNA.

    GDP會下降