億萬(wàn)富翁寄望道德革命破解貧富差距難題
????2007年堡壘投資集團(tuán)(Fortress Investment Group)上市時(shí),(公司投資總監(jiān))邁克?諾沃格拉茨和這家對(duì)沖基金的其他負(fù)責(zé)人立即成為了億萬(wàn)富翁。和華爾街眾多超級(jí)富豪一樣,他們的財(cái)富(部分源于寬松的貨幣政策)已成為政客和活動(dòng)人士的批評(píng)目標(biāo)。 ????最近的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)再次在美國(guó)引發(fā)了一場(chǎng)關(guān)于收入不平等的討論。正如最近《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》(New York Times)所指,2012年某個(gè)時(shí)候,有1,760萬(wàn)戶家庭吃不飽。美國(guó)人口調(diào)查局(The Census Bureau)最近報(bào)告,有15%或4,650萬(wàn)美國(guó)人生活貧困。而《經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家》(Economist)的報(bào)道顯示,富人在美國(guó)國(guó)民收入中的占比已達(dá)到創(chuàng)紀(jì)錄的19.3%,超過(guò)了2007年和1929年。 ????日前,諾沃格拉茨就相關(guān)問(wèn)題接受《財(cái)富》雜志(Fortune)采訪時(shí)沒(méi)有像很多華爾街人士那樣用套話回應(yīng),而是非常坦誠(chéng)地討論了如何通過(guò)調(diào)整政策來(lái)縮小收入差距,CEO們?cè)谒伎甲陨砥髽I(yè)時(shí)需要如何進(jìn)行一場(chǎng)“道德革命”,以及賺大錢為什么不一定被看成資本主義。 ????沃爾瑪(Wal-Mart)是美國(guó)最大的雇主,但它的很多員工卻要依賴某種形式的政府補(bǔ)貼來(lái)維持生活。您認(rèn)為,美國(guó)怎么到了今天這個(gè)地步? ????這是全球化和科技快速發(fā)展的結(jié)果。1989年時(shí)發(fā)達(dá)世界只有約5億人口。然后,柏林墻倒了,中國(guó)開(kāi)始對(duì)外開(kāi)放。接下來(lái)的25年里,發(fā)達(dá)世界人口從5億增長(zhǎng)到了30億。 ????勞動(dòng)力供應(yīng)增加拉低了工資,智力資本成本大幅上升。比如,馬克?扎克伯格這樣的人。他想出了一個(gè)可擴(kuò)展的點(diǎn)子,推廣至整個(gè)世界。這個(gè)點(diǎn)子價(jià)值連城。 ????延生閱讀:金融危機(jī)過(guò)后,美國(guó)有錢人更有錢了 ????從很多方面,這種財(cái)富的分化總是會(huì)發(fā)生,不管是哪個(gè)黨派當(dāng)政。自從20世紀(jì)80年代以來(lái),無(wú)論是共和黨、還是民主黨當(dāng)政,美國(guó)的基尼指數(shù)(反映一個(gè)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)不平等程度的指數(shù))都處于單邊走勢(shì)。變化如此之快,很多人,也許連我們的政治體系都沒(méi)能跟上。政府有責(zé)任去做并有可能做的事是,關(guān)注這些大趨勢(shì),關(guān)注它們對(duì)社會(huì)的影響。這是我們希望生活的環(huán)境嗎?這是我們希望生活的國(guó)家嗎? ????許多人會(huì)說(shuō),過(guò)去25年,沃爾瑪借國(guó)際趨勢(shì)大賺其錢,這方面無(wú)人能出其右。你會(huì)因?yàn)檎诎l(fā)生的這一切指責(zé)沃爾瑪這類公司嗎?你認(rèn)為他們貪婪嗎? ????是的,是的。沃爾瑪今年會(huì)賺150億美元。這家公司49%的股權(quán)由山姆?沃爾頓的繼承人和信托持有。他們有130萬(wàn)員工,人均時(shí)薪約12美元。因此,一個(gè)全職員工每周工作40個(gè)小時(shí),賺的錢還不夠維持生計(jì)。而且,美國(guó)納稅人每年還要為這些工資單補(bǔ)貼15億美元左右。沃爾頓家族的資產(chǎn)凈值已超過(guò)1,300億美元。這里感覺(jué)有些不對(duì)勁,是不是? ????如果只聽(tīng)最后兩句,把沃爾瑪換成堡壘投資集團(tuán),我會(huì)認(rèn)為你剛才說(shuō)的是你自己和你的合伙人們。你們可能沒(méi)有1,300億美元,但你們都是億萬(wàn)富翁。有什么不同嗎? ????我不是要跟有錢人找茬。我認(rèn)為,我們的第一要?jiǎng)?wù)不是盯著收入不平等問(wèn)題,而是要確保更多的工薪族能自己養(yǎng)活自己。華爾街從業(yè)人員,包括我們自己在內(nèi),我們所處的行業(yè)利潤(rùn)率很高,薪資也非常高。我們的行業(yè)正處于全球化的十字路口。在美國(guó),我們有很大的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì),美國(guó)作為全球金融中心的歷史悠久。我們有很多機(jī)會(huì)實(shí)戰(zhàn)學(xué)習(xí)投資和承擔(dān)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。當(dāng)然,假以時(shí)日這一優(yōu)勢(shì)必將消失,但短期內(nèi)不會(huì)。因此,我們能給所有員工非常好的薪酬。 |
????Mike Novogratz and the other principals of hedge fund Fortress Investment Group (FIG) became instant billionaires when the company went public in 2007. Like many other uber-rich on Wall Street, their wealth, some of it created by loose monetary policy, has become the target of criticism from politicians and activists. ????Recent statistics have renewed the debate about income inequality in the U.S. As referenced recently in the New York Times, 17.6 million households did not have enough to eat at some point in 2012. The Census Bureau recently reported that 15% of Americans, or 46.5 million people, live in poverty. But, according to the Economist, the share of national income flowing to the rich is at a record high of 19.3%, ahead of both 2007 and 1929. ????Breaking from typical canned responses given by many on Wall Street, Novogratz offers a candid interview with Fortune about how policy can change to close the income gap, how CEOs need to have a "moral revolution" when thinking about their businesses, and how making oodles of money isn't always considered capitalism. ????Many people at the country's biggest employer -- Wal-Mart -- are on some sort of government support. In your opinion, how did this country get to where it is now? ????It's the powerful combination of globalization and technology. In 1989, there were roughly 500 million people who constituted the developed world. Then the Berlin wall fell, and China opened up. Over the next 25 years, the developed world would go from 500 million to 3 billion. ????Labor supply increased, driving down wages, and the cost of intellectual capital went way up. So you look at a guy like Mark Zuckerberg. He developed a scalable idea that can go to the entire world. His single idea was very valuable. ????MORE: The rich got a lot richer since the financial crisis ????In a lot of ways, this divergence of wealth was going to happen no matter who was at the watch. The Gini index [a measure of a country's inequality] has been on a one-way trend since the '80s through both Republican and Democratic regimes. Change is happening so fast, many people and maybe our political system just can't keep up. What the government has a responsibility to do -- and has the possibility of doing -- is looking at these mega-trends and looking at what this does to our communities. Is this the environment that we want to live in? Is this the country we want to live in? ????Many would argue that Wal-Mart is the quintessential company that exploited global trends over the last 25 years. Do you blame the likes of Wal-Mart for what is happening? Do you think they are being greedy? ????Yes and yes. Wal-Mart (WMT) will make $15 billion this year. 49% is owned by the heirs and trusts of Sam Walton. They have 1.3 million workers who on average make around $12 an hour. So a full time employee, someone who works 40 hours a week doesn't make a living wage. And the U.S. taxpayer subsidizes that wage bill with an estimated $1.5 billion a year. The family has net worth of over $130 billion. Something doesn't feel right there, does it? ????If I looked at only those last two sentences, and replaced Wal-Mart with Fortress, I'd think that you were talking about yourself and your partners. You might not have $130 billion, but you're all billionaires. How is this different? ????My issue isn't with people making money. I really think our first priority is to focus less on inequality and more on making sure the working class can support themselves. Wall Street employees, including ours, are in an industry with large margins and a very inflated pay scale. Our industry sits at the crossroads of globalization. We have a huge competitive advantage here in the U.S. which has a long history of being at the center of global finance. We have the training grounds of investing and risk taking. I am sure in time, that advantage will disappear but not in the near future. So we are in a position to pay all our employees extremely well. |
-
熱讀文章
-
熱門視頻