Thomas Piketty: New thoughts on capital in the twenty-first century

翻译人员: dahong zhang 校对人员: Cindy Ma

It's very nice to be here tonight.

今晚很高兴在这里和大家一起讨论

So I've been working on the history of income

过去15年来，我一直致力于研究

and wealth distribution for the past 15 years,

收入和财富分配的历史，

and one of the interesting lessons

从所看到的史料中

coming from this historical evidence

我分析得出的一个有意思的现象是

is indeed that, in the long run,

从长远来看

there is a tendency for the rate of return of capital

趋势是

资本的收益率超过经济增长率，

to exceed the economy's growth rate,

and this tends to lead to high concentration of wealth.

这将会导致财富的高度集中。

Not infinite concentration of wealth,

但并不是财富的无限集中，

but the higher the gap between r and g,

而是r(资本收益率)和g(经济增长率)之间 比例的极不均衡，

the higher the level of inequality of wealth

以及财富分配的极不平等

towards which society tends to converge.

这似乎是社会的发展走向。

So this is a key force that I'm going to talk about today,

这是我今天将要谈的关键内容

but let me say right away

但是我得明确一下

that this is not the only important force

这不是唯一的

在收入和财富分配的变化中起到关键作用的因素

in the dynamics of income and wealth distribution,

and there are many other forces that play

另外还有很多因素

an important role in the long-run dynamics

在不断发展变化的收入和 财富分配的过程中起到

of income and wealth distribution.

重要作用。

Also there is a lot of data

同时，还有

许多数据需要收集。

that still needs to be collected.

We know a little bit more today

相比以前，现今我们对这个问题

than we used to know, but we still know too little,

了解的更多了，但是我们还是知之甚少，

and certainly there are many different processes —

另外，还应该在相关的不同领域，

economic, social, political —

例如经济，社会，政治等

that need to be studied more.

投入更多的研究。

And so I'm going to focus today on this simple force,

所以虽然今天我主要讨论的是关键因素

but that doesn't mean that other important forces

但并不是说其他重要因素

do not exist.

不存在了

So most of the data I'm going to present

今天我大部分数据都

comes from this database

基于一个数据库

that's available online:

大家可以在网上找到：

the World Top Incomes Database.

“世界顶级收入数据库“

So this is the largest existing

这是现有最大的

historical database on inequality,

表现收入不平均的数据库，

and this comes from the effort

其的建成有赖于

of over 30 scholars from several dozen countries.

几十个国家的30个学者的努力。

So let me show you a couple of facts

下面我们来看一下几个基于

coming from this database,

数据库的事实，

and then we'll return to r bigger than g.

然后我们再回到关于r > g的话题。

So fact number one is that there has been

事实一：

a big reversal in the ordering of income inequality

过去的一个世纪中

between the United States and Europe

在美国和欧洲

over the past century.

收入的不平等的排名有了逆转。

So back in 1900, 1910, income inequality was actually

让我们回到1900-1910年间，

much higher in Europe than in the United States,

在这段时间里欧洲收入不平等远比美国严重，

whereas today, it is a lot higher in the United States.

而今天美国却远比欧洲严重的多。

So let me be very clear:

所以我们可以清楚的得出结论：

The main explanation for this is not r bigger than g.

其中主要的原因不是 r 大于 g.

It has more to do with changing supply and demand

而是更多的跟技能的供给的改变有关，

for skill, the race between education and technology,

在美国，教育和科技上的竞赛、

globalization, probably more unequal access

全球化的因素，可能导致 更多的在技能获取方面的

to skills in the U.S.,

不平等性，

where you have very good, very top universities

在美国有非常好的，顶尖的大学

but where the bottom part of the educational system

但是教育系统中的下层

is not as good,

就不是那么好了，

so very unequal access to skills,

所以可以看到技能获取处于非常不平等的状态，

and also an unprecedented rise

而且在美国管理层薪酬

of top managerial compensation of the United States,

空前高涨，

which is difficult to account for just on the basis of education.

这个很难说是仅仅基于教育所造成的

So there is more going on here,

而是有多方面的因素

but I'm not going to talk too much about this today,

但是今天我不会过多地讨论这方面的问题，

because I want to focus on wealth inequality.

因为我想关注的是财富的不平等。

So let me just show you a very simple indicator

所以我们就简单看看

about the income inequality part.

不平等部分的指标。

So this is the share of total income

这个指数是顶级收入

going to the top 10 percent.

占10%的数字

So you can see that one century ago,

一个世纪之前

it was between 45 and 50 percent in Europe

这个数字在欧洲是在45%到50%之间

and a little bit above 40 percent in the U.S.,

在美国稍稍多于40%

so there was more inequality in Europe.

所以看来当时欧洲处于更不平等的状态

Then there was a sharp decline

接下来这个数字的急剧的下降

during the first half of the 20th century,

时间是在20世纪中期

and in the recent decade, you can see that

在最近的十年，您可以看到

the U.S. has become more unequal than Europe,

跟欧洲相比，美国显得更不平等，

and this is the first fact I just talked about.

这就是我刚才讲提到的第一个事实。

Now, the second fact is more about wealth inequality,

第二个事实更多的是在于财富的不平等，

and here the central fact is that wealth inequality

事实的核心就是财富的不平等的比率

is always a lot higher than income inequality,

更高于收入不平等的比率，

and also that wealth inequality,

而且尽管财富不平等

although it has also increased in recent decades,

在近几十年中又有所增长

is still less extreme today

但是现在依然

than what it was a century ago,

低于一个世纪以前，

although the total quantity of wealth

尽管现今的财富总量

relative to income has now recovered

与收入总量相比

from the very large shocks

已经从大冲击中恢复过来了，

caused by World War I, the Great Depression,

这些冲击来自第一次世界大战、经济大萧条

World War II.

和第二次世界大战。

So let me show you two graphs

现在我们来看两个图表

illustrating fact number two and fact number three.

用来说明事实二和事实三。

So first, if you look at the level of wealth inequality,

首先，如果你看一下 所显示的财富不均等的数字，

this is the share of total wealth

总财富指数显示

going to the top 10 percent of wealth holders,

财富集中于10%的富裕人群中

so you can see the same kind of reversal

同类型的的逆转也存在于

between the U.S. and Europe that we had before

我们刚才提到的美国和欧洲

for income inequality.

并体现在收入的不平等上

So wealth concentration was higher

所以就一个世纪前财富的集中度来说

in Europe than in the U.S. a century ago,

欧洲比美国高，

and now it is the opposite.

而现在却相反了。

But you can also show two things:

可是你也可以看到两个事实：

First, the general level of wealth inequality

第一，财富不平等的整体水平

is always higher than income inequality.

总是高于收入不平等。

So remember, for income inequality,

所以要提醒大家的事，收入不平等中

the share going to the top 10 percent

前10%高收入者所占份额

was between 30 and 50 percent of total income,

占收入总量的30%-50%，

whereas for wealth, the share is always

与此对照，前10%的财富持有者

between 60 and 90 percent.

占财富总量的60%-90%

Okay, so that's fact number one,

好了，这是事实一

and that's very important for what follows.

这对于下面要讲的非常重要。

Wealth concentration is always

财富集中度总是

a lot higher than income concentration.

远高于收入集中度。

Fact number two is that the rise

事实二是

近几十年来财富不平等加剧

in wealth inequality in recent decades

is still not enough to get us back to 1910.

还没有达到1910年水平。

So the big difference today,

今天最大的区别是

wealth inequality is still very large,

财富不平等还非常严重，

with 60, 70 percent of total wealth for the top 10,

前10%的高财富持有者占财富总量的60%-70%

but the good news is that it's actually

不过好消息是现在

better than one century ago,

好于一个世纪以前，

where you had 90 percent in Europe going to the top 10.

当时欧洲10%的高财富持有者 占财富总量的90%

So today what you have

今天您可以看到

is what I call the middle 40 percent,

中间40%的人，

the people who are not in the top 10

就是除了前10%

and who are not in the bottom 50,

和底层50%以外的人

and what you can view as the wealth middle class

您可以视之为财富中产阶级

that owns 20 to 30 percent

占财富总量、国民财富的

of total wealth, national wealth,

20%-30%，

whereas they used to be poor, a century ago,

一个世纪前，他们更穷些，

when there was basically no wealth middle class.

那时基本上没有财富中产阶级。

So this is an important change,

这是一个重要的变化，

and it's interesting to see that wealth inequality

有意思的是财富不平等

has not fully recovered to pre-World War I levels,

没有恢复到一战前水平，

although the total quantity of wealth has recovered.

尽管财富总量已经恢复。

Okay? So this is the total value

这是财富相对于收入的

of wealth relative to income,

总额

and you can see that in particular in Europe,

您可以看到特别在欧洲，

we are almost back to the pre-World War I level.

我们差不多回到了一战前水平。

So there are really two

这个件事有两个不同

different parts of the story here.

的部分。

One has to do with

其一为，

the total quantity of wealth that we accumulate,

我们积累财富的总量

and there is nothing bad per se, of course,

这本身不是坏事，

in accumulating a lot of wealth,

我们积累了大量财富，

and in particular if it is more diffuse

特别分布更平均

and less concentrated.

不那么集中。

So what we really want to focus on

这里我们关注

is the long-run evolution of wealth inequality,

财富不平等的长期演化，

and what's going to happen in the future.

以及未来将要发生什么。

How can we account for the fact that

我们如何解释，第一次世界大战前

until World War I, wealth inequality was so high

财富不平等如此高

and, if anything, was rising to even higher levels,

没有一战的话还会更高

and how can we think about the future?

我们如何设想未来？

So let me come to some of the explanations

让我来讲解和推测一下

and speculations about the future.

未来。

Let me first say that

让我先说说

probably the best model to explain

最好解释财富集中度高于

why wealth is so much

收入集中度

more concentrated than income

的动态模型

is a dynamic, dynastic model

是一个动态模型

where individuals have a long horizon

由于各种原因个人有长期

and accumulate wealth for all sorts of reasons.

的财富积累期。

If people were accumulating wealth

如果人们只为

only for life cycle reasons,

生命周期积累财富，

you know, to be able to consume

这样就可以

when they are old,

老有所依，

then the level of wealth inequality

这种情况下，

should be more or less in line

财富不平等应该和

with the level of income inequality.

收入不平等差不多。

But it will be very difficult to explain

但这很难解释

why you have so much more wealth inequality

为什么财富不平等

than income inequality

更甚于收入不平等

with a pure life cycle model,

如果仅用生命周期模型的话，

so you need a story

这里需要一个理由

where people also care

人们还需要

about wealth accumulation for other reasons.

关注财富积累的其他理由。

So typically, they want to transmit

典型的是，人们想

wealth to the next generation, to their children,

为下一代积累财富，给他们的儿孙，

or sometimes they want to accumulate wealth

有时候人们积累财富

because of the prestige, the power that goes with wealth.

是为了随财富而来的威望和权力。

So there must be other reasons

还有其他原因

for accumulating wealth than just life cycle

不只是仅为老有所依而积累财富

to explain what we see in the data.

来解释我们看到的数据。

Now, in a large class of dynamic models

如今，在一个大型的财富积累的

of wealth accumulation

动态模型中

with such dynastic motive for accumulating wealth,

有动态积累财富的动机

you will have all sorts of random,

且可进行所有随机的

multiplicative shocks.

乘法运算。

So for instance, some families

例如，一些家庭

have a very large number of children,

孩子很多

so the wealth will be divided.

财富就会分散

Some families have fewer children.

一些家庭孩子少

You also have shocks to rates of return.

还要算上收益率的冲击。

Some families make huge capital gains.

一些家庭获得巨额资本收益

Some made bad investments.

另一些投资失败

So you will always have some mobility

这样财富有更多的

in the wealth process.

流动性。

Some people will move up, some people will move down.

有些人变富有些人变穷。

The important point is that,

重点是

in any such model,

这些模型

for a given variance of such shocks,

给定方差的冲击，

the equilibrium level of wealth inequality

财富不平等的均衡水平将是

will be a steeply rising function of r minus g.

一个(r - g)急剧上升的函数。

And intuitively, the reason why the difference

直觉上说，

财富的回报率

between the rate of return to wealth

and the growth rate is important

和增长率之间的差距是由于

is that initial wealth inequalities

初始财富不平等造成的

will be amplified at a faster pace

将以更快的速度被放大

with a bigger r minus g.

r - g。

So take a simple example,

举个简单的例子，

with r equals five percent and g equals one percent,

r为5%，g为1%，

wealth holders only need to reinvest

财富持有者只需要再投资

one fifth of their capital income to ensure

资产中的五分之一

that their wealth rises as fast

就可以保证他们的财富

as the size of the economy.

可以和经济等速增长。

So this makes it easier

这就使得

to build and perpetuate large fortunes

财富保值更容易

because you can consume four fifths,

零税率的情况下

assuming zero tax,

你可以消费另外的五分之四，

and you can just reinvest one fifth.

你只需要五分之一用以再投资。

So of course some families will consume more than that,

当然有些家庭消费多些，

some will consume less, so there will be

有些则少些，

some mobility in the distribution,

这样分配就有了流动性，

but on average, they only need to reinvest one fifth,

平均来说，他们只需要 五分之一财富由于再投资

so this allows high wealth inequalities to be sustained.

这会导致财富不平等的持续。

Now, you should not be surprised

您不要惊讶

by the statement that r can be bigger than g forever,

r 会永远大于 g的说法

because, in fact, this is what happened

因为，这是

during most of the history of mankind.

人类大部分历史的情况。

And this was in a way very obvious to everybody

每个人都应该清楚

for a simple reason, which is that growth

原因很简单，

was close to zero percent

人类历史上

during most of the history of mankind.

大部分时间增长率都接近0。

Growth was maybe 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 percent,

增长率可能为0.1%,0.2%,0.3%

but very slow growth of population

人口增长缓慢

and output per capita,

人均产出

whereas the rate of return on capital

资本回报率

of course was not zero percent.

当然不是0%。

It was, for land assets, which was

土地资产

the traditional form

传统上的

of assets in preindustrial societies,

工业化前社会，

it was typically five percent.

一般为5%。

Any reader of Jane Austen would know that.

对于作家简·奥斯汀的读者应该知道，

If you want an annual income of 1,000 pounds,

如果你想每年收入1000英镑，

you should have a capital value

你得有2万英镑的

of 20,000 pounds so that

本钱

five percent of 20,000 is 1,000.

这样2万的5%为1000。

And in a way, this was

某种程度上来说，

the very foundation of society,

这是以往社会的基础，

because r bigger than g

因为r > g

was what allowed holders of wealth and assets

这样财富和资产的持有者可以

to live off their capital income

依靠资本收益生活

and to do something else in life

而且可以干点儿别的

than just to care about their own survival.

不只是关注与如何生存。

Now, one important conclusion

一个重要推论

of my historical research is that

是依据我的历史研究

modern industrial growth did not change

当代工业增长没有改变

this basic fact as much as one might have expected.

这一基本事实。

Of course, the growth rate

当然，增长率

following the Industrial Revolution

随着工业革命提升

rose, typically from zero to one to two percent,

从0%增长到2%，

but at the same time, the rate of return

但是同时，资本回报率

to capital also rose

也增加了

so that the gap between the two

这样两者之间的差距

did not really change.

并没有改变。

So during the 20th century,

20世纪

you had a very unique combination of events.

有一个非常独特的事件汇总影响。

First, a very low rate of return

首先，由于战争1914-1945

due to the 1914 and 1945 war shocks,

资本回报率非常低

destruction of wealth, inflation,

财富的损失，贬值

bankruptcy during the Great Depression,

大萧条时的破产，

and all of this reduced

这都降低了

the private rate of return to wealth

个人的财富收益率

to unusually low levels

到了一个低水平

between 1914 and 1945.

在1914-1945。

And then, in the postwar period,

战后，

you had unusually high growth rate,

增长率通常很高，

partly due to the reconstruction.

部分原因是重建。

You know, in Germany, in France, in Japan,

德国，法国，日本，

you had five percent growth rate

从1950-1980

between 1950 and 1980

有5%的增长率

largely due to reconstruction,

就是由于战后重建。

and also due to very large demographic growth,

同样由于人口大量增长

the Baby Boom Cohort effect.

婴儿潮世代效应。

Now, apparently that's not going to last for very long,

显然这不能持续很久，

or at least the population growth

至少人口增长率

is supposed to decline in the future,

在未来会下降，

and the best projections we have is that

最佳的推测是

the long-run growth is going to be closer

长期增长率接近

to one to two percent

1%-2%

rather than four to five percent.

而不是4%-5%

So if you look at this,

仔细审视，

these are the best estimates we have

我们得到的最佳估计是

of world GDP growth

世界GDP增长

and rate of return on capital,

和资本回报率

average rates of return on capital,

平均资本回报率，

so you can see that during most

您可以看到

of the history of mankind,

人类历史大部分时间

the growth rate was very small,

增长率非常小

much lower than the rate of return,

低于回报率，

and then during the 20th century,

在20世纪

it is really the population growth,

战后

very high in the postwar period,

人口快速增长

and the reconstruction process

以及战后重建

that brought growth

带来了增长

to a smaller gap with the rate of return.

缩小了增长率和回报率之间的差距。

Here I use the United Nations population projections,

这里我引用联合国人口预测，

so of course they are uncertain.

当然这并不是最准确的数字

It could be that we all start

但是我们未来可能

having a lot of children in the future,

都会有很多小孩，

and the growth rates are going to be higher,

增长率变得更高，

but from now on,

但是今后

these are the best projections we have,

这是我们最后好的预测，

and this will make global growth

这会导致全球增长

decline and the gap between

下滑和回报率的差距

the rate of return go up.

会加大。

Now, the other unusual event

还有其他不同的事件

during the 20th century

在20世纪

was, as I said,

如我所说

destruction, taxation of capital,

财产破坏，资本税

so this is the pre-tax rate of return.

这是税前收益率

This is the after-tax rate of return,

这是税后收益率

and after destruction,

破坏后的收益率，

and this is what brought

这是结果

the average rate of return

税后平均回报率

after tax, after destruction,

破坏后，

below the growth rate during a long time period.

低于增长率。

But without the destruction,

如果没有破坏，

without the taxation, this would not have happened.

没有税的话，这就不会发生。

So let me say that the balance between

让我说一下

returns on capital and growth

资本回报率经济增长之间的

depends on many different factors

平衡取决于不同的因素,

that are very difficult to predict:

很难预测:

technology and the development

技术和开发

of capital-intensive techniques.

资本密集型技术

So right now, the most capital-intensive sectors

当下，资本密集型行业

in the economy are the real estate sector, housing,

在经济中主要是房地产行业，

the energy sector, but it could be in the future

能源行业，但是未来

that we have a lot more robots in a number of sectors

更多的机器人应用在大量行业

and that this would be a bigger share

这会占更大的

of the total capital stock that it is today.

总发行股本。

Well, we are very far from this,

当然，我们还距此很远，

and from now, what's going on

今后，

in the real estate sector, the energy sector,

房地产行业，能源行业

is much more important for the total capital stock

更重要总发行股本

and capital share.

和资本股

The other important issue

其他重要问题是

is that there are scale effects in portfolio management,

投资管理的规模效应，

together with financial complexity,

加上金融复杂性,

financial deregulation,

金融自由化,

that make it easier to get higher rates of return

这获得更高回报率变得更容易

for a large portfolio,

大型投资组合

and this seems to be particularly strong

使得亿万富翁，大型资本捐增资金

for billionaires, large capital endowments.

变得非常强大。

Just to give you one example,

举个例子，

this comes from the Forbes billionaire rankings

从福布斯排行榜

over the 1987-2013 period,

在1987-2013间公布的数据来看，

and you can see the very top wealth holders

顶级财富持有者

have been going up at six, seven percent per year

每年提高6%-7%。

in real terms above inflation,

实际高于通货膨胀，

whereas average income in the world,

世界平均收入

average wealth in the world,

世界平均财富，

have increased at only two percent per year.

增长每年只有2%。

And you find the same

同样

for large university endowments —

大型大学捐增资金

the bigger the initial endowments,

初始捐增资金越大

the bigger the rate of return.

回报率越高。

Now, what could be done?

怎么办？

The first thing is that I think we need

首先我认为我们需要

more financial transparency.

更高的财务透明度。

We know too little about global wealth dynamics,

我们对全球财富动力学知之甚少，

so we need international transmission

我们需要国际间传递

of bank information.

银行信息。

We need a global registry of financial assets,

我们需要一个全球性的金融资产注册表

more coordination on wealth taxation,

更多的财富税，

and even wealth tax with a small tax rate

即使低的财富税税率

will be a way to produce information

会产生相关资产信息

so that then we can adapt our policies

以便根据我们观察

to whatever we observe.

调整政策。

And to some extent, the fight

某种程度上，

against tax havens

打击避税天堂

and automatic transmission of information

自动传输信息

is pushing us in this direction.

可以把我们推向这个方向。

Now, there are other ways to redistribute wealth,

还有其他的财富再分配方法，

which it can be tempting to use.

也可以一试。

Inflation:

通货膨胀：

it's much easier to print money

印钱

than to write a tax code, so that's very tempting,

比拟定一部税法简单，很有诱惑力，

but sometimes you don't know what you do with the money.

但有时你不知道如何花钱。

This is a problem.

这是个问题。

Expropriation is very tempting.

没收也不错。

Just when you feel some people get too wealthy,

如果觉得某些人太富了，

you just expropriate them.

就没收他们。

But this is not a very efficient way

不过这不是对财富动态监管的

to organize a regulation of wealth dynamics.

有效方法。

So war is an even less efficient way,

战争效率更低，

so I tend to prefer progressive taxation,

我更倾向于累进税，

but of course, history — (Laughter) —

当然，历史（笑声）

history will invent its own best ways,

历史会创造最好的方法，

and it will probably involve

可能是

a combination of all of these.

上述方法的组合。

Thank you.

谢谢

(Applause)

（掌声）

Bruno Giussani: Thomas Piketty. Thank you.

布鲁诺·朱萨尼：托马斯·皮克迪，谢谢。

Thomas, I want to ask you two or three questions,

托马斯，我想问你两三个问题，

because it's impressive how you're in command of your data, of course,

你的数据令人印象深刻

but basically what you suggest is

但是基本上你建议

growing wealth concentration is kind of

财富集中度提高

a natural tendency of capitalism,

是资本主义的自然趋势，

and if we leave it to its own devices,

如果任由发展，

it may threaten the system itself,

可能会危及系统本身，

so you're suggesting that we need to act

所以您建议采取

to implement policies that redistribute wealth,

一些政策对财富再分配，

including the ones we just saw:

包括

progressive taxation, etc.

累进税，等等。

In the current political context,

当下政治环境下

how realistic are those?

如何实现？

How likely do you think that it is

您认为

that they will be implemented?

如何执行？

Thomas Piketty: Well, you know, I think

托马斯·皮凯迪：当然，我认为

if you look back through time,

如果你看看过去，

the history of income, wealth and taxation

收入的历史，财富和税

is full of surprise.

充满了不确定性。

So I am not terribly impressed

我不会惊讶于

by those who know in advance

谁会提前知道

what will or will not happen.

会发生什么。

I think one century ago,

一个世纪前，

many people would have said

很多人会说

that progressive income taxation would never happen

不会征收累进所得税

and then it happened.

结果征了。

And even five years ago,

5年前，

many people would have said that bank secrecy

很多人会说

will be with us forever in Switzerland,

瑞士会一直坚持银行保密法，

that Switzerland was too powerful

瑞士太强大了

for the rest of the world,

相对于世界其他地方，

and then suddenly it took a few U.S. sanctions

然而美国的几个对瑞士银行的制裁

against Swiss banks for a big change to happen,

就导致了巨变，

and now we are moving toward

此后

more financial transparency.

金融透明度更高了。

So I think it's not that difficult

我认为

to better coordinate politically.

更好的政治协调并不难。

We are going to have a treaty

我们会和表格上

with half of the world GDP around the table

半数的世界GDP贡献国

with the U.S. and the European Union,

和美国、欧盟谈判

so if half of the world GDP is not enough

如果世界一半GDP不够

to make progress on financial transparency

改善金融透明性

and minimal tax for multinational corporate profits,

为跨国企业利润收最少的税，

what does it take?

需要做什么？

So I think these are not technical difficulties.

我认为这些技术上不困难。

I think we can make progress

我认为会取得进展的

if we have a more pragmatic approach to these questions

如果我们有对这些问题更实用的方法

and we have the proper sanctions

我们制裁

on those who benefit from financial opacity.

从金融不透明中获益的人。

BG: One of the arguments

布鲁诺·朱萨尼：反对您观点的

against your point of view

一个争论就是

is that economic inequality

经济不平等

is not only a feature of capitalism but is actually one of its engines.

这不仅是资本主义的特色也是驱动引擎。

So we take measures to lower inequality,

我们要是采取措施降低不平等，

and at the same time we lower growth, potentially.

同时我们会不经意间降低增长与潜能。

What do you answer to that?

您怎么看？

TP: Yeah, I think inequality

托马斯·皮凯迪：是的，不平等

is not a problem per se.

本身不是一个问题。

I think inequality up to a point

我认为某种程度上

can actually be useful for innovation and growth.

不平等有利于革新和增长。

The problem is, it's a question of degree.

问题是，问题的度。

When inequality gets too extreme,

不平等太大了，

then it becomes useless for growth

增长就没有意义

and it can even become bad

会更糟

because it tends to lead to high perpetuation

因为它会导致

of inequality over time

不平等的固化

and low mobility.

降低流动性。

And for instance, the kind of wealth concentrations

例如，像19世纪那样的

that we had in the 19th century

财富集中度

and pretty much until World War I

这个集中情况一直持续到一战前

in every European country

且遍布每个欧洲国家

was, I think, not useful for growth.

我认为，对增长没用。

This was destroyed by a combination

这种情况被一系列

of tragic events and policy changes,

悲剧事件和政策改变了，

and this did not prevent growth from happening.

没有阻碍增长的发生。

And also, extreme inequality can be bad

同样，极端不平等

for our democratic institutions

对我们的民主制度不好

if it creates very unequal access to political voice,

它创造了非常不平等的政治声音，

and the influence of private money

美国政治中的

in U.S. politics, I think,

私人资金的影响力

is a matter of concern right now.

现在就是需要关注的问题。

So we don't want to return to that kind of extreme,

我们不想回到类似

pre-World War I inequality.

一战前那种极端不平等。

Having a decent share of the national wealth

中产阶级占有适当的

for the middle class is not bad for growth.

国家财富对增长有利。

It is actually useful

实际上

both for equity and efficiency reasons.

有利于平等和效率。

BG: I said at the beginning

布鲁诺·朱萨尼：我开头说的

that your book has been criticized.

您的书被批评。

Some of your data has been criticized.

您的一些数据被批评。

Some of your choice of data sets has been criticized.

一些您所选择的数据集被批评。

You have been accused of cherry-picking data

您被指责刻意挑选数据作论据

to make your case. What do you answer to that?

您怎么回答？

TP: Well, I answer that I am very happy

托马斯·皮凯迪：我的回答是

that this book is stimulating debate.

我很高兴，这本书激起辩论。

This is part of what it is intended for.

这正是我想要的。

Look, the reason why I put all the data online

看，我把数据放到网上

with all of the detailed computation

带着计算的细节

is so that we can have an open and transparent

我们可以公开透明

debate about this.

探讨。

So I have responded point by point

我逐一回复

to every concern.

每个关注。

Let me say that if I was to rewrite the book today,

如果我今天重写此书，

I would actually conclude

我会断定

that the rise in wealth inequality,

财富不平等增加了，

particularly in the United States,

特别是在美国，

has been actually higher than what I report in my book.

比我写书时更不平等。

There is a recent study by Saez and Zucman

最近经济学家伊曼纽尔·赛斯(Emmanuel Saez)和加布里埃尔·祖克曼(Gabriel Zucman)

showing, with new data

用我写书时没有的新数据

which I didn't have at the time of the book,

表明，

that wealth concentration in the U.S. has risen

美国的财富不平等加剧

even more than what I report.

比我写的还要严重。

And there will be other data in the future.

将来还会有其他数据。

Some of it will go in different directions.

有些将引向不同的方向。

Look, we put online almost every week

要知道，每周我们上线

new, updated series on the World Top Income Database

新的、更新的世界顶级收入数据库 (World Top Incomes Database)

and we will keep doing so in the future,

将来我们也会坚持这样做，

in particular in emerging countries,

特别是新兴国家，

and I welcome all of those who want to contribute

我欢迎所有收集数据过程

to this data collection process.

提供帮助的人。

In fact, I certainly agree

事实上，我同意

that there is not enough

财富动力学的透明度

transparency about wealth dynamics,

不够，

and a good way to have better data

还有一个办法就是

would be to have a wealth tax

征收财富税

with a small tax rate to begin with

从低税率开始

so that we can all agree

这样我们都会同意

about this important evolution

这一重要演进

and adapt our policies to whatever we observe.

根据我们的观察调整政策。

So taxation is a source of knowledge,

征税是一个知识信息源，

and that's what we need the most right now.

是我们现在最需要的。

BG: Thomas Piketty, merci beaucoup.

布鲁诺·朱萨尼：托马斯·皮凯迪，非常感谢。

Thank you. TP: Thank you. (Applause)

谢谢。托马斯.皮凯迪：谢谢。(掌声)