我想看一级黄色片_欧美性爱无遮挡电影_色丁香视频网站中文字幕_视频一区 视频二区 国产,日本三级理论日本电影,午夜不卡免费大片,国产午夜视频在线观看,18禁无遮拦无码国产在线播放,在线视频不卡国产在线视频不卡 ,,欧美一及黄片,日韩国产另类

首頁 500強 活動 榜單 商業(yè) 科技 商潮 專題 品牌中心
雜志訂閱

通貨膨脹對弱勢群體竟然有好處,?

如果美聯(lián)儲和喬·拜登政府不改變目前的做法,那么通脹水平將對社會最弱勢群體(窮人,、婦女和其他少數(shù)群體)產(chǎn)生最嚴(yán)重的影響,。

文本設(shè)置
小號
默認
大號
Plus(0條)

美國消費者價格正在以1990年以來前所未有的速度上漲——但并不是每個人都記得當(dāng)年高通脹到底是什么樣子,尤其是年輕一代。圖片來源:BLOOMBERG/GETTY IMAGES

今年10月,,美國的通貨膨脹率達到6.2%,,創(chuàng)下30年來新高。如果美聯(lián)儲(Federal Reserve)和喬·拜登政府不改變目前的做法,,那么通脹水平將對社會最弱勢群體(窮人,、婦女和其他少數(shù)群體)產(chǎn)生最嚴(yán)重的影響。

當(dāng)局有理由擔(dān)心新冠疫情會導(dǎo)致重大的經(jīng)濟萎縮——這也是美聯(lián)儲和美國政府采取了旨在刺激經(jīng)濟的貨幣政策和財政政策的原因,。直到最近,,人們在擔(dān)心的還不是物價會上漲,,而是物價會像日本的通貨緊縮那樣跌得太多,。價格跳水令人擔(dān)憂,因為它們會導(dǎo)致消費減少——消費者在等待未來更好的價格,。

出于這種慣性,,以及擔(dān)心過早打斷經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇的勢頭,美聯(lián)儲對通脹上升的擔(dān)憂未予理會,,反而表示,,通脹只是暫時性的。這與人們的一致認同——通貨膨脹有好處——不謀而合,。正如貝萊德(BlackRock)的一位前董事總經(jīng)理所言:“許多美國人,,尤其是那些不那么富有的人,實際上會從較高的通脹水平中獲益,?!比藗兊闹庇X是,在新冠疫情期間,,工資穩(wěn)步上漲,,通脹侵蝕了家庭債務(wù)的價值,提高了領(lǐng)薪工人的購買力,,減輕了他們的債務(wù)負擔(dān),。

在過去的三十年里,每年的通貨膨脹率一致低于5%,,美國總?cè)丝谥屑s有一半人沒有經(jīng)歷過高通貨膨脹,,年齡中位數(shù)為38歲。沒有經(jīng)歷過通貨膨脹的人,,很難具體地把握其后果,。贊美通貨膨脹的人,在一開始可能會和關(guān)注貧困和不平等的人產(chǎn)生共鳴,,但現(xiàn)實卻往往更加復(fù)雜,。

通貨膨脹率高漲,會導(dǎo)致三個重要問題。

首先,,通脹會對分配產(chǎn)生重要影響,,對最不富裕階層的傷害比對富人的傷害更大。雖然通貨膨脹侵蝕了每個人的購買力,,但富人往往擁有能夠更好地抵御通貨膨脹的資產(chǎn),。例如,房地產(chǎn)資產(chǎn)的價格往往會隨著社會總體價格的上漲而升值,,租金收入也進行調(diào)整,,以跟上生活成本的上漲,這可以為房產(chǎn)所有者提供一些保護,,從而抵御通貨膨脹,。富人也往往有機會獲得對沖通貨膨脹的機制,比如將資產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移到國外,、交易貨幣,,以及購買黃金和加密貨幣。

相反,,工人階級依賴于工資和薪金保持在通貨膨脹水平之上,,而一旦通貨膨脹螺旋式上升,這種依賴就蕩然無存,。事實上,,不斷上升的通貨膨脹已經(jīng)侵蝕了美國工人在新冠疫情爆發(fā)早期的工資收益的增長,現(xiàn)在工人的實際報酬已經(jīng)低于新冠疫情之前的趨勢,。

第二,,隨著通貨膨脹的上升,抑制通貨膨脹的成本也在增加,。當(dāng)通貨膨脹預(yù)期變得根深蒂固時,,就需要付出更大的努力來控制——這就是拉丁美洲在20世紀(jì)八九十年代的經(jīng)驗。商業(yè)團體和工會之間承諾維持價格和工資水平的協(xié)議一再失敗,,因為沒有人相信其他人會遵守,。在美國,紐約聯(lián)邦儲備銀行(New York Federal Reserve)的一項調(diào)查指出,,預(yù)計今后一年的預(yù)期通脹率為5.7%,,這是自2013年開始收集數(shù)據(jù)以來的最高值。

在通貨膨脹周期中,,政府就不得不采取更嚴(yán)格的措施,,而這些措施也往往會對弱勢群體產(chǎn)生影響。更嚴(yán)格的加息和財政支出的減少,,導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟活動放緩更嚴(yán)重,,從而導(dǎo)致裁員和更高的借貸成本,,影響到更多依靠工資為生的人。

第三,,通貨膨脹不僅僅是一種經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)象,,其還導(dǎo)致了普遍的政治和社會后果。高通脹會讓人對自己的未來產(chǎn)生普遍的不確定性和焦慮,。雜貨店,、加油站的價格上漲,房租,、取暖費用上漲,,每天都在提醒著人們這種不確定的未來。對那些最無力保護自己免受意外事件影響的窮人來說,,尤其如此,。

由于所有的政治都是地方性的,人們直接從自己的口袋里感受到這些影響,,因此,,通貨膨脹以損害政治在任者而臭名昭著,,也就不足為奇了,。研究指出,通貨膨脹是影響投票決定的一個關(guān)鍵因素,,在位者需要為他們無力控制通貨膨脹付出代價?,F(xiàn)在,在美國,,大約十分之六的受訪者已經(jīng)稱經(jīng)濟狀況不佳,。

由于通脹對弱勢群體的有害后果,一旦高漲,,控制它以及它產(chǎn)生的社會和政治后果的成本很高,,因此,通貨膨脹必須在問題變多,、變復(fù)雜之前得到解決,。拜登政府和美聯(lián)儲都有共同的責(zé)任來采取行動。

如果拜登政府需要向經(jīng)濟中注入急需的資源,,用于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施,、環(huán)境和社會支出,那么這種做法必須明智而審慎,。同時,,美聯(lián)儲必須在通貨膨脹失去控制之前迅速收緊貨幣政策。當(dāng)我們確信通貨膨脹不是暫時的時候,,要想順利管理通脹就為時已晚了,,那些最弱勢的人將會為此買單。(財富中文網(wǎng))

本文作者古斯塔沃·弗洛里斯-馬西亞斯是康奈爾大學(xué)(Cornell University)負責(zé)國際事務(wù)的副教務(wù)長。

編譯:楊二一

今年10月,,美國的通貨膨脹率達到6.2%,,創(chuàng)下30年來新高。如果美聯(lián)儲(Federal Reserve)和喬·拜登政府不改變目前的做法,,那么通脹水平將對社會最弱勢群體(窮人,、婦女和其他少數(shù)群體)產(chǎn)生最嚴(yán)重的影響。

當(dāng)局有理由擔(dān)心新冠疫情會導(dǎo)致重大的經(jīng)濟萎縮——這也是美聯(lián)儲和美國政府采取了旨在刺激經(jīng)濟的貨幣政策和財政政策的原因,。直到最近,,人們在擔(dān)心的還不是物價會上漲,而是物價會像日本的通貨緊縮那樣跌得太多,。價格跳水令人擔(dān)憂,,因為它們會導(dǎo)致消費減少——消費者在等待未來更好的價格。

出于這種慣性,,以及擔(dān)心過早打斷經(jīng)濟復(fù)蘇的勢頭,,美聯(lián)儲對通脹上升的擔(dān)憂未予理會,反而表示,,通脹只是暫時性的,。這與人們的一致認同——通貨膨脹有好處——不謀而合。正如貝萊德(BlackRock)的一位前董事總經(jīng)理所言:“許多美國人,,尤其是那些不那么富有的人,,實際上會從較高的通脹水平中獲益?!比藗兊闹庇X是,,在新冠疫情期間,工資穩(wěn)步上漲,,通脹侵蝕了家庭債務(wù)的價值,,提高了領(lǐng)薪工人的購買力,減輕了他們的債務(wù)負擔(dān),。

在過去的三十年里,,每年的通貨膨脹率一致低于5%,美國總?cè)丝谥屑s有一半人沒有經(jīng)歷過高通貨膨脹,,年齡中位數(shù)為38歲,。沒有經(jīng)歷過通貨膨脹的人,很難具體地把握其后果,。贊美通貨膨脹的人,,在一開始可能會和關(guān)注貧困和不平等的人產(chǎn)生共鳴,但現(xiàn)實卻往往更加復(fù)雜,。

通貨膨脹率高漲,,會導(dǎo)致三個重要問題,。

首先,通脹會對分配產(chǎn)生重要影響,,對最不富裕階層的傷害比對富人的傷害更大,。雖然通貨膨脹侵蝕了每個人的購買力,但富人往往擁有能夠更好地抵御通貨膨脹的資產(chǎn),。例如,,房地產(chǎn)資產(chǎn)的價格往往會隨著社會總體價格的上漲而升值,租金收入也進行調(diào)整,,以跟上生活成本的上漲,,這可以為房產(chǎn)所有者提供一些保護,從而抵御通貨膨脹,。富人也往往有機會獲得對沖通貨膨脹的機制,,比如將資產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移到國外、交易貨幣,,以及購買黃金和加密貨幣,。

相反,工人階級依賴于工資和薪金保持在通貨膨脹水平之上,,而一旦通貨膨脹螺旋式上升,,這種依賴就蕩然無存。事實上,,不斷上升的通貨膨脹已經(jīng)侵蝕了美國工人在新冠疫情爆發(fā)早期的工資收益的增長,,現(xiàn)在工人的實際報酬已經(jīng)低于新冠疫情之前的趨勢。

第二,,隨著通貨膨脹的上升,抑制通貨膨脹的成本也在增加,。當(dāng)通貨膨脹預(yù)期變得根深蒂固時,,就需要付出更大的努力來控制——這就是拉丁美洲在20世紀(jì)八九十年代的經(jīng)驗。商業(yè)團體和工會之間承諾維持價格和工資水平的協(xié)議一再失敗,,因為沒有人相信其他人會遵守,。在美國,紐約聯(lián)邦儲備銀行(New York Federal Reserve)的一項調(diào)查指出,,預(yù)計今后一年的預(yù)期通脹率為5.7%,,這是自2013年開始收集數(shù)據(jù)以來的最高值。

在通貨膨脹周期中,,政府就不得不采取更嚴(yán)格的措施,,而這些措施也往往會對弱勢群體產(chǎn)生影響。更嚴(yán)格的加息和財政支出的減少,,導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟活動放緩更嚴(yán)重,,從而導(dǎo)致裁員和更高的借貸成本,,影響到更多依靠工資為生的人。

第三,,通貨膨脹不僅僅是一種經(jīng)濟現(xiàn)象,,其還導(dǎo)致了普遍的政治和社會后果。高通脹會讓人對自己的未來產(chǎn)生普遍的不確定性和焦慮,。雜貨店,、加油站的價格上漲,房租,、取暖費用上漲,,每天都在提醒著人們這種不確定的未來。對那些最無力保護自己免受意外事件影響的窮人來說,,尤其如此,。

由于所有的政治都是地方性的,人們直接從自己的口袋里感受到這些影響,,因此,,通貨膨脹以損害政治在任者而臭名昭著,也就不足為奇了,。研究指出,,通貨膨脹是影響投票決定的一個關(guān)鍵因素,在位者需要為他們無力控制通貨膨脹付出代價?,F(xiàn)在,,在美國,大約十分之六的受訪者已經(jīng)稱經(jīng)濟狀況不佳,。

由于通脹對弱勢群體的有害后果,,一旦高漲,控制它以及它產(chǎn)生的社會和政治后果的成本很高,,因此,,通貨膨脹必須在問題變多、變復(fù)雜之前得到解決,。拜登政府和美聯(lián)儲都有共同的責(zé)任來采取行動,。

如果拜登政府需要向經(jīng)濟中注入急需的資源,用于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施,、環(huán)境和社會支出,,那么這種做法必須明智而審慎。同時,,美聯(lián)儲必須在通貨膨脹失去控制之前迅速收緊貨幣政策,。當(dāng)我們確信通貨膨脹不是暫時的時候,要想順利管理通脹就為時已晚了,,那些最弱勢的人將會為此買單,。(財富中文網(wǎng))

本文作者古斯塔沃·弗洛里斯-馬西亞斯是康奈爾大學(xué)(Cornell University)負責(zé)國際事務(wù)的副教務(wù)長,。

編譯:楊二一

In October, U.S. inflation reached 6.2%—a 30-year high. Unless the Federal Reserve and the Joe Biden administration change their current approach, the consequences of these inflation levels are likely to be most severe for the most disadvantaged sectors of society—the poor, women, and underrepresented minorities.

Authorities were rightly worried about a major economic contraction resulting from the pandemic, which is why the Fed and the government adopted monetary policies and fiscal policies aimed at stimulating the U.S. economy. The worry until recently was not that prices would rise, but that they would fall too much, as with Japan’s deflation. Free-falling prices are a concern because they lead to lower spending as consumers wait for better prices in the future.

Out of this inertia and worried about interrupting economic recovery prematurely, the Fed has dismissed concerns about rising inflation, pointing instead to its transitory nature. This is in line with a chorus of opinions exalting the benefits of inflation. As a former managing director of BlackRock put it, “Many Americans, particularly the less wealthy, actually stand to benefit from higher levels of inflation.” The intuition is that wages have risen steadily during the pandemic and inflation erodes the value of household debt, improving the purchasing power of salaried workers and reducing their debt burden.

With annual inflation below 5% in the past three decades, about half of the total U.S. population has no experience with high inflation. The median age is 38. People who have not lived through inflation find it difficult to concretely grasp its consequences. Although the rosy picture exalting the benefits of inflation might initially resonate with those concerned about poverty and inequality, the reality is more complex.

There are three important problems with letting inflation run high.

First, inflation has important distributional consequences, disproportionately hurting the least affluent sectors more than the wealthy. Although inflation erodes everyone’s purchasing power, the wealthy tend to own assets better able to weather inflationary periods. The price of real estate assets, for example, tends to appreciate with the general price increases in society, and rental income can be adjusted to keep up with the rising cost of living, providing property owners some protection against inflation. The wealthy also tend to have access to hedging mechanisms against inflation, such as shifting assets abroad, trading currency, or purchasing gold and cryptocurrencies.

Conversely, the working class depends on wages and salaries staying above inflation, which is difficult to obtain in practice once an inflationary spiral takes hold. Indeed, rising inflation has already eroded the early pandemic wage gains of American workers, and real worker compensation is now lower than its pre-pandemic trend.

Second, as inflation rises, so does the cost of reining it in. And as inflation expectations become entrenched, a greater effort is required to put a lid on it. That’s what happened in the Latin American experience during the ’80s and ’90s. Agreements between business groups and labor unions pledging to maintain price and wage levels failed repeatedly because nobody believed others would comply. In the U.S., a New York Federal Reserve survey points to expected inflation at 5.7% a year from now—the highest since data collection began in 2013.

In inflationary cycles, governments then have to adopt more stringent measures, which also tend to affect disadvantaged groups disproportionately. Steeper interest rate hikes and reductions in fiscal spending result in a harsher slowdown of economic activity, with layoffs and a higher cost of borrowing affecting more of those living paycheck to paycheck.

Third, inflation is not merely an economic phenomenon. It also leads to pervasive political and social consequences. High inflation generates generalized uncertainty and anxiety about one’s own future. Higher prices at the grocery store or the gas pump, as well as higher rent and heating bills become everyday reminders of this uncertain future, especially among the poor who are least able to protect themselves against unforeseen events.

Since all politics is local and people feel these effects directly in their pockets, it is not surprising that inflation is notorious for hurting political incumbents. Research consistently points to inflation as a key consideration affecting voting decisions, with incumbents paying a price for their inability to rein it in. In the U.S. about six in 10 respondents already call the state of the economy poor.

Because of its harmful consequences for the disadvantaged, the high costs of reining it in once it is high, and the social and political costs it generates, inflation must be addressed before it becomes more of a problem. Both the Biden administration and the Fed have a shared responsibility to act.

If the Biden administration will inject much-needed resources into the economy for infrastructure, environmental, and social spending, it must do so judiciously. In turn, the Fed must be swift in tightening monetary policy before inflation gets out of control. By the time we have certainty that inflation is not temporary, it will have been too late for its smooth management, and those who have the least will be stuck with the bill.

Gustavo Flores-Macías is associate vice provost for international affairs at Cornell University.

財富中文網(wǎng)所刊載內(nèi)容之知識產(chǎn)權(quán)為財富媒體知識產(chǎn)權(quán)有限公司及/或相關(guān)權(quán)利人專屬所有或持有。未經(jīng)許可,,禁止進行轉(zhuǎn)載,、摘編、復(fù)制及建立鏡像等任何使用,。
0條Plus
精彩評論
評論

撰寫或查看更多評論

請打開財富Plus APP

前往打開
熱讀文章