Michael Metcalfe: We need money for aid. So let's print it.

譯者: Julianne Li 審譯者: Chunda Zeng

Thirteen years ago,

十三年前

we set ourselves a goal to end poverty.

我們為自己設立了 終止貧窮的目標。

After some success,

在幾次成功的經驗後，

we've hit a big hurdle.

我們遇上了大障礙。

The aftermath of the financial crisis

財務危機的餘波

has begun to hit aid payments,

開始影響救濟金，

which have fallen for two consecutive years.

目前已經連續兩年金額不足。

My question is whether the lessons learned

我想問的問題是

from saving the financial system

我們在拯救金融系統中學到的教訓

can be used to help us overcome that hurdle

是否能幫助我們 解決這個障礙，

and help millions.

且幫助數以萬計需要援助的人？

Can we simply print money for aid?

我們是否可以光靠 「印鈔票」來解決問題？

"Surely not."

「當然不行！」

It's a common reaction.

這是最常見的反應。

(Laughter)

(觀眾笑聲)

It's a quick talk.

「只是說說罷了別當真。」

Others channel John McEnroe.

有些人可能會用約翰‧麥可恩洛的口氣 這麼回答...

"You cannot be serious!"

「你肯定在開玩笑！」

Now, I can't do the accent, but I am serious,

我學不上他的語氣， 但我沒在開玩笑，

thanks to these two children,

幸虧有這兩位小孩，

who, as you'll learn, are very much at the heart

你們等等會明白

of my talk.

他們是我這段演講的主角。

On the left, we have Pia.

左邊這位是皮雅，

She lives in England.

她住在英格蘭，

She has two loving parents,

有和藹可親的雙親，

one of whom is standing right here.

其中一位 正站在這個講台上。

Dorothy, on the right,

右邊這位是桃樂思

lives in rural Kenya.

住在肯亞農村，

She's one of 13,000 orphans

她是一萬三千名孤兒中的 其中一名，

and vulnerable children

是位孤苦無依的小孩，

who are assisted by a charity that I support.

目前正由我支持的慈善機構協助。

I do that because I believe

我會這麼做是因為，我相信

that Dorothy, like Pia,

桃樂思 就跟皮雅一樣，

deserves the best life chances

值得擁有更好的人生機會，

that we can afford to give her.

如果我們可以負擔得起她們的生活。

You'll all agree with me, I'm sure.

你們大家都會同意我的看法， 這點我肯定，

The U.N. agrees too.

聯合國也同意。

Their overriding aim

他們針對國際援助上

for international aid

跨領域的目標

is to strive for a life of dignity for all.

便是為每個人 爭取生存尊嚴。

But -- and here's that hurdle --

不過...出現障礙了，

can we afford our aid aspirations?

我們要如何擔負起 這股對援助的熱心？

History suggests not.

歷史證據顯示，我們辦不到。

In 1970, governments set themselves a target

1970年，政府設立一個目標，

to increase overseas aid payments

將海外援助津貼數值增加到

to 0.7 percent

國民收入的

of their national income.

百分之0.7(%)。

As you can see, a big gap opens up

誠如你們看到的， 在實際援助經費與目標數值之間

between actual aid and that target.

有條巨大的鴻溝。

But then come the Millennium Development Goals,

不過在這之後 我們推行千禧發展目標，

eight ambitious targets

八項充滿企圖心的目標

to be met by 2015.

打算在2015年完全落實。

If I tell you that just one of those targets

如果我告訴你其中一個目標

is to eradicate extreme hunger and poverty,

是要徹底根除飢餓與貧窮，

you get a sense of the ambition.

你馬上就能感受到 設立這些目標的雄心。

There's also been some success.

過去有些成功的案例。

The number of people living

全球每天只靠1.25美元維生的人數

on less than $1.25 a day has halved.

已經減少一半，

But a lot remains to be done in two years.

但還是有許多問題需要 接下來兩年的時間來作改善。

One in eight remain hungry.

全球每8個人中 就有1個人受挨餓。

In the context of this auditorium,

以這個講廳 來給你們打比方，

the front two rows aren't going to get any food.

這代表著前兩排的觀眾 會沒有食物可吃，

We can't settle for that,

我們不能滿足於這樣的事實，

which is why the concern about the eighth goal,

因此我們的第八項目標設立的中旨

which relates to funding,

跟金援補助有關，

which I said at the beginning is falling,

我在前面已提到， 它正在下降，

is so troubling.

這著實令人不安。

So what can be done?

所以能做甚麼來補救呢？

Well, I work in financial markets,

我曾任職於金融市場，

not development.

與它的發展無關，

I study the behavior of investors,

我研究投資者行為，

how they react to policy and the economy.

研究他們對政策與經濟環境會有甚麼反應。

It gives me a different angle on the aid issue.

這讓我能以不同的角度來協助 援助金議題的運作。

But it took an innocent question

我女兒在四歲時曾問我

from my then-four-year-old daughter

一個聽起來天真的問題，

to make me appreciate that.

卻讓我有如當頭棒喝。

Pia and I were on the way to a local cafe

皮雅和我在到咖啡廳的途中，

and we passed a man collecting for charity.

我們遇到一位男士正為慈善機構募款。

I didn't have any change to give him,

我身上沒有零錢可以給他，

and she was disappointed.

皮雅覺得很失望。

Once in the cafe, Pia takes out her coloring book

進到咖啡廳時 皮雅拿出插畫本

and starts scribbling.

開始塗鴉。

After a little while, I ask her what she's doing,

一會後， 我問她在做甚麼，

and she shows me a drawing

皮雅將她的畫 遞過來給我，

of a £5 note

是一張五鎊的紙鈔，

to give to the man outside.

想給剛剛那位在募款的男人。

It's so sweet,

這舉動真的貼心，

and more generous than Dad would have been.

比任何人的爸爸都還要來的慷慨。

But of course I explained to her,

不過，當然，我對她解釋：

"You can't do that; it's not allowed."

「你不能這麼做，這是不被允許的。」

To which I get the classic four-year-old response:

接著我得到 所有四歲小孩都會有的反應：

"Why not?"

「為什麼不行？」

Now I'm excited, because I actually think

這時我感到興奮， 因為我知道

I can answer this time.

這次我知道怎麼回答這個問題。

So I launch into an explanation of how

所以我開始對她解釋為甚麼不行，

an unlimited supply of money

如果現金無限供應，

chasing a limited number of goods

商品價格會隨著有限的物資上漲，

sends prices to the moon.

這會使商品價格 漲到月球那麼高。

Something about that exchange stuck with me,

這個銀貨兩訖的概念 讓我停頓了一會，

not because of the look of relief

並不是因為在我解釋完畢 看到皮雅臉上露出

on Pia's face when I finally finished,

恍然大悟的表情，

but because it related

卻是因為這個概念 讓我聯想起

to the sanctity of the money supply,

獲取金錢來源的道德觀，

a sanctity that had been challenged and questioned

這個道德觀 一直以來備受中央銀行

by the reaction of central banks

質疑與挑戰 對金錢供需配給的態度

to the financial crisis.

導致金融財務危機。

To reassure investors,

為了讓投資者安心，

central banks began buying assets

中央銀行開始買各項資產，

to try and encourage investors to do the same.

只為了鼓勵投資者一同跟進，

They funded these purchases

他們針對某些資產購置 進行補助，

with money they created themselves.

用那些從投資無形資產中 錢滾出來的錢。

The money wasn't actually physically printed.

這類錢滾錢的獲利 從未被實體印製出來，

It's still sort of locked away in the banking system today.

直到今日這些錢仍舊卡在 銀行系統中循環。

But the amount created was unprecedented.

不過這些錢滾錢所製造出來的 數目之大是史無前例！

Together, the central banks of the U.S.,

美國、英國與日本...等

U.K and Japan

這些國家中央銀行

increased the stock of money in their economies

在他們經濟中總共增加了

by 3.7 trillion dollars.

3兆7000億美元之多。

That's three times, in fact that's more than three times,

這是三倍！事實上... 比三倍還多！

the total physical stock of dollar notes in circulation.

比起實體流通的貨幣... 多出三倍。

Three times!

三倍之多！

Before the crisis,

在金融危機之前，

this would have been utterly unthinkable,

不會有人想得到這個數字，

yet it was accepted remarkably quickly.

但大眾也很快視為理所當然。

The price of gold,

黃金的價格

an asset thought to protect against inflation,

被用來當作抵制通貨膨脹的資產，

did jump,

出現上漲趨勢，

but investors bought other assets

但投資者買下其它資產，

that offered little protection from inflation.

那些資產只對市場 通貨膨脹有一些保護作用。

They bought fixed income securities, bonds.

他們大筆買進 固定收入證券、債券...

They bought equities too.

... 也投資股票。

For all the scare stories,

所有恐怖故事當中，

the actual actions of investors

投資者的實際行為

spoke of rapid acceptance and confidence.

都說明了迅速的接受和信任。

That confidence was based on two pillars.

投資者的投資信心 主要建立在兩個基礎上。

The first was that, after years

第一個基礎便是

of keeping inflation under control,

中央銀行經過幾年控管通貨膨脹成效穩定，

central banks were trusted

大眾信任並授權中央銀行在通貨膨脹發生時

to take the money-printing away

有停止印鈔票的權力，

if inflation became a threat.

前提是通貨膨脹變成威脅

Secondly, inflation simply never became a threat.

第二個基礎是 通貨膨脹有史以來並未構成重大威脅。

As you can see, in the United States,

你們看看目前的美國市場，

inflation for most of this period

通貨膨脹在這個時期

remained below average.

大部分時間維持在平均數之下。

It was the same elsewhere.

這情形在世界各地皆如此。

So how does all this relate to aid?

所以這一切又如何跟金援扯上關係？

Well, this is where Dorothy

很好，這就是桃樂思

and the Mango Tree charity

跟支持她生計的芒果樹基金會

that supports her comes in.

來到我談話重點的時刻。

I was at one of their fundraising events

當時我人在募款活動現場，

earlier this year,

在今年初的時候

and I was inspired to give a one-off donation

我受感動後捐出一次性的樂捐，

when I remembered that my firm

當我想起我任職公司提出

offers to match the charitable contributions

加倍員工募款

its employees make.

金額的捐款制度。

So think of this:

所以這裡請大家思考一下：

Instead of just being able to help Dorothy

以我的能力 僅能提供桃樂思

and four of her classmates

和她的四位同學

to go through secondary school for a few years,

接受沒幾年的高中教育，

I was able to double my contribution.

但現在我有能力將捐款金額 多增加到兩倍之多

Brilliant.

真棒！

So following that conversation with my daughter,

在跟我女兒那段談話後

and seeing the absence of inflation

看見政府決定停止印製鈔票後，

in the face of money-printing,

通貨膨脹並沒有發生的情況下，

and knowing that international aid payments

又查覺到國際援助基金

were falling at just the wrong time,

正在一個錯誤的時間裡縮減中，

this made me wonder:

這使我反思：

Could we match

我們可以用更大規模的計劃來

but just on a much grander scale?

加倍援助金額嗎？

Let's call this scheme "Print Aid."

且讓我捫這麼稱呼這個 計畫為「印鈔援助金計劃」，

And here's how it might work.

此計畫的運作方式會這麼進行。

Provided it saw little inflation risk from doing so,

假設進行大規模金援印鈔 引發通貨膨脹的風險不大，

the central bank would be mandated

中央銀行會依照指示

to match the government's overseas aid payments

將加倍國際援助金，

up to a certain limit.

增加到一定額度。

Governments have been aiming to get aid

政府持續瞄準0.7%的援助金目標，

to 0.7 percent for years,

行年已久，

so let's set the limit at half of that,

不如這樣， 我們將這個目標打對折，

0.35 percent of their income.

從年度全國國民收入中抽出0.35%。

So it would work like this: If in a given year

這比金額會如此分配： 假設在某一定年度的收入中，

the government gave 0.2 percent of its income

政府分配0.2%的收入

to overseas aid,

至海外援助基金會，

the central bank would simply top it up

當地中央銀行會加倍 這比款項數目，

with a further 0.2 percent.

等同於多捐出0.2%的金額數目 給當地援助基金會。

So far so good.

到目前為止 一切聽起來都算合理。

How risky is this?

不過這之間會有甚麼風險呢？

Well, this involves the creation of money

這麼說好了， 這筆被印製出來的鈔票

to buy goods, not assets.

會用來買實際生活用品， 不是用來投資。

It sounds more inflationary already, doesn't it.

這一切聽起來根本就是 通貨膨脹的催化劑...你說是不是？

But there are two important mitigating factors here.

不過呢，卻有兩個 緩衝通貨膨漲的因素。

The first is that by definition,

首先，按照規定，

this money printed would be spent overseas.

被印出來的這筆錢僅限於海外使用。

So it's not obvious how it leads to inflation

因此這筆錢 對印鈔國家的市場

in the country doing the actual printing

造成的通貨膨脹影響不會明顯，

unless it leads to a currency depreciation of that country.

除非大量印鈔 造成該國幣值貶值。

That is unlikely for the second reason:

不過，依照第二點來看， 貨幣貶值的可能性不大，

the scale of the money that would be printed

原因是紙鈔數量 是在這計劃實行下

under this scheme.

印製出來的。

So let's think of an example

在此我們拿幾個國家當例子，

where Print Aid was in place

像美國、英國及日本，

in the U.S., U.K. and Japan.

這些國家以印鈔票為輸出的國家

To match the aid payments made

為趕上過去四年來

by those governments over the last four years,

政府對金援的支出金額，

Print Aid would have generated

印鈔計劃將印出

200 billion dollars' worth of extra aid.

2000億美元的額外援助金。

What would that look like

對於這些

in the context of the increase in the money stock

在金錢儲蓄中

that had already happened in those countries

有長足獲利的國家來說，

to save the financial system?

實行印鈔金援的計劃 會帶來怎樣的效果呢？

Are you read for this?

大家都準備好 接受這樣的計劃了嗎？

You might struggle to see that at the back,

坐在後排的人可能看不清楚，

because the gap is quite small.

因為這個鴻溝並不大。

So what we're saying here

因此這等同要我們

is that we took a $3.7 trillion gamble

支出3兆7000億元

to save our financial systems,

來展開一場 復甦全球金融系統的賭局，

and you know what, it paid off.

而且你們知道嗎？ 這筆錢不會是白白花掉。

There was no inflation.

結果證實 通貨膨脹根本沒因此而發生。

Are we really saying that it's not worth the risk

我們真的擔負不起

to print an extra 200 billion for aid?

多印個2000億元援助金的風險嗎？

Would the risks really be that different?

這個危機是否會是個轉機？

To me, it's not that clear.

對我來說 一切尚未明朗。

What is clear is the impact on aid.

唯一可以清楚的是， 這筆錢對需要的人有多重要。

Even though this is the printing

就算只從 上述三個國家的中央銀行

of just three central banks,

在此期間印出來的援助金

the global aid that's given

都會使全球慈善基金會

over this period is up by almost 40 percent.

整整多出將近40%的經費可利用。

Aid as a proportion of national income

援助金佔國民收入總額的比例

all of a sudden is at a 40-year high.

會因此達到40年新高。

Now, we don't get to 0.7 percent.

現在，政府不需要設立 抽出國民所得0.7%的目標，

Governments are still incentivized to give.

還是能照樣給予足夠的 金額來援助需要的人。

But you know what, that's the point of a matching scheme.

不過你們知道嗎？ 這就是「你捐款我加倍奉還」 這場印鈔計劃的精隨

So I think what we've learned

因此從這個貨幣印製機制上

is that the risks from this money creation scheme

我們能得知

are quite modest,

實行的風險並不大，

but the benefits

但其潛值上的獲利

are potentially huge.

卻非常可觀。

Imagine what we could do with 40 percent more funding.

想像多出40%的援助金。

We might be able to feed the front row.

我們甚至可以餵飽 所有第一排的觀眾。

The thing that I fear, the only thing that I fear,

我恐懼的事情是 我唯一的恐懼是…

apart from the fact that I've run out of time,

除了我們已經沒有時間的事實外，

is that the window of opportunity for this idea

就是這個想法能實現的機會

is a short one.

實在渺茫。

Today, money creation by central banks

今日，中央銀行印製鈔票

is an accepted policy tool.

是大眾都接受的政策機制。

That may not always be the case.

但或許也不需都透過中央銀行印鈔。

Today there are universally agreed aims

今日有個世界共通針對國際援助

for international aid.

設定的幾個目標…

That may not always be the case.

但這些目標可能會改變。

Today might be the only time

今天可能是唯一 讓我的想法以及國際援助

that these two things coincide,

同時發生的時刻，

such that we can afford the aid

這樣我們負擔得起

that we've always aspired to give.

當初立下目標要給予金援的數目。

So, can we print money for international aid?

因此，我們可不可以 印鈔票來進行國際慈善援助？

I seriously believe the question should be,

個人深信這個問題應該得到這樣的答覆…

why not?

為甚麼不呢？

Thank you very much.

謝謝大家！

(Applause)

(觀眾掌聲)