Adam Davidson: What we learned from teetering on the fiscal cliff

Translator: Morton Bast Reviewer: Thu-Huong Ha

翻译人员: dahong zhang 校对人员: Renji Yu

So a friend of mine who's a political scientist,

我有个朋友是政治学家，

he told me several months ago

他几个月前确切地告诉我

exactly what this month would be like.

本月会演哪出戏。

He said, you know, there's this fiscal cliff coming,

他说，会有财政悬崖问题降临，

it's going to come at the beginning of 2013.

发生在2013年初。

Both parties absolutely need to resolve it,

两党绝对需要解决这个问题，

but neither party wants to be seen as the first to resolve it.

但是两党都不想做第一个吃螃蟹的人。

Neither party has any incentive to solve it a second before it's due,

两党都没有在问题到期前，解决问题的动力，

so he said, December, you're just going to see lots of

他说，在十二月，你会看到

angry negotiations, negotiations breaking apart,

怒气冲冲的协商，协商破裂，

reports of phone calls that aren't going well,

和各种谈判不顺的报导，

people saying nothing's happening at all,

人们说什么都没有发生

and then sometime around Christmas or New Year's,

然后到圣诞结或新年前后，

we're going to hear, "Okay, they resolved everything."

我们会听说：“Okay，两党解决了所有问题。”

He told me that a few months ago. He said he's 98 percent positive they're going to resolve it,

他几个月前告诉我这些。他说，他有98%的信心，两党会解决这个问题。

and I got an email from him today saying, all right,

今天我收到他的一封Email，他说

we're basically on track, but now I'm 80 percent positive

我们基本步入正轨，但现在他有80%的信心

that they're going to resolve it.

两党会解决这个问题。

And it made me think. I love studying

这促使我思考。我爱研究

these moments in American history

美国历史的关键时刻

when there was this frenzy of partisan anger,

当有这种狂热的党派愤怒的情况下，

that the economy was on the verge of total collapse.

经济面临崩溃边缘的时刻。

The most famous early battle was Alexander Hamilton

早期最著名的此类论战是亚历山大·汉密尔顿

and Thomas Jefferson over what the dollar would be

和托马斯·杰斐逊关于美元地位

and how it would be backed up, with Alexander Hamilton

以及如何支撑美元地位的争论，

saying, "We need a central bank, the First Bank of the United States,

亚历山大·汉密尔顿说：“我们要有中央银行，美利坚第一银行，

or else the dollar will have no value.

否则，美元就没有价值。

This economy won't work,"

这种经济就不会运转，”

and Thomas Jefferson saying, "The people won't trust that.

托马斯·斐逊说：“人们不会信任它的。

They just fought off a king. They're not going to accept some central authority."

他们刚赶走一个国王。他们不会再接受中央集权了。”

This battle defined the first 150 years of the U.S. economy,

这场论战决定了美国建国头150年的经济发展，

and at every moment, different partisans saying,

每当，有不同党派的人说：

"Oh my God, the economy's about to collapse,"

“老天，经济要崩溃了，”

and the rest of us just going about, spending our bucks

我们中的其他人就会赶快出去，

on whatever it is we wanted to buy.

花美元购买我们想要的商品。

To give you a quick primer on where we are,

给您一个简明的当前形势图，

a quick refresher on where we are.

快速补习一下当前形势。

So the fiscal cliff, I was told

关于财政悬崖这个叫法，有人告诉我

that that's too partisan a thing to say,

那是党派之争的代名词，

although I can't remember which party it's supporting or attacking.

尽管我不记得到底哪派支持，哪派反对。

People say we should call it the fiscal slope,

人们说我们应该叫它财政斜坡，

or we should call it an austerity crisis,

或者我们应该称它为财政紧缩危机，

but then other people say, no, that's even more partisan.

不过还有人说，这更凸显了党派色彩。

So I just call it the self-imposed, self-destructive

所以我就称它为——咎由自取的，解决一个不可避免的问题的，

arbitrary deadline about resolving an inevitable problem.

武断的期限。

And this is what the inevitable problem looks like.

这就是“不可避免的问题”的图示。

So this is a projection of U.S. debt as a percentage

这就是美国债务占经济总体（GDP）的

of our overall economy, of GDP.

百分比。

The light blue dotted line represents

浅蓝的虚线代表

the Congressional Budget Office's best guess

国会预算办公室最好的猜想

of what will happen if Congress really doesn't do anything,

也就是，如果国会不采取行动的话，

and as you can see, sometime around 2027,

如您所见，到2027年，

we reach Greek levels of debt,

我们就会达到希腊的债务水平，

somewhere around 130 percent of GDP,

也就是债务占GDP，百分之130，

which tells you that some time in the next 20 years,

此图说明了未来20年，

if Congress does absolutely nothing,

如果国会真的不采取任何对策，

we're going to hit a moment where the world's investors,

我们就会达到一个临界点，全世界的投资家

the world's bond buyers, are going to say,

全世界的债券买家，就会说，

"We don't trust America anymore. We're not going to lend them any money,

“我们不信任美国了，我们不会再借给他们钱了，

except at really high interest rates."

除非有很高的贷款利率。”

And at that moment our economy collapses.

在那个临界点，我们的经济会崩溃。

But remember, Greece is there today.

不过记住，这是希腊今天的水平。

We're there in 20 years. We have lots and lots of time

我们还有20年时间呢。我们有大把大把的时间

to avoid that crisis,

避免危机发生，

and the fiscal cliff was just one more attempt

财政悬崖只是逼迫

at trying to force the two sides to resolve the crisis.

两党解决危机的再一次尝试。

Here's another way to look at exactly the same problem.

此图是从另一个角度解读同样的问题。

The dark blue line is how much the government spends.

深蓝线代表政府的支出。

The light blue line is how much the government gets in.

浅蓝线代表政府的收入。

And as you can see, for most of recent history,

如您所见，近几十年

except for a brief period, we have consistently spent

除了一个短暂的时期，国家支出

more than we take in. Thus the national debt.

一直高于国家收入。这就是国家债务。

But as you can also see, projected going forward,

如您所见，预计未来

the gap widens a bit and raises a bit,

收支鸿沟会更宽更高些，

and this graph is only through 2021.

此图截止到2021年。

It gets really, really ugly out towards 2030.

如图所示，到2030年收支差距会非常大。

And this graph sort of sums up what the problem is.

此图总结了问题的实质。

The Democrats, they say, well, this isn't a big deal.

民主党人会说，这没什么大不了的。

We can just raise taxes a bit and close that gap,

我们可以增税，来消解这个鸿沟，

especially if we raise taxes on the rich.

特别的要提高富人的税率。

The Republicans say, hey, no, no, we've got a better idea.

共和党人会说，不，不，我们有更好的办法。

Why don't we lower both lines?

为什么我不同时压缩支出和税率呢？

Why don't we lower government spending and lower government taxes,

为什么我们不压缩政府支出的同时压缩政府的税率，

and then we'll be on an even more favorable

那样，我们就可以得到一个更有利的

long-term deficit trajectory?

长期的赤字曲线吗？

And behind this powerful disagreement between

在关于如何平衡收支的

how to close that gap,

巨大分歧后面，

there's the worst kind of cynical party politics,

有最糟糕的愤世嫉俗的党派政治，

the worst kind of insider baseball, lobbying, all of that stuff,

最糟糕的内幕人士，游说，所有人，

but there's also this powerfully interesting,

不过同样还是有强大的有趣地方，

respectful disagreement between

尊重两种不同经济哲学之间的分歧。

two fundamentally different economic philosophies.

尊重两种不同经济哲学之间的分歧。

And I like to think, when I picture how Republicans

我喜欢思考，当我想象共和党人

see the economy, what I picture is just some amazingly

如何看待经济，我想到的是

well-engineered machine, some perfect machine.

精密运转的机器，完美的机器。

Unfortunately, I picture it made in Germany or Japan,

不幸的是，我构建出了德国或日本的图景，

but this amazing machine that's constantly scouring

这个神奇的机器，不断地消磨

every bit of human endeavor and taking resources,

每一个人的努力，并攫取资源，

money, labor, capital, machinery,

资金，劳动力，资本，机构，

away from the least productive parts and towards the more productive parts,

从低产出部分转到高产出部分，

and while this might cause temporary dislocation,

虽然这可能导致暂时的混乱，

what it does is it builds up the more productive areas

它所作的就是构建高产出领域

and lets the less productive areas fade away and die,

让低产出领域消亡，

and as a result the whole system is so much more efficient,

从而使整个系统更有效率，

so much richer for everybody.

每个人变得更富有。

And this view generally believes that there is a role for government,

这种观点，认为政府要扮演一个角色，

a small role, to set the rules so people aren't lying

一个小角色，设置规范，这样人们就不会互欺

and cheating and hurting each other,

互骗，互相伤害了。

maybe, you know, have a police force and a fire department

比如说，可以有一支警察队伍，一个消防部门，一支军队，

and an army, but to have a very limited reach

不过（这个政府）只能非常有限地

into the mechanisms of this machinery.

干预经济“机器”的运行。

And when I picture how Democrats and Democratic-leaning

当我如民主党人和民主党派经济学家一样

economists picture this economy,

构想整个经济，

most Democratic economists are, you know, they're capitalists,

大多数民主党派经济学家是资本主义者，

they believe, yes, that's a good system a lot of the time.

他们相信，一个好系统需要时间。

It's good to let markets move resources to their more productive use.

让市场配置资源到更高产出的部分去。

But that system has tons of problems.

不过这个系统有成堆的问题。

Wealth piles up in the wrong places.

财富积累在错误的地方。

Wealth is ripped away from people who shouldn't be called unproductive.

财富被从不应被称为低产者的人手中夺走。

That's not going to create an equitable, fair society.

这不会产生出公正公平的社会。

That machine doesn't care about the environment,

这部经济机器不考虑环境，

about racism, about all these issues

种族，等等问题，

that make this life worse for all of us,

使我们活的更差，

and so the government does have a role to take resources

所以政府确需扮演一个角色，

from more productive uses, or from richer sources,

从更高产的，或更富有者手里

and give them to other sources.

拿出一部分资源给其他人。

And when you think about the economy through these two different lenses,

当您从以上两个不同角度考虑问题时，

you understand why this crisis is so hard to solve,

您就会明白这个危机为什么这么难解决，

because the worse the crisis gets, the higher the stakes are,

因为危机越深，赌注越高，

the more each side thinks they know the answer

每当一方人越认为他们知道答案

and the other side is just going to ruin everything.

而另一方人只会破坏。

And I can get really despairing. I've spent a lot

我深感失望。过去几年我花了很多精力，

of the last few years really depressed about this,

真的感到很沮丧，

until this year, I learned something that

直到今年，我知道了一些东西

I felt really excited about. I feel like it's really good news,

让我感到很兴奋。我感到它真的很好

and it's so shocking, I don't like saying it, because I think

很震撼，我不想说出来，因为我想

people won't believe me.

人们不会相信我的。

But here's what I learned.

但这就是我学到的。

The American people, taken as a whole,

作为一个整体，美国人民，

when it comes to these issues, to fiscal issues,

面对这些财政问题时，

are moderate, pragmatic centrists.

美国人民是温和、务实的中间派。

And I know that's hard to believe, that the American people

我知道这很难被接受，美国人民

are moderate, pragmatic centrists.

是温和、务实的中间派。

But let me explain what I'm thinking.

不过让我来解释一下我的想法。

When you look at how the federal government spends money,

当您看到联邦政府是如何花钱的时候，

so this is the battle right here,

这就是症结所在，

55 percent, more than half, is on Social Security,

55%超过一半的钱花在社会保障领域，

Medicare, Medicaid, a few other health programs,

医疗保险和医疗补助，几个其他健康计划，

20 percent defense, 19 percent discretionary,

20%国防，19%自由支配，

and six percent interest.

6%支付利息。

So when we're talking about cutting government spending,

所以当我们谈论削减政府支出的时候，

this is the pie we're talking about,

这就是我们所说的蛋糕，

and Americans overwhelmingly, and it doesn't matter

美国人都认为，不管

what party they're in, overwhelmingly like

他是哪个党派的，都认为

that big 55 percent chunk.

55%的部分是好的。

They like Social Security. They like Medicare.

他们喜欢社会保障。他们喜欢医疗保险。

They even like Medicaid, even though that goes to the poor and indigent,

甚至喜欢医疗补助，即使用到穷人身上，

which you might think would have less support.

可能您原以为没这么多人支持。

And they do not want it fundamentally touched,

他们不希望改变它，

although the American people are remarkably comfortable,

美国人民是非常满意的，

and Democrats roughly equal to Republicans,

民主党人和共和党人一致，

with some minor tweaks to make the system more stable.

只做些小的调整，使系统更稳定。

Social Security is fairly easy to fix.

社会保障是相当容易解决。

The rumors of its demise are always greatly exaggerated.

取消社会保障的谣言是被大大夸大了。

So gradually raise Social Security retirement age,

逐渐提高社会保障退休年龄，

maybe only on people not yet born.

可能只适用于还没出生的人。

Americans are about 50/50,

美国人50对50，

whether they're Democrats or Republicans.

不管他们是民主党人还是共和党人。

Reduce Medicare for very wealthy seniors,

减少对非常富有老年人的医疗保险

seniors who make a lot of money. Don't even eliminate it. Just reduce it.

那些有钱的老年人。甚至不取消它。只是减少它。

People generally are comfortable with it, Democrats and Republicans.

人们通常是满意的,民主党人和共和党人。

Raise medical health care contributions?

提高医疗保健的出资额？

Everyone hates that equally, but Republicans

每个人是同样讨厌它，共和党人

and Democrats hate that together.

和民主党人则是一起讨厌它。

And so what this tells me is, when you look at

这告诉我，当你

the discussion of how to resolve our fiscal problems,

看到如何解决我们财政问题的讨论时，

we are not a nation that's powerfully divided on the major, major issue.

这并不是我们国家的主要分歧，

We're comfortable with it needing some tweaks, but we want to keep it.

我们需要的只是微调，我们想保留它。

We're not open to a discussion of eliminating it.

我们不是公开讨论取消它。

Now there is one issue that is hyper-partisan,

有个超党派的问题，

and where there is one party that is just spend, spend, spend,

一个党派只是支出，支出，支出，

we don't care, spend some more,

我们不在意，支出更多

and that of course is Republicans

那当然是共和党人

when it comes to military defense spending.

当说到国防支出。

They way outweigh Democrats.

他们远远高于民主党人。

The vast majority want to protect military defense spending.

共和党人绝大多数支持国防开支。

That's 20 percent of the budget,

这占预算的20%，

and that presents a more difficult issue.

这表现出更困难的问题。

I should also note that the [discretionary] spending,

我也要提到自由支出，

which is about 19 percent of the budget,

大约占预算的19%，

that is Democratic and Republican issues,

这事民主党人和共和党人的问题，

so you do have welfare, food stamps, other programs

所以你有福利，食品救济券，和其他项目

that tend to be popular among Democrats,

趋向于民主党人比较乐于接受，

but you also have the farm bill and all sorts of Department of Interior

但你也有农业法案和各类内务部

inducements for oil drilling and other things,

各种系用于石油钻井和其他东西，

which tend to be popular among Republicans.

趋向于共和党人比较乐于接受。

Now when it comes to taxes, there is more disagreement.

现在，当涉及到税收，有更多的分歧。

That's a more partisan area.

这是一个更有党派之争的区域。

You have Democrats overwhelmingly supportive

绝大多数民主党人支持

of raising the income tax on people who make 250,000 dollars a year,

增加年收入25万美元的人的个人所得税，

Republicans sort of against it, although if you break it out by income,

共和党人的反对，但如果你打破它的收入

Republicans who make less than 75,000 dollars a year like this idea.

共和党人中，年收入少于7万5千美元的人喜欢这个主意。

So basically Republicans who make more than 250,000 dollars a year don't want to be taxed.

所以基本上，共和党人中年收入超过25万美元的人不想多课税。

Raising taxes on investment income, you also see

增加投资收入税率，你也会看到

about two thirds of Democrats but only one third of Republicans

三分之二的民主党人支持，而只有

are comfortable with that idea.

三分之一的共和党人支持。

This brings up a really important point, which is that

这带来了一个真正重要的问题，

we tend in this country to talk about Democrats

我们倾向于在这个国家谈论民主党人

and Republicans and think there's this little group

和共和党人，还有一小部分

over there called independents that's, what, two percent?

独立派，大约2%？

If you add Democrats, you add Republicans,

如果你或者算上民主党人，算上共和党人，

you've got the American people.

你就会得到几乎所有美国人。

But that is not the case at all.

但这并不是这样。

And it has not been the case for most of modern American history.

而且它不是大多数现代美国史的情况。

Roughly a third of Americans say that they are Democrats.

大约三分之一的美国人说自己是民主党人。

Around a quarter say that they are Republicans.

大约四分之一的人说自己是共和党人。

A tiny little sliver call themselves libertarians, or socialists,

一小部分称自己为自由主义者，或社会主义者，

or some other small third party,

或者其他小的党派，

and the largest block, 40 percent, say they're independents.

大约有40%说他们是独立派。

So most Americans are not partisan,

所以绝大多数美国人是没有派性的，

and most of the people in the independent camp

绝大所数人属于独立派阵营

fall somewhere in between, so even though we have

介于两党之间，即使我们

tremendous overlap between the views on these fiscal issues

民主共和两党之间有很多

of Democrats and Republicans,

重叠的地方，

we have even more overlap when you add in the independents.

考虑到独立派，我们会有更多的重叠的地方。

Now we get to fight about all sorts of other issues.

现在我们争论其他问题。

We get to hate each other on gun control

在控枪问题堕胎问题和环境问题上

and abortion and the environment,

我们互相讨厌，

but on these fiscal issues, these important fiscal issues,

但是有关财政问题，这类重要的财政问题，

we just are not anywhere nearly as divided as people say.

我们并不如人所说的那样分派别。

And in fact, there's this other group of people

事实上，有一群人

who are not as divided as people might think,

并不如人们所想的那样分派性，

and that group is economists.

这群人就是经济学家。

I talk to a lot of economists, and back in the '70s

我和很多经济学家谈过话，在70年代

and '80s it was ugly being an economist.

和80年代，作为经济学家不是好事。

You were in what they called the saltwater camp,

要么你是在他们所谓的海水阵营，

meaning Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley,

这意味着哈佛大学，普林斯顿大学，麻省理工学院，斯坦福大学，伯克利分校，

or you were in the freshwater camp, University of Chicago,

要么你在淡水阵营，芝加哥大学，

University of Rochester.

罗切斯特大学。

You were a free market capitalist economist

要么你是一个自由市场的资本主义经济学家

or you were a Keynesian liberal economist,

要么你是凯恩斯主义的自由派经济学家，

and these people didn't go to each other's weddings,

这些人不去参加对方的婚礼，

they snubbed each other at conferences.

在会议上互相冷落对方。

It's still ugly to this day, but in my experience,

现如今，它仍然不好的，但以我的经验，

it is really, really hard to find an economist under 40

这是真的，真的很难找到40岁以下的经济学家

who still has that kind of way of seeing the world.

仍然以这种方式看世界。

The vast majority of economists -- it is so uncool

绝大多数经济学家 - 土气的

to call yourself an ideologue of either camp.

称自己为不属于两个阵营的理论家。

The phrase that you want, if you're a graduate student

你想的头衔是，如果你是一个研究生

or a postdoc or you're a professor,

或博士后，或者你是一个教授，

a 38-year-old economics professor, is, "I'm an empiricist.

一个38岁的经济学教授，是的，“我是一个经验主义者。

I go by the data."

我靠数据分析问题。”

And the data is very clear.

数据是非常明确的。

None of these major theories have been completely successful.

这两个学派理论都没有取得完全胜利

The 20th century, the last hundred years,

20世纪，过去这一百年，

is riddled with disastrous examples

充满了灾难性的例子的时候，

of times that one school or the other tried to explain

有一所学校或其他学校试图解释

the past or predict the future

过去或预测未来，

and just did an awful, awful job,

只是做了一个可怕的工作，

so the economics profession has acquired some degree of modesty.

所以经济学界已经变得很谦逊了。

They still are an awfully arrogant group of people, I will assure you,

他们仍然是一群非常傲慢的人，我向你们保证，

but they're now arrogant about their impartiality,

但他们现在傲慢显示在他们的公正性，

and they, too, see a tremendous range of potential outcomes.

他们也看到了巨大的潜在结果。

And this nonpartisanship is something that exists,

而这个无党派存在的东西，

that has existed in secret

在美国秘密已经存在多年了。

in America for years and years and years.

在美国秘密已经存在多年了。

I've spent a lot of the fall talking to the three major

我花很大精力对三个主要组织对话

organizations that survey American political attitudes:

调查美国人的政治态度：

Pew Research,

皮尤研究，

the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center,

芝加哥大学全国民意研究中心，

and the most important but the least known

以及最重要的，但最不为人所知的

is the American National Election Studies group

是美国的全国选举研究组，

that is the world's longest, most respected poll of political attitudes.

是世界上最悠久，最受人尊敬的政治态度调查。

They've been doing it since 1948,

他们从1948年就开始了这项工作，

and what they show consistently throughout

他们始终表明的是，

is that it's almost impossible to find Americans

它几乎是不可能的找到

who are consistent ideologically,

美国人思想是一致性，

who consistently support, "No we mustn't tax,

一贯支持，“不，我们不必加税，

and we must limit the size of government,"

我们必须限制政府的规模”

or, "No, we must encourage government to play a larger role

或“不，我们必须鼓励政府再分配中发挥更大的作用

in redistribution and correcting the ills of capitalism."

来纠正资本主义的弊病。“

Those groups are very, very small.

这些人群都非常非常小。

The vast majority of people, they pick and choose,

绝大多数人，他们选择

they see compromise and they change over time

他们妥协和随时间变化改主意

when they hear a better argument or a worse argument.

尤其是他们听到更好的论点或更糟糕的论点。

And that part of it has not changed.

这部分没有改变。

What has changed is how people respond to vague questions.

改变的是人们如何应对模糊的问题。

If you ask people vague questions, like,

如果你问人们模糊的问题，比如，

"Do you think there should be more government or less government?"

“你认为更多政府参与还是更少政府参与？”

"Do you think government should" — especially if you use loaded language --

“你认为政府应该...” 特别是如果你使用加载的语言

"Do you think the government should provide handouts?"

“你认为政府应该提供施舍吗？”

Or, "Do you think the government should redistribute?"

或者“你认为政府应该重新分配吗？”

Then you can see radical partisan change.

然后你可以看到激进党派变化。

But when you get specific, when you actually ask

但是当你特指某事，当你确切的

about the actual taxing and spending issues under consideration,

问到某项税收或支出问题时，

people are remarkably centrist,

人们就变得中立，

they're remarkably open to compromise.

他们非常愿意妥协。

So what we have, then, when you think about the fiscal cliff,

因此，我们有的，那么，当你觉得对财政的悬崖，

don't think of it as the American people fundamentally

不认为美国人民从根本上

can't stand each other on these issues

不能站在对方立场上看问题，

and that we must be ripped apart

我们必须把美国撕成

into two separate warring nations.

两个独立的论战的国家。

Think of it as a tiny, tiny number of ancient economists

把它看成是一个很小，很小的数目老经济学家

and misrepresentative ideologues have captured the process.

和不具代表性的理论家已掌控了过程。

And they've captured the process through familiar ways,

他们已经掌控了这个过程，通过熟悉的方式

through a primary system which encourages

通过一个主要系统鼓励

that small group of people's voices,

一小群人发出声音，

because that small group of people,

因为这一小群人，

the people who answer all yeses or all noes

这些人回答，是或否

on those ideological questions,

在那些意识型态问题，

they might be small but every one of them has a blog,

他们可能人数少，但是他们都有博客，

every one of them has been on Fox or MSNBC in the last week.

每个人上个星期在福克斯或微软全国广播公司上露脸。

Every one of them becomes a louder and louder voice,

他们中的每一个人都发出了更大的声音

but they don't represent us.

但是他们不代表我们。

They don't represent what our views are.

他们不代表我们的视角。

And that gets me back to the dollar,

这使我回到美元，

and it gets me back to reminding myself that

这使我提醒自己，

we know this experience.

我们知道这个体验。

We know what it's like

我们知道它像什么

to have these people on TV, in Congress,

让这些人上电视，去国会，

yelling about how the end of the world is coming

叫嚣，世界末日会来临，

if we don't adopt their view completely,

如果我们不采纳他们的观点，

because it's happened about the dollar

因为它发生的美元上

ever since there's been a dollar.

自从有美元起就这样。

We had the battle between Jefferson and Hamilton.

我们有杰斐逊和汉密尔顿的论战。

In 1913, we had this ugly battle over the Federal Reserve,

在1913年，关于美联储的论战

when it was created, with vicious, angry arguments

当美联储建立的时候，充满了恶毒和愤怒的争论

over how it would be constituted,

关于美联储如何构成，

and a general agreement that the way it was constituted

和一般的协议关于是如何构成

was the worst possible compromise,

是最坏的妥协，

a compromise guaranteed to destroy this valuable thing,

一个妥协保证摧毁这宝贵的东西，

this dollar, but then everyone agreeing, okay,

美元，但最后每人同意了，Okay,

so long as we're on the gold standard, it should be okay.

只要我们采用金本位制，它应该是好的。

The Fed can't mess it up so badly.

美联储不能搞的如此糟糕。

But then we got off the gold standard for individuals

但是我们取消了个人的金本位制，

during the Depression and we got off the gold standard

在大萧条中，

as a source of international currency coordination

尼克松时代我们取消了国际货币协调中

during Richard Nixon's presidency.

金本位制。

Each of those times, we were on the verge of complete collapse.

上述时刻，我们都处在崩溃边缘。

And nothing happened at all.

但最终也没发生崩溃。

Throughout it all, the dollar has been

贯穿始终，美元

one of the most long-standing,

都是最长存的，

stable, reasonable currencies,

稳定的，合理的货币，

and we all use it every single day,

我们每天都会使用，

no matter what the people screaming about tell us,

不管什么人尖叫告诉我们，

no matter how scared we're supposed to be.

不管我们多么害怕，我们还在使用美元。

And this long-term fiscal picture that we're in right now,

我们正在经历的，这个长期财政图景

I think what is most maddening about it is,

我认为什么是最令人抓狂的是，

if Congress were simply able

如果国会不只是能

to show not that they agree with each other,

显示他们同意与对方，

not that they're able to come up with the best possible compromise,

而不是他们能够拿出最好的妥协，

but that they are able to just begin the process

但他们的过程才刚刚开始

towards compromise, we all instantly are better off.

的妥协，大家都立刻好起来的。

The fear is that the world is watching.

可怕的是世界正在关注。

The fear is that the longer we delay any solution,

可怕的越是我们拖延解决方案

the more the world will look to the U.S.

世界越认为美国

not as the bedrock of stability in the global economy,

不是全球经济稳定的基石，

but as a place that can't resolve its own fights,

但作为一个不能解决自己的论战的地方，

and the longer we put that off, the more we make the world nervous,

我们拖得越久，我们越让世界担心

the higher interest rates are going to be,

就会有更高的贷款利率，

the quicker we're going to have to face a day

越快的面对

of horrible calamity.

灾难性的那天。

And so just the act of compromise itself,

所以就妥协本身的行为，

and sustained, real compromise,

和持续的、真正的妥协，

would give us even more time,

将给我们争取更多时间，

would allow both sides even longer to spread out the pain

使得双方更长时间分担痛苦，

and reach even more compromise down the road.

一段时间后达成更多的妥协。

So I'm in the media. I feel like my job to make this happen

所以我上媒体。我感觉我的工作就是

is to help foster the things that seem to lead to compromise,

帮助培养导致妥协的东西，

to not talk about this in those vague and scary terms

不要讲那些模糊的、吓人的术语

that do polarize us,

这会分化我们，

but to just talk about it like what it is,

只是谈财政悬崖是什么，

not an existential crisis,

不是一个生存危机，

not some battle between two fundamentally different religious views,

不是两种不同宗教的战争，

but a math problem, a really solvable math problem,

而只是一个数学问题，一个可解的数学问题，

one where we're not all going to get what we want

是我们不能得到所有我们想要的东西

and one where, you know, there's going to be a little pain to spread around.

是需要传播有些痛苦的东西。

But the more we address it as a practical concern,

不过，我们越是把它强调为现实关切，

the sooner we can resolve it,

我们就越快能解决它，

and the more time we have to resolve it, paradoxically.

同时，为我们解决它争取更多时间。

Thank you. (Applause)

谢谢。（掌声）