特朗普預(yù)算案中的初級(jí)錯(cuò)誤

Details of President Donald Trump’s first budget have now been released. Much can and will be said about the dire social consequences about what is in it and the wildly optimistic economic assumptions it embodies. My observation is that there appears to be a logical error of the kind that would justify failing a student in an introductory economics course.

美國(guó)總統(tǒng)唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)第一份預(yù)算案的細(xì)節(jié)現(xiàn)已對(duì)外公布。關(guān)于預(yù)算內(nèi)容和預(yù)算體現(xiàn)出來(lái)的極為樂(lè)觀(guān)的經(jīng)濟(jì)假設(shè)會(huì)帶來(lái)的可怕社會(huì)后果，有很多值得說(shuō)的，也會(huì)有很多評(píng)議。我認(rèn)為，預(yù)算里看上去存在一個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤，因這個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤掛掉一名學(xué)生的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)導(dǎo)論課也無(wú)可厚非。

Apparently, the budget forecasts that US growth will rise to 3.0 per cent by 2021 because of the Trump administration’s policies — largely its tax cuts and perhaps also its regulatory policies. Fair enough if you believe in tooth-fairies and ludicrous supply-side economics.

顯然，這份預(yù)算預(yù)測(cè)稱(chēng)，由于特朗普政府的政策——主要是其減稅、也許還有監(jiān)管方面的政策——到2021年美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)率將提高至3%。說(shuō)得不錯(cuò)，如果你相信牙仙子和荒謬的供給學(xué)派經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的話(huà)。

Then the administration asserts that it will propose revenue-neutral tax cuts, with the revenue neutrality coming in part because the tax cuts stimulate growth! This is an elementary double count. You cannot use the growth benefits of tax cuts once to justify an optimistic baseline and then again to claim that the tax cuts do not cost revenue. At least not in a world of logic.

特朗普政府接著堅(jiān)稱(chēng)，其將提議不影響財(cái)政收入的減稅措施，財(cái)政收入不受影響的部分原因在于，減稅刺激增長(zhǎng)!這是一種初級(jí)的重復(fù)計(jì)算。你不能先用減稅對(duì)增長(zhǎng)的好處來(lái)為樂(lè)觀(guān)的預(yù)算基線(xiàn)辯護(hù)，接著又宣稱(chēng)減稅不影響財(cái)政收入。起碼在講邏輯的世界里，這是說(shuō)不通的。

The Trump team prides itself on its business background. This error is akin to buying a company assuming that you can make investments that will raise profits, but then, in calculating the increased profits, counting the higher revenues while failing to account for the fact that the investments would actually cost some money to make. The revenue generated by the investments might exceed their cost (though the same is almost never true of tax cuts), but that does not change the fact that the investment has a cost that must be included in the accounting.

特朗普?qǐng)F(tuán)隊(duì)為自己的商界背景而自豪。上面這個(gè)錯(cuò)誤類(lèi)似于：在收購(gòu)一家公司時(shí)假定，你可以進(jìn)行將要帶來(lái)利潤(rùn)的投資，接著在計(jì)算增加的利潤(rùn)時(shí)，把提高的收入算進(jìn)來(lái)，卻忽視了做這筆投資實(shí)際上要消耗一些資金。投資帶來(lái)的收入也許會(huì)高于投資成本(盡管這對(duì)減稅幾乎從不適用)，但這不能改變投資有成本、成本必須計(jì)入賬目的事實(shí)。

This is a mistake no serious business person would make. It appears to be the most egregious accounting error in a presidential budget in the nearly 40 years I have been tracking them.

這是任何嚴(yán)肅的商人都不會(huì)犯的錯(cuò)誤。這似乎是我追蹤總統(tǒng)預(yù)算案近四十年以來(lái)發(fā)現(xiàn)的最糟糕的錯(cuò)誤。

Who knew what when? I have no doubt that there are civil servants in the Office of Management and Budget, the Treasury and the Council of Economic Advisers who do know better than this mistake. Were they cowed, ignored or shut out? How could the Treasury secretary, director of the OMB and director of the National Economic Council allow such an elementary error? I hope the press will ferret this out.

什么人在什么時(shí)候知道什么?我毫不懷疑，白宮行政管理和預(yù)算局(OMB)、財(cái)政部和國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)顧問(wèn)委員會(huì)(Council of Economic Advisers)里面有公務(wù)員懂，不至于犯這種錯(cuò)誤。他們被恐嚇、被忽視，或者被隔離在圈外了嗎?財(cái)長(zhǎng)、行政管理和預(yù)算局局長(zhǎng)和國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)委員會(huì)(NEC)主任怎么能允許出現(xiàn)這樣一個(gè)初級(jí)錯(cuò)誤?我希望媒體會(huì)找出真相。

The president’s personal failings are now not just centre stage but whole stage. They should not blind us to the manifest failures of his economic team. Whether it is Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin’s absurd claims about tax cuts not favoring the rich, commerce secretary Wilbur Ross’s claim that the small squib of a deal negotiated last week with China was the greatest trade result with that country in history, NEC director Gary Cohn’s ridiculous estimate of the costs of Dodd Frank, or Tuesday’s budget, the Trump administration has not yet made a significant economic pronouncement that meets a minimal standard of competence and honesty.

總統(tǒng)的個(gè)人失敗如今不僅僅占據(jù)了舞臺(tái)的焦點(diǎn)，而且占據(jù)了整個(gè)舞臺(tái)。這些失誤不應(yīng)遮蔽我們的眼睛，讓我們看不到他的經(jīng)濟(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)的明顯失敗。無(wú)論是財(cái)長(zhǎng)史蒂文•姆努欽(Steven Mnuchin)有關(guān)減稅并非偏向富人的荒謬說(shuō)法、商務(wù)部長(zhǎng)威爾伯•羅斯(Wilbur Ross)將上周與中國(guó)達(dá)成的令人失望的協(xié)議稱(chēng)為歷史上取得的對(duì)華最大貿(mào)易成果、國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)委員會(huì)主任加里•科恩(Gary Cohn)對(duì)多德-弗蘭克法案(Dodd Frank)成本的可笑估算，還是周二的預(yù)算案，都表明特朗普政府至今沒(méi)能發(fā)布一項(xiàng)滿(mǎn)足最低能力和誠(chéng)信標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的重大經(jīng)濟(jì)聲明。