Name: 專業化與貿易。經濟學速成班#2 (Specialization and Trade: Crash Course Economics #2)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T05:44:14.000Z
Duration: 9 min 4 s

Mr. Clifford: And I'm Mr. Clifford. Welcome to Crash Course Economics.

我是克里福。歡迎來到經濟學速成班。

Adriene: Here at Crash Course, we recognize that difficult subjects are sometimes fraught

在課堂上，我們知道困難的科目常充斥著

with truly unintelligible vocabulary that's difficult for us regular people to understand.

極為抽象的字眼，令我們這些普通人難以理解

Mr. Clifford: But it doesn't have to be that complicated. Remember, economics is the study

但其實不用看得那麼複雜。記得，經濟學是稀少性和選擇的學問

of scarcity and choices.We have limited resources, so we need a way to analyze the best way to

我們的資源有限，所以我們需要一個管道分析出最好的方式

use them. We need economics to make wise decisions in the future, but it also helps us understand

以使用他們。我們需要經濟學以利在未來做出明智的選擇，同時也幫助我們

Adriene: Most empires, wars, and human endeavors can be explained using economics. All you

大部分的帝國盛衰、戰爭引發和人類活動都可以用經濟學來解釋。

have to understand is who wanted what. The American Civil War wasn't just about freedom,

你所需要了解的是誰想要甚麼。南北戰爭的起源不只跟自由有關

it was fought because southern states wanted to keep using cheap slave labor. It was economics.

而是南方各州想要持續使用廉價奴隸。這就是經濟學

Mr. Clifford: Econ can explain so much about the world, and that's why we love teaching

它可以為這個世界諸多現象給予解釋。因此我們喜歡講授經濟學

it, and that's what makes it the greatest subject of all time.

也使它成為有史以來最棒的科目

Adriene: Take that physics! We're comin' for ya!

Adriene: Let's stick with this history theme and talk about the progress of humanity throughout

繼續環繞在歷史這個主題，我們來講述人類活動的

the ages. Using measurements like life expectancy, child mortality, and income per capita, we

發展。藉由使用如生命週期、兒童死亡率和國民平均收入這些計量工具

can show the majority of humans that ever lived had terrible lives. Statistically speaking.

我們可以發現大部分存活過的人類都過得蠻慘的。根據統計

It wasn't until the industrial revolution that people saw a significant and sustained

直到工業革命，人民才感受到生活水平大幅提升

increase in their standard of living. Populations skyrocketed, but so did life expectancy and

food supplies and hospitals and eventually toilets and refrigerators.

食物供給和醫院，到後面甚至廁所和冰箱也大為進步。

Mr. Clifford: It was at the beginning of the industrial revolution that Adam Smith, the

first modern economist, wrote his book An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the

第一位近代經濟學家，寫出「國富論」一書

Wealth of Nations or AIITNACOTWON. He wasn't great at naming books, but he was really good

也可以稱為【AIITNACOTWON】。他不擅長為書取名，但他真的擅於

at explaining the source of prosperity. Smith concluded it was specialization, or what he

解釋人類繁榮的來龍去脈。亞當斯密以專業化為結論，或者是他所謂的

called the division of labor, that made countries wealthy. Let's go to the thought bubble.

勞力分工，使國家富裕。帶你們到思考泡沫

Adriene: When I think of specialization, I think of a pizza restaurant where different

當我想到專業化，我會把它想成在一個披薩店，有許多不同的員工

workers have specific tasks like preparing the ingredients, making the pizza, putting

他們各有所長像準備食材，製作披薩，將它

it in the oven, taking it out and putting it in the box. This division of labor makes

放進烤爐，再將它拿出，放入盒子中。這樣的勞力分工使得

each worker more productive since they can each focus on the thing they do best, and

每位員工更有效率，因為他們能專注在自己的專長上

they don't waste time switching between jobs.

不會浪費時間，輾轉在不同工作項目間

But specialization goes beyond the assembly line for pizza. To produce the cheese, there

但專業化也可以用於披薩的組裝線。為了生產起司

was a dairy farmer who specialized in raising cows; the oven was designed and manufactured

會有專於養牛的酪農處理；烤爐則由專於建造的人

by people who specialize in engineering ovens; the friendly moustache guy on the pizza box?

設計和生產；而在披薩盒上友善的八字鬍男

Someone had to stamp him on there. I love that guy!

有人要負責印製它。我愛死它了!

Adam Smith observed, "in every improved society, the farmer is generally nothing but a farmer;

亞當斯密觀察到「在每個發展中的社會，農夫就只是農夫

the manufacturer, nothing but a manufacturer. The labour... necessary to produce any one

製造商就只是製造商。產品製造業所需的勞工

manufacture, is almost always divided among a great number of hands."

大多都經由無數隻巧手進行分配。」

Imaging what it would be like to make a pizza completely on your own. From scratch. You

想像獨自一人製作一個披薩，從零開始。

would have to grow the wheat and tomatoes and raise the cow, you'd make the flour, the

你需要種麥、種番茄、養牛。你得自己生產麵粉、

cheese, the oven, the pan, and then draw the moustache guy on the box. Without specialization,

起司、火爐、平底鍋，並在包裝盒上畫八字鬍男。缺乏專業化，

if you want something, you have to make it yourself.

And for thousands of years of human history, specialization was, well, pretty minimal.

對於人類千年歷史，專業化可以說是微不足道

Of course humans specialized prior to the industrial revolution, it's one of the marks

當然，人類在工業革命前就已懂得分工，這是人類歷史文明

of civilization that we mentioned in our World History series, but the modern era has taken

this to the extreme. Think of how many people from how many different specialized fields

則達到顛峰。想想需要多少不同領域的人，又需要多少人

it takes to make a smartphone, all of them working in harmony so I can tweet my super

來製造一個智慧型手機。他們團結合作，讓我可以在推特

Thanks Thought Bubble! So specialization makes people more productive, but Adam Smith said

有鑑於剛剛的思考!我們知道專業化使每個人更有效益，但亞當斯密認為

that it's trade that makes them better off. Assume that John can produce either pizza

是貿易使他們獲益。假設John 可以生產披薩

or t-shirts. If he's way better at making pizza, then he should specialize in making

或T恤。如果他較擅於生產披薩，那他應該專於製作

pizza and then trade with someone else like Hank who's way better at making t-shirts.

披薩，並與其他人，像Hank較擅於生產T恤的人，進行交易

Everyone knows Hank's better at making t-shirts, right? With trade, each of them can end up

每個人都知道Hank比較會生產T恤，對吧?透過貿易，每個人最後

with more pizza and shirts than if they tried to make them on their own.

比起自己生產，反而能獲得更多披薩和T恤，

To fully explain this idea of the benefits of trade, we need to show you an economic

要完全解釋貿易的好處，我們需要給你們看經濟

model, but before we go any further, know that economists geek out over models and graphs.

模型，但在進一步說明前，知道經濟學家超級依賴模型跟圖表吧

Don't get all worked up about the numbers; they're not that complicated. Models are just

不要在數字上太費力，它們沒有那麼複雜。模型只是

visuals to help us simplify and explain concepts. It's time for the model! So let's go to the

將事情具體化，好讓我們簡化並解釋觀念。是時候看模型了!一起到

Mr. Clifford: Now this is the first graph you'll see in an economics textbook. It's

這是你在經濟課本上會看到的第一個圖表

called the production possibilities frontier, or PPF. The PPF shows the different combinations

叫做生產可能曲線，PPF。它表示出兩種商品

of two goods being produced using all resources efficiently.

在有效率的情況下，用盡全部資源生產的組合

Now here's a made up example. If the United States uses all of its workers and factories

舉個例子，如果美國用盡全部的勞工和工廠

to produce airplanes, it can produce 500 per day, but they can't produce any shoes. Now

來製造飛機，一天能生產五百架，卻無法生產任何鞋子。現在，

if they use all their resources to produce shoes, they can produce 1000 tons per day,

如果用全部的資源來生產鞋子，一天能生產1000噸。

Now because the United States has limited resources, they can't produce any combination

因為美國的資源有限，他們無法在組合超出生產可能曲線

beyond the production possibilities frontier, so it's impossible to produce 500 planes and

的情況下進行生產，所以不可能製造500架飛機

Adriene: Wait wait wait, Mr. Clifford, I want to stop you here for a second. We don't live

等等，Clifford先生，可以暫停一下嗎。我們並非住在

in a world where there are only two things that a country can produce. There are like

一個國家只能製造兩種產品的世界。我們有

a million things that US workers can choose to make: toilet paper, zippers, adorable stuffed

差不多一百萬種產品供員工選擇:廁所衛生紙、拉鍊、抱著愛心的

kitty cats holding hearts, artisanal sauerkraut -- we don't live in a world of just shoes

超萌kitty貓、德國酸菜-- 我們的世界不是只有鞋子和

and airplanes, so what's the real world value of the production possibilities frontier?

飛機，所以真實世界的生產可能曲線所屬價值為何?

Mr. Clifford: The idea is once you really understand that there's trade-offs between

這個觀念，一旦了解在生產兩個商品間要做取捨

producing two goods, that same logic applies for any number of goods. Adding additional

就能將同樣的邏輯套用在各種商品上。雖然增加其他

goods makes it more complex but doesn't really add any more insights, so economists usually

商品會顯得更複雜，但事實上，不需要另外深入，所以經濟學家通常

Now, what if American companies mismanage their resources and try to produce planes

如果現在，美國公司在資源上管理失誤，在鞋子工廠

in shoe factories and shoes in plane factories? Well, they'd be at a point inside the production

生產飛機，在飛機工廠生產鞋子?那麼，他們將坐落於

possibilities frontier, showing an inefficient use of resources. So every possible combination

生產可能曲線的內側，顯示著資源利用的無效率。所以在曲線內側的

inside the curve is inefficient, and on the curve is efficient and outside the curve is

各種組合都是無效率的，在曲線上則是符合效率，在外側則顯示

Now let's compare this PPF to China's. China can produce 100 planes per day or 800 tons

我們現在來跟中國的生產可能曲線做比較。中國一天能生產100架飛機和800噸

of shoes. Since the United States can produce more planes than China, they have an absolute

鞋子。因為美國比中國能生產更多飛機，他們在生產飛機上

advantage in the production of planes. The US also has an absolute advantage in the production

Since the US can produce more of both goods, you might think there's no reason to trade,

因為美國在兩個商品上都生產較多，你也許認為貿易毫無意義

that they should just produce both on their own. Well, no. Remember, specialization and

他們應該獨自生產。然而，並非如此。記得，專業化和

trade makes people, and in this case countries, better off.

Now stick with me, let's calculate the opportunity cost for the United States to produce one

現在跟著我計算美國生產一架飛機的機會成本

plane. Every single time they produce an additional plane, it costs them two tons of shoes. China

每多製造一架飛機，都須付出2噸的鞋子。

on the other hand gives up 8 tons of shoes for each plane they produce, and since they

然而中國須為每架飛機放棄8噸鞋子，因為他們

have a lower opportunity cost, they have what's called a comparative advantage. China has

的機會成本比較低，他們具有所謂的比較利益。中國在

a comparative advantage in the production of shoes.

But here's the best part, if the US specializes in planes, they can import shoes from China

但這是最棒的地方，如果美國專於生產飛機，他們可以從中國進口鞋子

at a lower opportunity cost than if they produce shoes themselves. For example if these two

跟自己生產的機會成本相比較低。舉個例子，如果有兩個

countries make a deal to trade one plane for four tons of shoes, The US would be better

國家想進行交易，以一架飛機換得4噸鞋子。美國會因此

They would rather get four tons of shoes per plane from China than only get two tons per

他們會願意從中國輸入4噸鞋子，反而不會用每架飛機換得2噸鞋子