Capitalism is a system in which people own stuff and run things.

資本主義是一種制度，在這種制度下，人們擁有東西並經營事物。

You decide which goods to make, who to work with, what services to offer, and how much to charge.

你決定生產哪些產品、與誰合作、提供哪些服務以及收費多少。

To do this effectively, we form groups, call them companies, and compete with each other.

為了有效地實現這一目標，我們組建了集團，稱之為公司，並相互競爭。

Capitalists believe that these groups create lots of wealth for their founders, their partners, their employees, and society as a whole. Socialism relies on government officials to get things done.

資本家認為，這些集團為其創始人、合作伙伴、員工以及整個社會創造了大量財富。 社會主義依靠政府官員來完成工作。

There are different ideas about how to create such a system, but most socialists agree that the state should own some property, regulate what we can or can't do, and offer social services.

關於如何建立這樣一種制度，人們有不同的想法，但大多數社會主義者都同意，國家應該擁有一些財產，管理我們能做什麼、不能做什麼，並提供社會服務。

Socialists believe that political leaders can establish rules to share a nation's wealth fairly, which then makes all people better off.

社會主義者認為，政治領導人可以制定公平分享國家財富的規則，從而讓所有人都過上更好的生活。

So both the socialist and the capitalist want to maximize well-being for all of us, but have inherently different ideas of how to do that, and are afraid of each other. To maximize well-being, capitalists support the freedom of the individual.

是以，社會主義者和資本主義者都希望最大限度地為我們所有人謀福利，但在如何實現這一目標的問題上卻有著固有的不同想法，並且相互害怕。為了實現福祉最大化，資本家支持個人自由。

They want a world where simple Joe can sell his own apples in front of his house at the price he chooses, hire anyone interested to help for the money he is willing to pay, and keep most of his profits.

他們希望在這個世界上，普通的喬能在自家門前以自己選擇的價格出售蘋果，以自己願意支付的價格僱傭任何感興趣的人幫忙，並保留大部分利潤。

In an anarcho-capitalist utopia, there would not even be a state, all schools will be private, and police, courts, and military would only exist if they could be formed on a voluntary basis.

在無政府資本主義烏托邦中，甚至不會有國家，所有學校都是私立的，警察、法院和軍隊只有在自願的基礎上才能存在。

The capitalist fears the socialist because they have reason to believe that once we transfer money, property, and power to the collective, it will be those who control us who will first help themselves, then limit individual freedoms and make us dependent on welfare programs, and finally impoverish society. Socialists want to maximize well-being by regulating our behavior.

資本家害怕社會主義者，因為他們有理由相信，一旦我們把金錢、財產和權力轉移到集體手中，控制我們的人首先會幫助自己，然後限制個人自由，讓我們依賴福利計劃，最後使社會陷入貧困。社會主義者希望通過規範我們的行為來實現福祉最大化。

They prefer a world in which simple Joe only sells apples of a certain type, does so only in designated areas, pays his helpers a minimum wage, charges affordable prices, and shares most of his profits with those who have less.

他們更喜歡這樣一個世界：普通的喬只賣某種類型的蘋果，只在指定的地區賣，付給幫工最低工資，收取合理的價格，並將大部分利潤與那些收入較低的人分享。

In a socialist utopia, all of us would get to have equal access to education, enjoy the same standard of living, and benefit from plenty of state-funded services, including an unconditional basic income.

在社會主義烏托邦中，我們每個人都能平等地接受教育，享受同等的生活水準，並受益於大量由國家資助的服務，包括無條件的基本收入。

The socialist fears the capitalist because they have reason to believe that if people are allowed to keep all their money, property, and liberties, they would act immoral, pollute the environment, or abuse their power and eventually make living conditions worse for everyone, except the very rich. What most people don't know is that both socialists and capitalists fear big business.

社會主義者害怕資本主義者，因為他們有理由相信，如果允許人們保留自己所有的金錢、財產和自由，他們就會做出不道德的行為、汙染環境或濫用權力，最終使每個人的生活條件變得更糟，除了非常富有的人。大多數人不知道的是，社會主義者和資本家都害怕大企業。

Capitalists fear big companies because they use their power to influence the government to create laws that restrict the success of smaller businesses.

資本家害怕大公司，因為他們利用自己的力量影響政府，制定限制小企業成功的法律。

Capitalists are hence not pro-business, they are pro-market.

是以，資本家並不親商，而是親市場。

Socialists fear large corporations because they use their power to establish regulations that benefit themselves but make everyone else worse off.

社會主義者懼怕大公司，因為它們利用自己的權力制定對自己有利的法規，卻讓其他人的境況更糟。

Socialists are not pro-business, they are pro-state. Now, to understand which of the two is better, we can study people who live along a spectrum of the two extremes by looking at wealth, the key promise of capitalists, equality, the main promise of socialists, and levels of happiness.

社會主義者不支持商業，他們支持國家。現在，我們可以通過觀察資本家的主要承諾--財富、社會主義者的主要承諾--平等以及幸福水準，來研究生活在這兩個極端之間的人們，從而瞭解兩者之間哪個更好。

Let's first examine economic freedom around the world.

讓我們先來看看世界各地的經濟自由度。

Capitalist countries have higher levels of economic freedom.

資本主義國家的經濟自由度更高。

When countries offer less freedom, it's often due to socialism, but may also be thanks to religious fanaticism, civil war, or other factors. If we now look at 15 specific states, we see that Singapore ranks top in economic freedom, Switzerland second, the US ranks 25th, and North Korea is last.

當國家提供的自由度較低時，通常是由於社會主義，但也可能是由於宗教狂熱、內戰或其他因素。如果我們現在考察 15 個具體國家，我們會發現新加坡在經濟自由度方面排名第一，瑞士排名第二，美國排名第 25 位，北韓排名最後。

If we plot the data from 177 countries along a spectrum ranging from low to high levels of freedom, we see that we can divide them into three types: highly free, more mixed, and not so free societies, and can then make the following observations.

如果我們把 177 個國家的數據按照自由度從低到高的範圍繪製出來，就會發現我們可以把這些國家分為三種類型：高度自由的社會、比較混雜的社會和不太自由的社會。

There is no pure capitalist country.

沒有純粹的資本主義國家。

The Swiss restrict some forms of voluntary exchange, offer some public services, and collect taxes to pay for all of that.

瑞士限制某些形式的自願交換，提供某些公共服務，並徵稅支付所有這些費用。

And 5% of all people in Singapore, the most capitalist place of all, work for the government, the state builds public housing, and if you take the liberty to chew gum, you might get fined. Mixed market economies are normal.

而在新加坡這個最資本主義的地方，5%的人在為政府工作，國家建造公共住房，如果你冒昧地嚼口香糖，可能會被罰款。混合市場經濟是正常的。

In the United States, businesses are privately owned, which is clearly capitalist.

在美國，企業是私人所有的，這顯然是資本主義。

However, the government controls education and healthcare, and hands out subsidies to specific groups, such as chip makers, bankers, and farmers.

然而，政府控制著教育和醫療，並向芯片製造商、銀行家和農民等特定群體發放補貼。

And around 15% of all Americans work in the public sector.

大約 15%的美國人在公共部門工作。

In Russia, 1 out of 4 people serve the state.

在俄羅斯，每 4 個人中就有 1 個人為國家服務。

The rest are working in private firms, many of which, however, are highly regulated. Highly socialist states are rare.

其餘的人則在私營公司工作，但其中許多公司都受到嚴格監管。 高度社會主義的國家很少見。

In Venezuela, which is one, state officials control what people can and cannot charge for their products, which tends to lead to notoriously long queues.

委內瑞拉就是其中之一，國家官員控制著人們對其產品的收費標準，這往往會導致臭名昭著的排長隊現象。

In North Korea, a socialist dictatorship, private property is illegal, and 9 out of 10 citizens work for the state. So how do people in these countries compare when we look at wealth, happiness, and equality?

在社會主義獨裁國家北韓，私有財產是非法的，10 個公民中有 9 個為國家工作。 那麼，從財富、幸福和平等的角度來看，這些國家的人們又是如何比較的呢？

If we look at GDP per capita as a measure of wealth, we see that again Singapore ranks top, Switzerland 7th, the US 14th, and North Korea is again last.

如果我們把人均國內生產總值作為衡量財富的標準，我們會發現新加坡再次排名第一，瑞士排名第七，美國排名第十四，北韓再次排名最後。

Note that GDP figures usually include public services, such as free schooling and public healthcare.

請注意，國內生產總值數字通常包括公共服務，如免費學校教育和公共醫療保健。

A comparison of GDP with economic freedom shows that countries with higher freedom are also richer, with some reaching a gross domestic product of close to $200,000 per person.

國內生產總值與經濟自由度的比較顯示，自由度越高的國家也越富有，有些國家的人均國內生產總值接近 20 萬美元。

Looking at this distribution, it's important to note that wealth and freedom correlate with better education and longer life expectancy.

從這一分佈來看，財富和自由與更好的教育和更長的預期壽命相關，這一點很重要。

They might, however, not cause it.

不過，它們可能不是原因。

In other words, a history of colonialism and the prevalence of natural disasters can reduce wealth and restrict certain freedoms, independent of people's political ideology. Happiness around the world looks a lot like the previous maps, with the difference that quite a few rather poor countries also show a decent level of self-reported well-being.

換句話說，殖民主義的歷史和自然災害的頻發會減少財富並限制某些自由，這與人們的政治意識形態無關。世界各地的幸福感看起來與前幾幅地圖很相似，不同的是，不少相當貧窮的國家也顯示出了不錯的自報幸福感水準。

Switzerland, which is economically free and rich, ranks 4th, Singapore, which is even 27th, and people in Brazil, which is relatively poor, are surprisingly happy.

經濟自由、富裕的瑞士排名第 4，新加坡甚至排在第 27 位，而相對貧窮的巴西人民卻出奇地幸福。

Lithuania is the country where young people say they are the happiest.

立陶宛是年輕人認為自己最幸福的國家。

The most miserable place for those below age 30 seems to be Afghanistan, which is extremely restrictive.

對於 30 歲以下的人來說，最悲慘的地方似乎是阿富汗，那裡的限制極其嚴格。

If we look at happiness versus economic freedom, we can see that countries with higher freedom tend to have higher levels of happiness, while those with lower freedom generally report lower levels, although people in Venezuela seem relatively content. Comparing economic freedom, GDP, and happiness, it looks as if freedom correlates with wealth, but neither necessarily coincides with well-being.

如果我們將幸福感與經濟自由度進行對比，我們可以發現，自由度較高的國家往往幸福感較高，而自由度較低的國家一般幸福感較低，儘管委內瑞拉人民似乎相對滿足。比較經濟自由、國內生產總值和幸福感，可以看出自由與財富相關，但兩者都不一定與幸福相吻合。

Lastly, let's look at inequality around the world with data from the Gini index, which measures how much wealth belongs to the richest people in a country.

最後，讓我們用基尼指數的數據來看看世界各地的不平等現象。基尼指數衡量的是一個國家最富有的人擁有多少財富。

Doing so, we see that the picture looks mixed.

這樣一來，我們就會發現情況喜憂參半。

Rich, capitalist countries like Singapore and the United States seem quite unequal, but so do socialist societies like Venezuela and China.

像新加坡和美國這樣富裕的資本主義國家似乎相當不平等，但像委內瑞拉和中國這樣的社會主義社會也是如此。

The country where wealth is distributed most equally is Slovakia, which is moderately free.

財富分配最平等的國家是斯洛伐克，該國屬於中等自由國家。

The most unequal society is South Africa, a place that is rather unfree, but also has a history of racial segregation.

最不平等的社會是南非，這個地方相當不自由，而且還有種族隔離的歷史。

And if we plot both inequality and economic freedom on the same chart, we can't see a clear trend.

如果我們把不平等和經濟自由繪製在同一張圖表上，我們就看不到明顯的趨勢。

It seems as if neither socialism nor capitalism is very good at creating equality. But now you tell us which system you prefer, and where you are from.

社會主義和資本主義似乎都不擅長創造平等。但現在你告訴我們你更喜歡哪種制度，以及你來自哪裡。

And if you can't make up your mind, consider looking at more data like the Human Development where people actually want to live.

如果您無法下定決心，可以考慮查看更多數據，如《人類發展報告》（Human Development），看看人們究竟想住在哪裡。

All sources with links to the raw datasets are in the description below.

所有資料來源及原始數據集鏈接見下文說明。

We relentlessly researched education for the past decade, read plenty of peer-reviewed papers, visited all sorts of schools, created hundreds of videos on the topic, and even set up our very own kindergarten for project-based learning.

在過去的十年裡，我們堅持不懈地研究教育，閱讀了大量同行評議的論文，參觀了各種學校，製作了數百部相關視頻，甚至建立了自己的幼兒園，開展基於項目的學習。

And now we also made a book!

現在，我們還製作了一本書！

The Unschooler's Educational Dictionary covers everything we know about learning, unveils the unintended consequences of compulsory education, and includes a complete guide to the alternative school movement.

非學校主義者的教育詞典》涵蓋了我們對學習的一切認識，揭示了義務教育的意外後果，還包括另類學校運動的完整指南。

Order your copy now!

現在就訂購吧

Just visit your favorite bookshop or check the links in the description below.

請訪問您喜愛的書店或查看下面描述中的鏈接。

If you found this helpful, check out our other videos, join us on YouTube or on Patreon.com slash Sprouts.

如果您覺得這對您有幫助，請查看我們的其他視頻，在 YouTube 或 Patreon.com slash Sprouts 上加入我們。

For more information, classroom exercises, or videos without background music, visit SproutsSchools.com Published under Creative Commons.

如需瞭解更多資訊、課堂練習或無背景音樂的視頻，請訪問 SproutsSchools.com 在創作共用協議下發布。