Mentally preparing myself for the sticker shock.

已經做好會漲價的心理準備。

Here we are. Wish me luck.

到了。祝我好運吧。

Got my diapers.

買到我要的尿布了。

It might be something else for you.

對你來說可能是其他物品，

For me, diapers is really where, like, I notice inflation the most.

但對我來說，尿布是讓我深刻注意到通貨膨脹發生的東西。

One of the things that's interesting about this particular period of inflation that we're in is this is a worldwide phenomenon.

有趣的是，我們現在面臨的通貨膨脹是全球性的現象。

Hi, Vox. My question is about inflation: What is the real cause?

嗨 Vox。我的問題是關於通貨膨脹：真正的原因是什麼？

Is it just COVID or we have others to blame? Thank you.

只是因為 COVID 疫情的關係，還是有其他原因？謝謝。

Diapers in the US, food in Ghana, and home prices in India - what actually caused all this inflation?

美國的尿布、迦納的食物，還有印度的房價——到底是什麼造成通貨膨漲？

And is there something we can do about it?

我們能做些什麼呢？

If you watch cable news in the US, you will see one explanation for inflation that gets a lot of attention.

如果你在美國有觀看有線電視新聞，你會看到一個解釋通貨膨脹的理論受到大量關注。

"Still too much money chasing too few goods."

「過多的貨幣追逐太少的商品。」

Too much money chasing too few goods.

太多的貨幣追逐太少的商品。

Say I have a car dealership.

假設我有一家汽車經銷店。

Today, we're in a global pandemic.

現在我們處於全球性的疫情狀態。

Factories are shutting down periodically and I'm just not able to keep as many cars on my lap.

工廠會定期關閉，我無法保持足夠的汽車存貨。

My inventory is low.

我的庫存很低。

But at the same time, I have customers willing to spend money on my cars.

但與此同時，我有願意花錢買我的車的客戶。

My inventory starts to dwindle, and now there is more customers than there are cars.

我的庫存開始減少，現在客戶比汽車還多。

So I can just increase the price.

所以我可以提高價格。

Too much money chasing too few goods.

太多的貨幣追逐太少的商品。

Economists like this guy, Larry Summers, he's been sounding the alarm bell about this kind of inflation from the beginning.

像這樣的通膨，像 Larry Summers 這樣的經濟學家們從一開始就一直在警告大眾。

I am much more worried that we'll have inflation.

我更擔心的是我們會經歷通貨膨脹。

This is the least responsible macroeconomic policies we've had in the last 40 years.

這是過去 40 年來最不負責任的宏觀經濟政策。

He is talking about those pandemic relief checks.

他說的是那些疫情期間發放的紓困支票。

Before we can figure out if Larry Summers is right, we need to take a closer look at exactly how inflation is measured in the first place.

在我們確定 Larry Summers 說的正不正確之前，我們需要仔細研究通貨膨脹究竟是如何衡量的。

Once a month, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics puts together what it calls a market basket.

每個月，美國勞工統計局都會編制一個所謂的市場籃子。

These data are specific to the US but you can find similar numbers around the world.

這些數據是針對美國特定的，但是在世界各地也可以發現類似的數據。

The BLS looks at the prices for different goods and services like housing, electricity, apparel, prescription drugs, bakery products, dairy.

美國勞工統計局會查看各種商品和服務的價格，例如住房、電力、服飾、處方藥品、麵包製品還有乳製品。

They look at the price we're paying this month and then compare it to the price for the same good or service last month or last year.

他們會查看當月我們所支付的價格，然後將其與上個月或去年同一商品或服務的價格進行比較。

Then they calculate a single percentage that captures all of that change and that's the Consumer Price Index, or CPI.

接著他們計算出一個百分比，紀錄所有的變化，這就是消費者物價指數（CPI）。

And it's true the consumer price index has been rising steadily for the past couple of years.

消費者物價指數近年來確實逐步上升。

Here's when those stimulus checks went out.

這是發放那些紓困支票的時候。

But now let's take a closer look at some of the specific goods and services that make up the CPI.

現在讓我們仔細看一些構成 CPI 的特定商品和服務。

Some things are way more expensive than this time last year like fuel oil, airline fares, gas, baked goods, dairy products.

有些東西比去年這個時候貴多了，比如燃料油、航空票價、天然氣、烘烤食品、乳製品等。

But there is some stuff that's held fairly steady.

但是有一些東西的價格保持相對穩定。

In a normal, healthy economy, the Federal Reserve expects for inflation to be about 2% a year.

在正常、健康的經濟中，聯邦儲備委員會估計通貨膨脹率每年約為 2%。

And for stuff like clothing, prescription drugs, and education, prices are only slightly above that 2% mark.

像服裝、處方藥物和教育這樣的東西，價格只略高於 2% 的標準。

For used cars and trucks, gasoline, and communication (that's your phone plan, Internet streaming), prices are actually lower than this time last year.

對於二手汽車和卡車、汽油和通訊（即手機合約資費、網路流量），價格實際上低於去年同期。

It seems a bit more complicated than simply: People have too much money.

這看起來比單純地說「人們有太多錢」這個問題要複雜一些。

If that were the only problem, wouldn't everything be more expensive?

如果這是唯一的問題，那不是所有東西都應該更貴了嗎？

So unfortunately for me, the Bureau of Labor Statistics doesn't actually track the price of diapers as part of the CPI.

所以對我來說很不幸，因為勞工統計局並沒有追蹤尿布價格作為 CPI 指數的一部分。

But I did find a private research firm, Nielsen IQ, that does.

但我找到了一家私人研究公司 Nielsen IQ。

So, Nielsen looks at something called the unit price.

Nielsen 觀察了一些被稱為「單位價格」的東西。

Basically, they take the box of diapers, divide it by how many diapers are in the box and that gives you the unit price.

基本上，他們將尿布盒裡面的尿布數量除以盒子數量，計算出單位價格。

They get a bunch of different brands and then come up with this average.

他們收集了很多不同品牌，然後得出了這個平均值。

So in 2019, the average unit price for diapers was 16.1 cents.

在 2019 年，尿布的平均單位價格為 16.1 美分。

If prices had gone up at that expected 2% annual inflation rate, January of 2023 would have seen me paying 17.4 cents per diaper.

如果價格按照預期的每年 2% 的通貨膨脹率上漲，到 2023 年 1 月，我將支付每片 17.4美 分的尿布價格。

But of course, that's not what the last few years have looked like.

但當然，過去幾年發生的情況並非如此。

If the price of diapers had increased at the same rate as the CPI, I would be paying 19 cents per diaper in January of 2023.

如果尿布的價格按照 CPI 的同樣比率增加，到 2023 年 1 月，我將支付每片 19 美分的尿布價格。

But no, no, no, no.

但不對。

I am currently paying 21 cents per diaper an increase of over 30%.

我目前每片尿布花費 21 美分，漲幅超過 30％。

So why is it that the price of diapers is rising so much faster than the price of all these other goods?

那麼為什麼尿布價格上漲的速度比其他商品都要快呢？

You can think of the costs of a business in a couple of ways.

這個情況可以從幾個方面考慮企業成本。

There's the wages that you pay for workers, their investments in capital and the machinery itself, and all of that adds up to the cost of production.

包括支付員工的工資、對資本和機器本身的投資，以及這些成本的總和。

And then there's the cost you actually sell the good at.

然後還有實際出售商品的成本。

And the difference between those two costs are called a markup.

這兩個成本之間的差額稱為利潤。

One of the things that makes it difficult to report on inflation is that reporters and consumers, we don't know how much it costs companies to pay their workers.

報導通貨膨脹變得困難的原因之一是，記者和消費者不知道公司支付員工的成本有多少。

We don't know how much it costs them to import the materials that they need, but we can guess.

我們不知道他們進口所需材料的成本，但我們可以用猜的。

Take labor costs, for example.

以勞動力成本為例。

We know that from 2019 to 2023, the average hourly wage for someone working in manufacturing rose by about 17%.

我們知道，從 2019 年到 2023年，製造業工人的平均時薪上升了約 17％。

Now, that is faster than what you would expect under normal 2% annual inflation.

這比正常 2％ 的年通貨膨脹速度還要快。

But when you consider the fact that corporations have successfully kept wages so low in the years leading up to that point that they were actually declining relative to inflation,

但是，考慮到公司在此之前成功地讓工資保持如此之低，以至於其實這數字相對於通貨膨脹而言是在下降，

this recent bump starts to look more like a kind of return to normalcy.

這次的增幅開始看起來更像是回歸正常。

Okay, but what about the cost of materials?

但是材料成本呢？

I went to the Pampers website and looked at what goes into making a diaper.

我上了 Pampers 網站，查看了製作尿布的材料。

It turns out this stuff is made out of wood and these are all plastics which are made by refining petroleum in slightly different ways

結果，這些材料都是由木材和塑料製成的，這些塑料是通過略微不同的方式精煉石油製成的。

According to the Federal Reserve's Producer Price Index, the average price for both of these materials wood pulp and plastic products has risen significantly over the past five years.

根據聯邦儲備局的生產者物價指數，這些材料的平均價格在過去五年中已經顯著上升。

But both of these rising input costs still don't completely explain the price hike in diapers.

但是，這些上漲的進口成本仍無法完全解釋為何尿布的價格上漲。

One of the reasons I really wanted to talk to Rakeen is that she and her colleagues have listened to hundreds and hundreds of hours of earnings calls.

我非常想和 Rakeen 聊一聊的原因之一是，她和她的同事聽過數百個小時的電話財報會議。

What we found is big corporations who are jacking up prices beyond what their production cost would justify.

我們發現的是大型企業正在哄抬價格，超過其生產成本所能證明的範圍。

These are some transcripts of those earnings calls that Rakeen and her colleagues have been listening to.

這些是 Rakeen 及其同事收聽過的電話財報會議的一些文字記錄。

The CEO of Hostess Brands, for example, says of these price hikes, "Consumers get used to it." "When all prices go up, it helps."

例如，Hostess Brands 的執行長表示，這些價格上漲會「讓消費者習慣」，「當所有價格上漲時，這有助於經濟。」

A Tyson Foods executive claimed that price increases for beef "more than offset the higher costs."

森食品的一位高階領導聲稱，牛肉的價格上漲「遠高於成本的增加」。

VISA's CEO says that historically "inflation has been a positive for us."

VISA 的執行長說，從歷史上看，「通貨膨脹對我們來說是正面的」。

All three of these corporations experienced record profits over the past three years.

這三家公司在過去三年間都獲得了破紀錄的利潤。

But what they did with those profits is instructive.

但他們用這些利潤做了什麼是值得玩味的。

They paid that money out to their shareholders and raised prices for the rest of us.

他們將這些錢支付給股東，並提高了我們其他人需要支付的價格。

So we have our three theories for this current moment of inflation:

因此，我們對當前通貨膨脹的狀況有了三種理論：

Too much money floating around,

過多的流動資金、

supply shocks,

供給衝擊，

and massive markups.

以及大幅度的加價。

Unfortunately, it's probably going to be months or maybe even years before we have all of the data necessary to figure out which one of these 3 explanations holds the most weight.

不幸的是，在我們獲得所有必要數據之前，可能需要幾個月甚至幾年時間才能弄清楚這三種解釋中哪一種更有力。

But there are still things we can do to help bring prices down.

但我們仍然可以做一些事情來幫助降低價格。

We think of inflation in a really singular way. I think that really limits the vast panoply of tools that we actually have to fight this problem.

我們將通膨視為一種非常單一的方式。我認為這限制了我們可以用來解決這個問題的各種工具。

Let's start with the tool that the Federal Reserve has already busted out: raising interest rates.

讓我們從聯邦儲備委員會已經使用的工具開始：提高利率。

The way that works is it makes it more expensive for companies to borrow money, which makes it harder for them to invest in new projects and hire new people.

這樣做的方式是讓公司借錢變得更加昂貴，讓他們更難投資新項目和招聘新人。

So far, the Fed has raised interest rates 8 times and the unemployment rate has stayed pretty low.

到目前為止，聯邦儲備委員會已經提高了利率八次，失業率仍然相對較低。

But that could change if the Fed keeps raising rates.

但如果聯邦儲備委員會繼續提高利率，這種情況可能會改變。

The last time inflation got super high back in the early 80s, the Fed did huge interest rate hikes and inflation did go down.

回到 1980 年代初通膨飆升時，聯邦儲備委員會實行了巨額利率上調，通膨確實下降了，

But look what happened to unemployment.

但是看看失業率的情況。

It shot way up.

它飆升了。

By 1982, one in ten people were out of work.

到了 1982 年，十分之一的人失業了。

In the last month of 2022, prices were starting to come down in some key areas: dairy, fruits and veggies, airline fares.

在 2022 年的最後一個月，某些關鍵領域的價格開始下降：乳製品、水果和蔬菜、航空票價。

Prices for these two items, gasoline and fuel oil are way down.

這兩項物品的價格，汽油和燃料油，大幅下降。

And the reason likely has very little to do with raising interest rates.

而原因很可能與升息無關。

Over the past 12 months, President Biden released millions of barrels of oil from the US emergency stockpile, which increased global supply and drove down the price.

在過去的 12 個月中，拜登總統從美國緊急儲備中釋放了數百萬桶石油，增加了全球供應並拉低了價格。

There's precedent for doing this in other areas of the economy.

在經濟的其他領域中，這樣做早有先例。

In 1939, US President Franklin Roosevelt asked Congress for nearly $900 million to help the airline industry quadruple their output.

1939 年，美國總統富蘭克林·羅斯福要求國會提供近九億美元，幫助航空業將其產量增加四倍。

"Ships, planes, tanks, guns. That is our purpose and our pledge."

「船、飛機、坦克、槍。這是我們的目的和承諾。」

Something Rakeen told me about diapers got me thinking about a third way we might start bringing prices down.

Rakeen 告訴我關於尿布的問題讓我開始思考第三種降低價格的方法。

Turns out that somewhere between 70 and 80% of all the diapers produced in the US are made by two companies.

原來在美國生產的尿布有 70% 到 80% 是由兩家公司製造的。

This honestly threw me a little bit, but then I went back and looked at some of that footage that I shot in the grocery store:

這讓我有點吃驚，但我回去看了我在雜貨店拍攝的一些片段：

Luvs, Pampers, Ninjamas, those are all made by Procter & Gamble;

Luvs、Pampers、Ninjamas 都是由寶潔公司製造的；

Huggies, Pull-Ups, Goodnites, all made by Kimberly-Clark.

Huggies、Pull-Ups、Goodnites 都是由金百利克拉克公司製造的。

So while it looks like parents have a lot of choices in the diaper aisle, we actually don't.

所以雖然看起來爸媽們有很多尿布的種類可以選擇，但其實根本沒有。

Policymakers have allowed really rampant deregulation that has facilitated these companies having so much power in a way that they can jack up prices without any cost to them.

政策制定者允許極端的去除管制，讓這些公司擁有如此強大的權力，讓他們可以不承擔任何成本就能提高價格。

That's supply dial and that corporate power dial.

那就是供應與公司權力之爭。

We've let them get dusty.

我們讓這些問題變得難以解決。

We do not and we never did have to throw workers under the bus in order to bring down prices .

為了降低價格，我們並不需要把工人置於危險之中。