How to Live With Economic Doomsaying | Philipp Carlsson-Szlezak | TED

翻译人员: Shirley Tu 校对人员: suya f.

Do you ever tire of the doom,

你是否厌倦了关于全球经济的厄运

the gloom and the false alarms about the global economy?

忧郁和虚假警报？

In public discourse,

在公共话语中，

the economy always teeters at the cliff edge.

经济总是在悬崖边徘徊，

Supposedly, we're just inches away from falling to our economic death.

声称我们离经济死亡只有咫尺之遥。

And surprisingly often, we're told the fall's already begun,

令人震惊的是，我们常常被告知 经济衰退已经开始，

such as in 2020 when the pandemic hit.

例如在 2020 年疫情来袭时，

We were told there was going to be a deep depression,

我们被告知 严重的萧条即将出现，

the headlines said worse than 2008,

头条新闻说将比 2008 年的

the global financial crisis,

全球金融危机还要糟糕，

and as bad as the 1930s Great Depression.

和 1930 年代的大萧条一样严重。

But the opposite was true.

但事实恰恰相反：

A swift and strong recovery.

经济迎来了转向和强劲复苏。

In 2021,

2021 年，

when the strong recovery pushed up demand and prices,

当强劲的复苏推高了需求和价格时，

the doomsayers said there would be forever inflation.

末日论者说 永久性的通货膨胀将会来临。

The headlines said a return to the ugly 1970s.

头条新闻说 又回到了丑陋的 1970 年代。

But that didn't pan out either.

但是这也没有发生。

After a dramatic squeeze higher, inflation fell.

在大幅上涨之后， 通货膨胀率下降了。

And then in 2022,

然后在 2022 年，

when the Federal Reserve and other central banks

当美联储和其他中央银行

raised interest rates,

提高利率时，

the fear mongers came out

恐慌者纷纷表示

and said there was going to be a historic cascade

新兴市场将出现一连串的

of emerging market defaults.

历史性违约。

But that didn't happen.

但那依然没有发生。

In fact, the currencies of emerging markets

事实上，新兴市场的货币对美元的表现

performed better against the dollar than those of rich economies.

要优于富裕经济体的货币。

And then in 2023,

然后在 2023 年，

public discourse really wanted to believe in that recession.

公众话语实在很想相信 经济在衰退。

The headlines anchored on one word: inevitable.

头条新闻锚定了一个词： 不可避免。

But there was no recession.

但是衰退没有出现。

In fact, unemployment on both sides of the Atlantic

实际上，大西洋两岸的失业率

was at or near record lows this century.

都处于或接近本世纪最低水平。

We have to ask ourselves:

我们必须问问自己：

Why the doom?

为什么说厄运？

Why the gloom?

为什么说忧虑？

Why all the false alarms?

为什么到处都是虚假警报？

So I have a few ideas.

所以我有一些想法。

Perhaps it's economists like myself.

可能是因为， 像我这样的经济学家，

We're not good at forecasting,

明明不擅长预测，

clinging to silly but sophisticated models that fail to predict.

却执着于那些愚蠢又复杂、 但根本预测不成功的模型。

Or perhaps it’s the press that leans into doomsaying.

也可能是因为 媒体倾向于末日论。

Financial and economic journalists,

金融和经济记者，

they don't get to write about sex and crime and celebrities,

他们无法撰写有关性、犯罪 和名人的文章，

so perhaps macro doomsaying is a great substitute.

那么宏观末日论 也许是一个很好的替代品。

Or is it all of you?

又或者，这全都是因为你们？

If we're honest, there is some thrill in doomsaying,

说实话，末日论确实有点刺激，

and it's in our nature to worry and to obsess.

而担忧和痴迷是我们的天性。

Well, I think it's all of the above.

好吧，我想以上全部原因都有。

And the problem is not the drama that plays out in headlines.

问题不在于头条新闻所营造的戏剧性，

The problem is it comes with real costs for firms, for society, for all of us.

问题在于末日论会让企业、社会 和我们所有人付出实际成本。

So I've spent my career helping executives

因此，我的职业生涯 一直在帮助高管们

and investors navigate macro risk.

和投资者们应对宏观风险。

I work with them when they worry about recession,

当他们担心衰退、

when they worry about inflation,

担心通货膨胀、

about volatility and equity and currency markets and bond markets

担心波动性、股票、货币市场 以及债券市场等时，

and so on.

我会与他们合作。

The one thing I've learned is that they worry most

我从中学到了一件事， 他们最担心的

about the seesawing economic narratives,

是摇摆不定的经济叙事，

such as the ones we've just seen.

比如我们刚才所提到的。

There's not just a leadership cost of sending organizations in one direction,

让组织朝着一个方向发展， 到一段时间后又走回头路，

only to revert some time later.

不仅会付出领导力成本，

There is also the hard-dollar cost of false alarms.

还会因虚假警报付出 实际金钱成本。

Think about the automakers.

想想汽车制造商吧。

When the pandemic started,

当疫情开始时，

they thought it was going to be a greater depression,

他们以为一场 更严重的经济萧条即将到来，

just like the headlines said.

正如头条新闻所说。

所以他们削减了半导体订单，

So they cut their semiconductor orders.

却迎来了一场 势头强劲的经济复苏，

But when instead you got a roaring recovery,

可他们没有芯片 来为汽车提供动力了，

they didn't have the chips that power their cars,

只好与生产、销售、 收入和利润失之交臂。

they lost out on production, sales, revenue, profits.

But also there was a scarcity of cars pushing up prices and inflation.

同时汽车的短缺又 推高了价格和通货膨胀，

We all bore the cost of that.

我们都为此付出了代价。

Now, against this backdrop of doom and gloom,

现在，在这种厄运与忧郁的背景下，

we need more optimism.

我们需要更多的乐观情绪。

Not the Panglossian variety, but rational optimism.

不是庞氏骗局那种， 而是理性的乐观。

I'm not here to belittle macroeconomic risk.

我不是来贬低宏观经济风险的。

I know it's out there, even the pernicious and systemic kind.

我知道它是存在的， 甚至是系统性地有害的。

But if we can bring rational optimism to all the volatility,

但是，如果我们能以理性的乐观 来看待所有波动性，

we can reduce what we experience

就能减少我们所经历的波动，

and we can sidestep some of the false alarms.

并能避开一些虚假警报。

How?

怎么做？

A good place to start is to let go of master-model mentality.

一个不错的起点是， 丢掉“大师模型”思维。

There is no theory.

没有任何理论，

There is no model that provides the definitive macro answer and forecast.

没有任何模型可以给出一个 明确的宏观答案和预测。

Unfortunately, economics does not enjoy the stationary law

不幸的是，经济学们不喜欢那些

that allows physicists to close the debate and settle for truth.

能让物理学家们结束辩论 并接受真理的静态定律。

Already 50 years ago,

早在 50 年前，

Friedrich Hayek, the Austrian economist,

奥地利经济学家 弗里德里希·哈耶克（Friedrich Hayek）

he criticized fellow economists

就批评其他经济学家们

for imitating the brilliantly successful natural sciences.

在模仿那些硕果累累的自然科学。

So what went wrong in 2020

那么，在 2020 年， 是什么问题造成了

when there was a false alarm about a COVID depression?

有关疫情萧条的虚假警报呢？

Turns out, macro models,

事实证明，宏观模型

they anchor on the unemployment rate to forecast the recovery.

以失业率为锚点来预测复苏。

After 2008,

2008 年，

the global financial crisis was followed by years of sluggish recovery.

全球金融危机之后， 是长达数年的缓慢复苏。

So in 2020,

因此，在 2020 年，

when the pandemic hit and unemployment went to 15 percent,

当疫情来袭， 失业率高达 15％ 时，

the doomsayers, of course, thought it was much worse,

末日论者当然认为情况要糟糕得多，

and the models predicted an even longer recovery.

同时模型所预测的复苏时间会更长。

But the problem was, the models didn't know 15 percent unemployment.

但问题是，模型不了解 15％ 的失业率是什么情况，

It had never occurred before,

它以前从未发生过，

it was not in the empirical base of the models.

并不在模型的经验基础之中。

So what did they do?

所以他们做了什么呢？

They extrapolated outside the range of their empirical knowledge,

他们将自己经验知识范围内的结论 进行了外推 (extrapolate)，

and they failed.

然而他们失败了。

Unfortunately, that is the rule rather than the exception in economics.

不幸的是，这是经济学中的常规操作， 而非例外。

An economy like the US has only seen 11 recessions

像美国这样的经济体， 仅经历了 11 次经济衰退，

between the end of the World War II and the start of the pandemic.

自第二次世界大战结束 到疫情开始。

Now, each of those was idiosyncratic,

这些衰退都具有特异性，

with its own drivers and own idiosyncrasies.

有自己的驱动因素和特质。

But even if they were homogenous,

即便它们是同质性的，

11 is still not a sample size that will convince any natural scientist.

仅仅 11 个样本量 仍然无法说服任何自然科学家。

So instead of chasing elusive certainty in forecasts,

因此，我们要做的不是 追求渺茫的预测确定性，

what we need to do is embrace uncertainty instead.

而是拥抱不确定性。

Now that sounds like a burden.

现在这听起来像是一种负担。

But instead of feeling small and envious of natural scientists

但是，与其因自身的渺小 而去羡慕自然科学家们，

and that their own world doesn't fit into an Excel sheet,

只因自己的世界 不适合写在一张 Excel 表格中，

economists should embrace that diversity of drivers

经济学家们， 不如去拥抱驱动因素的多样性吧，

and they should embrace the messy reality of economics.

同时，应该接受经济学的混乱现实。

And to be extra clear,

更应明确的是，

if the models had had more empirical bases,

就算这些模型已经拥有了 更多的实证基础，

even if they had known 15 percent unemployment,

即使它们已经理解了 失业率为 15％ 的情况，

they still would not have been able to string together

他们仍然无法对经济复苏

a coherent narrative of that recovery.

做出一个连贯一致的叙述。

What about the brilliantly successful natural sciences?

那些硕果累累自然科学 是怎样做到的呢？

Turns out they didn't do much better.

事实证明他们并没有做得更好。

The onset of the pandemic was an accidental race

疫情的爆发正好成为了 流行病学家们

between epidemiologists and economists reading the future.

和经济学家们之间的一场 关于解读未来的竞赛。

Epidemiologists, they predicted many million more COVID deaths

流行病学家们，他们所预测的 因疫情死亡的人数

that never occurred,

比实际死亡人数多出了几百万，

making economists almost look good in the process.

这让经济学家们在这场竞赛中 看起来还算靠谱。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

So what we need is an open, eclectic mind,

所以我们需要的是一个开放的、 兼容并包的思维，

not closed for models.

而不是一个封闭的模型思维。

Now, the good news is,

现在，好消息是，

if we let go of master-model mentality,

如果我们忘掉“大师模型”思维，

and if we embrace the uncertainty that is a reality,

如果我们接受 现实就是不确定的，

we're already more than halfway towards thinking like a rational optimist.

那我们已经朝着理性乐观主义者 的方向前进了大半程。

Let me talk about the “rational” in rational optimism first.

让我先谈谈理性乐观主义中的“理性”。

Of course, there will be another recession.

当然，总会有另一场衰退，

There will be another crisis, and it is rational to consider them.

总会有另一场危机， 考虑这些危机是合理的，

But it is not rational to assume them.

但是去假设它们是不合理的。

The pathway to the cliff edge.

假设一条通向悬崖边缘的路。

When we have a narrow analytical lens,

当我们用狭窄的分析视角时，

we tend to see only the edges of the risk distribution get stuck there.

我们往往只会看到 风险分布曲线的边缘，

并局限在那里。

When we have a wider analytical lens,

当我们有更广阔的分析视角时，

we see broader parts of the risk distribution,

我们会看到风险分布曲线更宽的部分，

and we’re able to calibrate risk against each other.

并能相互校准风险。

There's also a tricky asymmetry.

还有一个棘手的问题是不对称性。

Big macro crises,

大型宏观危机，

they tend to be low-probability but high-impact events.

它们往往是低概率但高影响的事件。

But when we conflate the dimensions of probability and impact,

但是，当我们将概率和影响 这两个维度混为一谈时，

it becomes very easy to have distorted perspectives.

就很容易得到扭曲的视角。

A telltale sign of such distorted perspectives of the doomsaying narrative

末日论者的视角就是这么扭曲， 一个明显迹象就是

is they often cut straight to two questions:

它们总是直接切入这两个问题：

When will it happen?

它何时会发生？

And how big will be the damage?

以及它损失会有多大？

But isn’t it more rational to ask: What are the drivers?

可是，更合理的逻辑不是应该问： 什么才是其驱动因素？

What is the pathway to that cliff edge?

通往悬崖边缘的路径是什么？

And what are the signposts along the way?

还有沿途的路标是什么？

Now that leads me to the “optimism” in rational optimism.

这使我想到了 理性乐观主义的“乐观”。

Public discourse has always skewed negative,

公共话语一直偏向负面报道，

but we now live in a digital era of a culture where news is entertainment.

但我们现在生活在一个 新闻娱乐化的数字时代。

The business model of fighting for our eyeballs and our clicks

商业模型为了夺人眼球和点击率，

reliably passes the microphone to the loudest pessimists in the room.

总是将麦克风递给房间里 声音最大的悲观主义者。

And we never keep them accountable.

而我们从不追究他们的责任。

Sure, it's impressive when an economist predicted

诚然，一位经济学家预测了 2008 年的全球金融危机，

the 2008 global financial crisis,

令人印象深刻，

until you realize they predicted another dozen meltdowns

直到你意识到他们又预测了 另外十几次金融危机，

that somehow didn't happen.

但不知为何都没有发生。

Remember, a broken clock is right twice a day.

记住，即使是一个停摆的时钟， 每天也会正确报时两次。

And remember, the doomsayers,

同样地，请记住，末日论者，

they never bear the cost of their false alarms.

他们从不承担虚假警报的代价。

Only those who act on them do.

承担代价的都是那些 因他们的话采取行动的人。

So where does that leave us?

那么，我们该怎么办呢？

When you consume goods and services,

当您消费商品和服务时，

you're often warned about their contents.

总会得到有关其内容的警告。

When you watch a movie, it might say PG-13 or X-rated.

你看一部电影， 它可能会显示 PG-13 或 X 级。

When you open a bottle of wine, it'll say drink with moderation.

你开一瓶葡萄酒， 它会说要适量饮用。

But when you take in the news, particularly about the economy,

但是，当你看新闻， 尤其是经济新闻时，

you're never warned about the false alarms.

你永远不会得到虚假警报的警告。

Let rational optimism be your warning system.

让理性乐观主义成为你的警告系统吧。

Remember, for every true crisis, there are many false alarms.

请记住，每一次真正的危机 都伴随着许多次虚惊一场。

So when the next recession or crisis hits,

因此，当下一次经济衰退或危机来临时，

let go of the master-model forecasts.

忘掉大师模型的预测，

Embrace the uncertainty.

拥抱不确定性，

Embrace the distribution of risk.

接受风险分布，

Ask what takes us to the edge of the risk distribution

问一问是什么让我们 来到了风险分布的边缘，

and what pulls us back from the brink.

又是什么将我们从边缘拉回来。

Don't outsource your judgment to the headlines.

不要将你的判断外包给头条新闻。

Dare to judge for yourself.

要敢于自己做判断。

In other words, dare to be a rational optimist.

换句话说，要敢于成为一个 理性的乐观主义者。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

（掌声）