The people who do the jobs we most depend on had already suffered wage stagnation and were now most exposed to COVID on the front lines and to financial hardship in the lockdowns.

從事我們最依賴的工作的人已經遭受了工資停滯，現在他們在前線最容易受到 COVID 的影響，在封鎖期間最容易陷入經濟困境。

Politicians everywhere are promising to build back better.

各地的政治家都承諾要重建得更好。

So now must surely be the time we try to make our economy work for everyone.

是以，現在肯定是我們努力讓經濟為所有人服務的時候了。

One idea for how to do so is Universal Basic Income, or UBI.

如何做到這一點，一個想法是全民基本收入，或稱 UBI。

It's sometimes derided as free money, for the idea is that the government should give everyone a regular amount of money, no strings attached, so that they never need to fear for their economic security.

它有時被揶揄為 "免費的錢"，因為它的理念是，政府應該給每個人一筆固定的錢，不附加任何條件，這樣他們就永遠不必擔心自己的經濟安全。

During the pandemic, the US actually did this and sent several checks to almost everyone in the country.

在大流行病期間，美國確實這樣做了，幾乎給全國每個人都寄了幾張支票。

But checks in the mail forever may sound ridiculous to you, and the cost of it even more so.

但對你來說，永遠郵寄支票可能聽起來很荒謬，其成本更是如此。

Certainly many academics and many of my FT colleagues disapprove of basic income.

當然，許多學者和我的許多金融時報同事都不贊成基本收入。

We shouldn't be giving people a handout because ultimately that doesn't help them.

我們不應該向人們施捨，因為這最終也幫不了他們。

It's really the universality of it that makes me very sceptical.

真正讓我感到懷疑的是它的普遍性。

But I believe there's more wisdom to UBI than many people think.

但我相信，UBI 比很多人想象的更有智慧。

Welcome to Free Lunch on Film, the series where I take unorthodox economic ideas that I like, such as Universal Basic Income, and put them to the test.

歡迎收看 "電影中的免費午餐"，我將在這個系列中介紹我喜歡的非正統經濟理念，例如 "全民基本收入"，並對其進行測試。

So UBI is an income, a cash benefit, it's universal, so it's given to everyone, and it's unconditional, which means you don't need to do anything in particular to become eligible for it.

是以，UBI 是一種收入，一種現金福利，它是普遍性的，所以它是提供給每個人的，而且是無條件的，這意味著你不需要做任何特別的事情就有資格獲得它。

This seems hopelessly radical, even naive, but it's an idea with an amazing staying power, discussed for centuries from the founding fathers of the US to today's Silicon Valley tech billionaires, from US libertarians like Milton Friedman to Finnish socialists.

從美國的開國元勳到今天的硅谷科技億萬富翁，從米爾頓-弗裡德曼這樣的美國自由主義者到芬蘭的社會主義者，人們已經討論了幾個世紀。

I see that the Universal Basic Income would be a natural next step for the Nordic welfare state.

在我看來，全民基本收入將是北歐福利國家自然而然的下一步。

Finland's government has tested the policy, and they're not alone.

芬蘭政府已經對這項政策進行了測試，而且他們並不孤單。

India and South Africa have considered it, Iran's tried a version, there have been UBI trials in the US, Canada, the Netherlands, Kenya, and many more places.

印度和南非已經考慮過這個問題，伊朗也嘗試過一個版本，美國、加拿大、荷蘭、肯亞等許多地方都進行過 UBI 試驗。

But there's one place that gives a better idea than all of these, and that's Alaska.

但有一個地方比這些地方都更能說明問題，那就是阿拉斯加。

When oil tax revenue started coming in 40 years ago, the state set up a permanent fund to prevent politicians wasting the money.

40 年前開始徵收石油稅時，州政府設立了一個永久基金，以防止政客們浪費這筆錢。

Every year, it pays out a dividend between $1,000 and $2,000 to every man, woman, and child living in Alaska.

每年，它都會向生活在阿拉斯加的每個男人、女人和孩子派發 1000 到 2000 美元的紅利。

It was important and it was big, you know, for us, especially as a young family.

這對我們來說很重要，尤其是作為一個年輕的家庭。

Alex and Kyra Stewart live in Houma, 220 miles from Anchorage.

亞歷克斯和凱拉-斯圖爾特住在霍馬，距離安克雷奇 220 英里。

They started out in fishing, but now supply wood to restaurants to flavor grills and ovens.

他們以捕魚起家，現在則向餐館供應木材，用於烤架和烤爐的調味。

They saved up the dividends that were paid to their two girls.

他們把分給兩個女兒的紅利存了起來。

We homeschooled both of our children and we used a portion of that savings that the girls had to build their schoolhouse so we could continue to school outside of the kitchen table.

我們對兩個孩子進行家庭教育，我們用女孩們的部分積蓄建造了她們的校舍，這樣我們就可以在廚房的桌子外繼續上學了。

And then as the girls got older, it was just theirs, you know, if they had a choir trip to go on or, you know, they had money.

然後，隨著女孩們年齡的增長，如果她們要去唱詩班旅行，或者有錢的話，這些錢就屬於她們了。

The Stewarts use their own dividends just as sensibly.

斯圖爾特夫婦也同樣明智地使用了自己的紅利。

So quite often in the past, we would use our dividend checks or a dividend check to buy winter tires for one of our trucks.

是以，過去我們經常會用紅利支票或分紅支票為我們的一輛卡車購買冬季輪胎。

Sometimes if you're on the margins, that little bit is enough to pay the mortgage or just give you some breathing room.

有時，如果你的收入微薄，那一點點錢就足以支付抵押貸款或給你一些喘息的空間。

Often what we did when we had extra, we give to the local nonprofits, the local museum, the library.

當我們有多餘的錢時，通常會捐給當地的非營利組織、當地的博物館和圖書館。

Even if it's $1,000 to me, if I go and then spend that $1,000 in Homer, then that person have got their dividend check, but then they just got another $1,000 from me and maybe a bunch of other people.

即使是給我 1000 美元，如果我去荷馬花掉了這 1000 美元，那麼那個人雖然拿到了分紅支票，但他們只是從我這裡又得到了 1000 美元，也許還有其他很多人。

So it really ripples out across the whole community.

是以，它真的會波及整個社區。

And they don't think the cash stops people working.

他們不認為現金會阻止人們工作。

I just like to think that people like to work.

我只是覺得人們喜歡工作。

I mean, people like to, maybe they would work in a different job.

我的意思是，人們喜歡，也許他們會從事不同的工作。

Maybe they would not wash dishes, but if they could have the job they want instead of the job they have to have.

也許他們不會洗盤子，但如果他們能擁有自己想要的工作，而不是不得不擁有的工作。

And if they did have a job that they liked, but it wasn't paying a lot, then they could still keep that job.

如果他們確實有一份自己喜歡的工作，但薪水不高，那麼他們仍然可以保住這份工作。

But they do think a bigger dividend could change that.

但他們認為，更多的紅利可以改變這種狀況。

I think there would be definitely a lot more people that would opt to just, if they could just coast on the dividend, if say it was $1,000 a month, and if there was two people and then they had all their kids.

我認為，如果每個月有 1000 美元的分紅，如果有兩個人，然後他們又有了孩子，那麼肯定會有更多的人選擇這樣做。

If there's one thing the Stuarts made clear is that the dividend has given them a greater sense of security and well-being.

斯圖亞特家族明確表示，紅利給了他們更多的安全感和幸福感。

You know, $1,000 a year is not going to make or break most people, but knowing that we're getting it is definitely a psychological comfort.

要知道，一年 1000 美元對大多數人來說並不算什麼，但知道我們能拿到這筆錢，心理上肯定會感到安慰。

It's not that much, but it saves your pride a little bit, I guess.

雖然沒那麼多，但我想，這也能讓你少一點自尊心。

It feels good to get something, and I think everybody can say that.

有收穫的感覺很好，我想每個人都會這麼說。

Alaska's a special case, but what the Stuarts say goes to the heart of the debate on universal basic income, and whether a similar or even larger payment could make sense elsewhere.

阿拉斯加是一個特例，但斯圖亞特夫婦所說的內容正是關於全民基本收入的爭論焦點，以及在其他地方是否也應支付類似甚至更多的基本收入。

And I think they answer many of the objections people have to UBI.

我認為它們回答了人們對 UBI 的許多反對意見。

What some people think is bad about UBI is precisely what others think is good about it.

一些人認為 UBI 不好的地方，恰恰是另一些人認為它好的地方。

Above all, that there are no strings attached to receiving basic income.

最重要的是，領取基本收入沒有附加條件。

To a conservative thinker like Oren Kess, that is a terrible idea.

對於像奧倫-凱斯這樣的保守派思想家來說，這是一個可怕的想法。

The thing about a UBI is that it's not how parents want to raise their own kids.

UBI 的問題在於，父母們並不想這樣撫養自己的孩子。

Most parents don't tell their kids, don't worry, whatever you do, we're going to take care of you and give you enough money to live on every year.

大多數父母不會告訴孩子，別擔心，無論你做什麼，我們都會照顧你，每年都會給你足夠的生活費。

But they won't have any say about it.

但他們對此沒有任何發言權。

Whether they want the kids to receive it or not, in America it'll be like having your crazy Uncle Sam come charging through the door, telling the kids, don't worry what your parents say, I'm going to take care of you as you turn 18.

無論他們是否願意讓孩子們接受，在美國，這就像瘋狂的山姆大叔衝進門來，告訴孩子們，別管你們父母說什麼，我會在你們滿 18 歲時照顧你們。

Work if you want, don't work, travel and smoke, I've got your back.

想工作就工作，不想工作就不工作，想旅遊就旅遊，想抽菸就抽菸，我都支持你。

So why give out money unconditionally?

那麼，為什麼要無條件地給錢呢？

Well one reason is that the welfare systems we have today are just too complex.

其中一個原因就是我們現在的福利制度太複雜了。

A lot of poor people who are eligible and should be getting the benefits aren't.

很多符合條件且本應獲得福利的窮人卻沒有得到。

Joanna Marinesco has studied UBI trials as well as the Alaska dividend.

喬安娜-馬里內斯科（Joanna Marinesco）曾研究過無人值守機制試驗以及阿拉斯加紅利。

The one thing that a universal benefit would be able to achieve is to avoid leaving behind people who should be eligible but due to administrative complexities weren't able to avail themselves of the benefit.

全民福利能夠做到的一點是，避免遺漏那些本應符合條件但由於行政管理複雜而無法享受福利的人。

Politicians who support UBI, like Finland's social affairs minister Hanna Sarkkinen, also believe our welfare systems have to be updated to support more digital and precarious working lives.

芬蘭社會事務部長漢娜-薩基寧（Hanna Sarkkinen）等支持全民醫保的政治家也認為，我們的福利制度必須更新，以支持更加數字化和不穩定的工作生活。

People are not so clearly workers or entrepreneurs or unemployed or studying.

人們不是那麼明顯的工人、企業家、失業者或學習者。

They might be that all mixed together and maybe our current social security system is not really flexible enough.

它們可能是混合在一起的，也許我們目前的社會保障制度真的不夠靈活。

Not everyone on the left agrees with Sarkkinen's socialist party.

並非所有左翼人士都贊同薩基寧的社會主義政黨。

UBI is not Finnish government policy.

全民儲蓄計劃不是芬蘭政府的政策。

At the same time, not everyone on the right disagrees.

與此同時，並非所有右翼人士都持不同意見。

It was a previous center-right government that set up a two-year UBI trial.

正是上一屆中右翼政府設立了為期兩年的 UBI 試驗。

It paid 2,000 unemployed people 560 euros a month.

它每月向 2 000 名失業者支付 560 歐元。

The trial showed that people, when they have the universal basic income, they are more satisfied with their life and they feel that their income is more stable and protected.

試驗表明，當人們擁有全民基本收入時，他們對自己的生活更加滿意，他們覺得自己的收入更加穩定、更有保障。

The findings also went against the belief that unconditional money weakens the incentive to work.

研究結果也與無條件發放資金會削弱工作積極性的觀點背道而馳。

You see from the Finnish trial that people didn't work less, so having the universal basic income didn't mean that people would stop looking for jobs and stop being active in their life.

從芬蘭的試驗中可以看出，人們的工作並沒有減少，是以，有了全民基本收入並不意味著人們會停止找工作，停止積極生活。

That Finnish result has held up elsewhere.

芬蘭的這一成果在其他地方也得到了驗證。

People don't seem to use unconditional money irresponsibly or work less.

人們似乎不會不負責任地使用無條件的金錢或減少工作。

In many studies there is no effect on work at all, and in some studies there is some decrease in work, but it tends to be very small.

在許多研究中，對工作根本沒有影響，在一些研究中，工作有所減少，但往往非常小。

And what matters isn't just whether a basic income will keep people working, but whether their jobs would be better.

重要的不僅僅是基本收入能否讓人們繼續工作，而是他們的工作是否會更好。

This chimes with the experience of the Stuarts in Alaska, who described how their dividend liberates people, and that to me is one of the greatest attractions of basic income.

這與阿拉斯加斯圖亞特夫婦的經驗不謀而合，他們描述了他們的紅利是如何解放人民的，而這對我來說正是基本收入的最大吸引力之一。

When people don't live on the edge, they enjoy more freedom of choice and suffer less stress financially and psychologically.

如果人們不生活在邊緣，他們就能享受更多的選擇自由，承受更少的經濟和心理壓力。

They can more easily afford to say no to exploitative jobs, or have time off to retrain and learn new skills.

他們可以更容易地拒絕剝削性的工作，或有時間休息以接受再培訓和學習新技能。

They can reduce paid work to care for young children or elderly parents, or even take the risk of starting up for themselves.

她們可以減少有償工作，以照顧年幼的子女或年邁的父母，甚至冒險自己創業。

But not everyone is convinced by small-scale trials.

但並非所有人都相信小規模試驗。

The experiments that are run are very short and time-limited for a small number of people.

所進行的實驗時間很短，只有少數人参加。

So it's not actually a test of how people would behave in a society where they grow up knowing the program is there.

是以，這實際上並不是在測試人們在一個知道有這個項目的社會中會有怎樣的行為。

And yes, knowing basic income will always be there could make people less keen on paid work.

是的，如果知道基本收入會一直存在，人們就不會那麼熱衷於有償工作了。

Because the person has more opportunities to do something outside of work, they might want to work less, especially if the job they're doing isn't very good.

因為有更多的機會做工作以外的事情，他們可能會想減少工作，尤其是如果他們所做的工作不是很好的話。

Being able to leave bad jobs is not a bad thing, though.

不過，能夠離開糟糕的工作並不是一件壞事。

It could force employers to treat workers better.

它可以迫使僱主更好地對待工人。

And remember what the Stuarts said about the Alaska dividend, which has been around for 40 years.

請記住斯圖亞特家族關於阿拉斯加紅利的說法，這種紅利已經存在了 40 年。

When it's spent, it creates jobs.

只要花出去，就能創造就業機會。

All this cash is going to be spent in local businesses, in restaurants, in retail, and that creates jobs.

所有這些現金都將用於當地企業、餐館和零售業，從而創造就業機會。

And so you have a phenomenon where maybe people want to work a bit less, but companies want to hire more people.

於是就出現了這樣一種現象：也許人們想少幹一點活，但公司卻想多僱一些人。

And it turns out that these two effects work in opposite directions, and therefore you could see no effect once you introduce UBI at scale.

而事實證明，這兩種效應的作用方向是相反的，是以，一旦大規模引入 UBI，你可能看不到任何效應。

That's why I don't think we need to worry a lot about the work incentives of a UBI.

這就是為什麼我認為我們不需要太擔心 UBI 的工作激勵機制。

But skeptics have another worry.

但持懷疑態度的人還有另一種擔心。

They doubt that those who lose their jobs or are poorly paid because of automation and Just giving people handouts doesn't solve the problems that come with being out of work.

他們懷疑那些因為自動化而失去工作或收入微薄的人，而只是給人們施捨並不能解決失業帶來的問題。

Particularly the way UBI is being spoken about in Silicon Valley, they're saying, hey, let's just go to the Midwest and hand laid-off factory workers a check and they're going to be fine.

特別是在硅谷，人們談論 UBI 的方式是，他們說，嘿，讓我們去中西部，給失業的工廠工人一張支票，他們就會沒事了。

They can go off and be poets and painters.

他們可以去當詩人和畫家。

Doesn't work like that, guys.

不是這樣的，夥計們。

Work has meaning.

工作是有意義的。

Well, I agree with that, but I still think that if you are out of work, you're much better off with a UBI than without one.

好吧，我同意這一點，但我仍然認為，如果你失業了，有 UBI 比沒有 UBI 要好得多。

Now, opponents still worry that without conditions on the money, some people will just waste it.

現在，反對者仍然擔心，如果不附加條件，有些人就會把錢浪費掉。

I think that's a prejudice not rooted in the facts.

我認為這是一種沒有事實根據的偏見。

They just spend it on everyday expenses, the rent, the food, you know, just like you would spend any extra income.

他們只是把錢花在日常開銷上，房租、食物，你知道，就像你花任何額外收入一樣。

Certainly this is what we see in Alaska, where the cash largely seems to be spent well.

當然，這也是我們在阿拉斯加看到的情況，那裡的現金似乎花得很好。

Alex and Kyra have used it to buy fuel and winter tires.

亞歷克斯和凱拉用這筆錢購買了燃料和冬季輪胎。

But critics say the Alaska dividend is too small to draw any conclusions.

但批評者認為，阿拉斯加紅利太少，無法得出任何結論。

The size of the payment is not something that actually is designed to or could support a family.

支付的金額實際上並不是為了或可以養活一個家庭。

That's a good point.

說得好。

So let's look at another U.S. case with much more money.

是以，讓我們來看看另一個美國案例，它的資金要多得多。

In North Carolina, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians gets huge revenues from a casino on their reservation and they hand this out unconditionally to all members of the tribe, just like a UBI.

在北卡羅來納州，東切諾基印第安人部落從其保留地上的一家賭場獲得了鉅額收入，他們將這筆收入無條件地發放給部落的所有成員，就像全民儲蓄計劃一樣。

It averages $4,000 to $6,000 a year, much more than Alaska.

平均每年 4,000 至 6,000 美元，比阿拉斯加高出很多。

The effects were quite remarkable.

效果相當顯著。

First of all, increased educational attainment of kids by one full year among the poorest members of the tribe.

首先，將部落中最貧困成員的子女受教育程度提高了整整一年。

Secondly, the dividend reduced mental health issues among the kids, and in particular, it reduced drug and alcohol abuse, which I think is very interesting because a lot of people, when you tell them about UBI, they're worried that people will spend it on drug and alcohol.

其次，紅利減少了孩子們的心理健康問題，尤其是減少了吸毒和酗酒，我認為這一點非常有趣，因為當你向很多人介紹全民教育時，他們擔心人們會把錢花在吸毒和酗酒上。

And this study shows that it's exactly the opposite.

而這項研究表明，情況恰恰相反。

Well, I find all this pretty reassuring.

好吧，我覺得這些都很讓人放心。

People spend free money sensibly and they don't stop working.

人們理智地使用閒錢，不會停止工作。

But there is another objection.

但還有另一種反對意見。

Why on earth would you want to give it to the rich?

你究竟為什麼要把錢給富人？

That's what bothers Melissa Kearney, an economics professor who studies inequality.

這正是研究不平等問題的經濟學教授梅麗莎-卡尼（Melissa Kearney）感到困擾的地方。

The idea that we're going to be paying transfer payments to a universal set of people, people all up the income distribution, with very little social return for that, that's what doesn't make any sense to me.

我們要向所有的人支付轉移支付，所有的人都在收入分配的上游，而社會回報卻很少，這種想法對我來說沒有任何意義。

I could come up with a lot better uses of taxpayer dollars, subsidized childcare, low-income rental support, unconditional cash assistance to families with kids.

我可以想出很多更好的辦法來使用納稅人的錢，比如補貼託兒所、低收入租金支持、向有孩子的家庭提供無條件現金援助等。

But supporters have a reason for giving UBI to everyone, including the rich.

但是，支持者們有理由讓包括富人在內的所有人都享有全民教育。

It's that if you means test the benefit only for the poorest, you penalize people just when they manage to do better.

這是因為，如果只對最貧窮的人進行經濟情況調查，就會在他們設法做得更好時對他們進行懲罰。

As they become less poor, their benefits get cut off.

當他們變得不那麼貧窮時，他們的福利就會被切斷。

And so that both provides a disincentive to work, but also, frankly, could be seen as unfair as people are slightly bettering themselves.

是以，這既打擊了人們的工作積極性，坦率地說，也可能被認為是不公平的，因為人們正在一點點地提高自己。

We are clobbering them.

我們正在擊敗他們。

And so the whole point of a universal basic income is that since the cash is the same for everybody, even if you're working more, you're still receiving your benefit.

是以，全民基本收入的全部意義在於，由於現金對每個人都是一樣的，即使你工作得更多，你仍然可以領取你的福利。

So if we really want to reward work, we should let people keep their cash when they're successful.

是以，如果我們真的想獎勵工作，就應該讓人們在成功後保留現金。

Even opponents agree with this point.

就連反對者也同意這一點。

You're right that the case to be made for extending it up the income distribution is then you don't distort people's decisions.

你說得沒錯，將其擴大到收入分配的更高層次的理由是，這樣就不會扭曲人們的決定。

Whether or not you go to work, you get this check.

無論你是否去上班，你都能拿到這張支票。

That's a good thing.

這是好事。

So it really depends on how much spending we want to put towards this program.

是以，這確實取決於我們想為這項計劃投入多少資金。

So here we come to one of the biggest issues.

下面我們就來談談最大的問題之一。

Is UBI even affordable?

UBI 是否負擔得起？

A small payment like Alaska's doesn't make enough of a difference.

像阿拉斯加這樣的小額付款並不能產生足夠的影響。

So I'm interested in whether we could have a generous UBI that would provide a real safety net.

是以，我感興趣的是，我們是否可以有一個慷慨的 UBI，提供一個真正的安全網。

But the headline cost seems terrifyingly high.

但標題成本似乎高得嚇人。

A meaningful UBI, something like $10,000 per adult in the U.S., would cost about $2.5 trillion.

在美國，一個有意義的 UBI，比如每個成年人 10,000 美元，將耗資約 2.5 萬億美元。

That is more, much more than we spend right now on all redistributive programs.

這比我們現在花在所有再分配項目上的錢還要多，多得多。

So if we wanted to pay for something of this magnitude, something that could cost 5 to 10 percent of GDP, we'd have to give up Social Security, we'd have to give up disability insurance.

是以，如果我們想支付這種規模的費用，即可能佔國內生產總值 5%至 10%的費用，我們就必須放棄社會保障，放棄傷殘保險。

To me, that's a very strange view of what the government should be doing to help its citizens.

在我看來，這是一種非常奇怪的觀點，認為政府應該做什麼來幫助公民。

While I think we can find better ways to fund a UBI if we see it in connection with the tax system, rather than as simply swapping one benefit for another.

我認為，如果我們把全民教育與稅收制度聯繫起來，而不是簡單地把一種福利換成另一種福利，我們就能找到更好的方法為全民教育提供資金。

Well, of course, we cannot look at basic income as a separate conversation.

當然，我們不能把基本收入作為一個單獨的話題來看待。

We would make the changes to the taxation system and take the money away from the rich people.

我們將對稅收制度進行改革，把錢從富人那裡拿走。

Let's work through a hypothetical example of a generous basic income.

讓我們舉一個慷慨的基本收入的假設例子。

Suppose we wanted to pay all adults one third of what the average British household has to spend per head.

假設我們要向所有成年人支付英國家庭人均支出的三分之一。

That would be about £7,000 a year.

每年大約 7000 英鎊。

I would implement this as a deduction from your monthly taxes.

我會將此作為每月稅款的扣除項目。

A deduction that could be refunded so that if you didn't owe any tax, you would get the whole amount paid out in cash.

可以退稅的扣除額，這樣，如果你不欠稅，你就可以得到全額現金支付。

On a gross basis, that would cost about 18% of national income.

按毛額計算，這筆費用約佔國民收入的 18%。