最近，我獲得了極為難得的機(jī)會(huì)，向四位曾在政府任職的頂尖經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家請(qǐng)教當(dāng)前經(jīng)濟(jì)中困擾我的五個(gè)問題。這四位經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家分別是本?伯南克、邁克爾?波斯金、約瑟夫?斯蒂格利茨和莫里斯?奧布斯特菲爾德。他們受布魯金斯學(xué)會(huì)哈欽斯中心主任大衛(wèi)?韋塞爾邀請(qǐng)，參加了白宮經(jīng)濟(jì)顧問委員會(huì)成立70周年慶典。

我提出的五大謎以及四位經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家的解答摘要如下：

生產(chǎn)率之謎：如果說出現(xiàn)了新的工業(yè)革命，那么生產(chǎn)率為何沒有提高？

四位經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家各抒己見，但總的來說，他們提出的原因包括統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)不準(zhǔn)，技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)化為生產(chǎn)率的提升存在滯后期，以及坦承物聯(lián)網(wǎng)的意義或許不像電力那么重大。有人提到了羅伯特?戈登的新書《美國增長(zhǎng)率的起伏》。我還沒有拜讀過。誰有時(shí)間看一本784頁的書??？

通脹之謎：失業(yè)率低于5%，為何沒有看到通脹？反映失業(yè)率和通脹關(guān)系的菲利普斯曲線出了什么問題么？

伯南克說，用來表明失業(yè)與通貨膨脹反向關(guān)系的菲利普斯曲線，可能仍是經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家解讀宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)的最佳框架。奧布斯特菲爾德則指出，對(duì)美國來說或許仍然適用，但就全球而言，失業(yè)率和通脹之間的關(guān)系已經(jīng)不再遵從菲利普斯曲線。

油價(jià)之迷：油價(jià)下跌對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)來說為什么不是件好事？

癡迷于信息不對(duì)稱理論的斯蒂格利茨說，價(jià)格大幅波動(dòng)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響有好有壞，但看起來短期內(nèi)不利影響將占據(jù)上風(fēng)。

中國之迷：中國經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑會(huì)波及全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的其他領(lǐng)域嗎？

四位經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家都認(rèn)為中國經(jīng)濟(jì)有問題，但伯南克態(tài)度樂觀：“好消息是中國政府掌握著大量資源，而且愿意用來維持經(jīng)濟(jì)?！彼€指出，中國的大多數(shù)債務(wù)都是國內(nèi)債務(wù)，而不是外債，因此，中國經(jīng)濟(jì)即便出現(xiàn)問題也不會(huì)大范圍傳播。

貧富差距之迷：為何貧富差距越來越大？

不出所料，波斯金和斯蒂格利茨對(duì)此爭(zhēng)執(zhí)不下。波斯金的觀點(diǎn)是全球貧富差距已經(jīng)變小，發(fā)達(dá)國家的貧富差距主要源于技術(shù)和全球化，而且應(yīng)該更關(guān)注經(jīng)濟(jì)普遍缺乏增長(zhǎng)的問題，而不是貧富差距。斯蒂格利茨則引述了托馬斯?皮凱蒂所著《21世紀(jì)的資本》中的觀點(diǎn)。不過，這本696頁的書我也沒有讀過。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Charlie

審校：夏林

Recently, I had the rare opportunity to quiz four of the smartest economists who have ever served in government – Ben Bernanke, Michael Boskin, Joseph Stiglitz and Maurice Obstfeld – on the five things that puzzle me about today’s economy. The panel was put together by David Wessel of the Hutchins Center at Brookings as part of a celebration of the 70th anniversary of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.

My five mysteries, and some takeaways:

The productivity mystery: If we are in a new industrial revolution, why isn’t productivity growing?

Lively disagreement on this, but the answer seems to be a combination of bad statistics, long lags in achieving productivity gains from technology, and a recognition that the “internet of things” may not be as big as electricity. Some talk about Robert Gordon’s new book The Rise and Fall of American Growth, which I haven’t read. Who has time for 784 pages?

The inflation mystery: With unemployment below 5 percent, why isn’t there any? What happened to the “Philips Curve” relationship between unemployment and inflation?

Bernanke said the Philips Curve is probably still the best framework economists have to understand the macro economy. Obstfeld says that may be true in the U.S., but globally, the relationship has vanished.

The oil mystery: Why aren’t falling oil prices a good thing for the economy?

Stiglitz, who is fond of asymmetries, said big price movements have both good and bad economic effects, but the bad ones tend to win out in the short term.

The China mystery: Will its problems spill over into the rest of the global economy?

All agree China is a problem, but Bernanke played the optimist: “The good news is that the Chinese government has large resources and is willing to use them.” He also pointed out most Chinese debt is held inside the country, not overseas, limiting contagion.

The inequality mystery: Why is it getting worse?

Boskin and Stiglitz tussled over this one, as expected. Boskin’s argument: that global inequality has fallen; that inequality within developed countries is driven primarily by technology and globalization; and that it’s better to focus on lack of growth overall than on inequality. Stiglitz referred to Thomas Piketty’s book Capital in the Twenty-First Century which, at 696 pages, I also haven’t read.