第二編 貨幣的價(jià)值
第十一章 貨幣客觀交換價(jià)值及其變化的度量問(wèn)題
章節(jié)大綱
一、問(wèn)題的歷史
Some of the greatest minds in economics have devoted themselves to the development of indexes that would provide an objective measurement of the change in the purchasing power of money. However, such statistical techniques have never lived up to their promises, as even their own creators often admitted.
經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)領(lǐng)域中一些最偉大的思想家致力于指數(shù)的發(fā)明，這些指數(shù)將為貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力的變化提供客觀的衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。然而，像指數(shù)的發(fā)明者們經(jīng)常承認(rèn)的那樣，這些統(tǒng)計(jì)技術(shù)從未實(shí)現(xiàn)他們的承諾。
二、問(wèn)題的本質(zhì)
Just as we can express the price of any commodity by reference to how many units of money it takes to purchase one unit of the commodity, the opposite approach can yield the “price” of a unit of money in terms of the commodity. However, this technique yields as many “prices” of money as there are commodities. What economists desire is a method for combining all of this information into a single measurement of “the” purchasing power of money. Then, a second task is to ask of any particular commodity’s price change, how much can be attributed to forces arising from the side of money (in contrast to a change in the relative scarcity of the good which would also make its price rise).
正如我們可以通過(guò)參考購(gòu)買(mǎi)一單位商品所需的貨幣數(shù)量來(lái)表達(dá)任何商品的價(jià)格一樣，相反的方式可以產(chǎn)生單位貨幣的“商品價(jià)格”。然而，這種方式產(chǎn)生的貨幣“價(jià)格”和商品種類(lèi)一樣多。經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家所希望獲得的是一種方法，能夠?qū)⑺羞@些信息結(jié)合到單一尺度的“唯一”貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力中。然后，第二個(gè)任務(wù)，是為任何特定商品的價(jià)格變化有多少可以歸因于貨幣方面的力量來(lái)提供證據(jù)（相比之下，商品相對(duì)稀缺性的變化也會(huì)使其價(jià)格上漲）。
三、計(jì)算指數(shù)的方法
Nearly all attempts at measuring the objective exchange value of money have relied on the assumption that if a large enough collection of goods are included in the “basket” to be measured, then changes in the relative scarcities of the goods themselves will largely cancel out. Thus the average or net change in the prices of all the goods (as quoted in money) will demonstrate whether the purchasing power of money has risen or fallen. Unfortunately, in practice it is only possible to carry out such calculations by making ad hoc assumptions about the relative importance of various factors. In the end, the economic theorist does not gain much from studying the various statistics of price movements that he could not obtain from deductive reasoning about the nature of exchange and money.
幾乎所有衡量貨幣客觀交換價(jià)值的嘗試都是基于這樣一個(gè)假設(shè)：如果要測(cè)量的“籃子”中包含了足夠多的商品集合，那么商品本身相對(duì)稀缺性的變化將在很大程度上互相抵消。因此，所有商品價(jià)格（以貨幣報(bào)價(jià)）的平均或凈變化將證實(shí)貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力是上升還是下降。不幸的是，在實(shí)踐中，只有通過(guò)對(duì)各種因素的相對(duì)重要性作出特別假設(shè)，才能進(jìn)行這種計(jì)算。最后，經(jīng)濟(jì)理論家從關(guān)于交換和貨幣性質(zhì)的演繹推理中無(wú)法獲得的東西，他從研究?jī)r(jià)格變動(dòng)的各種統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)中同樣無(wú)法獲得。
四、維塞爾關(guān)于指數(shù)計(jì)算方法的改進(jìn)
Wieser devised the most careful and satisfactory approach to measuring the objective exchange value of money, with a technique involving the contrast between nominal and real income. However, even Wieser’s approach had several fatal flaws. For example, over large stretches of time, the types of income people could earn become incommensurable, robbing Wieser’s technique of its desired precision.
維塞爾設(shè)計(jì)了一種最為謹(jǐn)慎和令人滿意的方法來(lái)衡量貨幣的客觀交換價(jià)值，這種方法涉及到名義收入和實(shí)際收入之間的對(duì)比。然而，即使是維塞爾的方法也有幾個(gè)致命的缺陷。例如，長(zhǎng)期來(lái)看，人們可以獲得的收入類(lèi)型變得不可通約，剝奪了維塞爾方法所要求的精確性。
五、指數(shù)的實(shí)際用途
The criticisms leveled against various techniques for calculating index numbers refer to the problems of economic theory. In practical use for government policy, these techniques provide a rough guide to changes in the purchasing power of money.
針對(duì)各種指數(shù)計(jì)算方法的批評(píng)同樣適用于經(jīng)濟(jì)理論問(wèn)題。在政府政策的實(shí)際運(yùn)用中，這些方法為貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力的變化提供了粗略的指導(dǎo)。
技術(shù)說(shuō)明
On page 189 Mises writes, “Invariability in respect of the property to be measured . . . is a sine qua non of all measurement.” For example, if a person is using a meter stick to measure length, then he must be assuming that the meter stick’s length is itself invariable. Yet when economists try to measure changes in the objective exchange value of money (i.e., in the purchasing power of money), they run into the problem that there are no such invariable benchmarks. If the exchange ratio between money and any other commodity changes, it is not clear whether the change originates from the side of money or the commodity.
在英文版第189頁(yè)，米塞斯寫(xiě)道：“相對(duì)于被度量財(cái)產(chǎn)的不變性…是所有度量的必要條件?！崩?，如果一個(gè)人使用米尺來(lái)測(cè)量長(zhǎng)度，那么他必須假設(shè)米尺本身的長(zhǎng)度是不變的。然而，當(dāng)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家試圖衡量貨幣的客觀交換價(jià)值（即貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力）的變化時(shí)，他們遇到了這樣一個(gè)問(wèn)題：沒(méi)有這樣不變的基準(zhǔn)。如果貨幣與任何其它商品之間的交換比率發(fā)生了變化，這種變化是來(lái)源于貨幣還是商品是不清楚的。
Some numerical examples may clarify Mises’s observations on index numbers (pp. 188–90). If the price of oil increases from
100, while the price of a television falls from
90, it is possible that these changes have nothing to do with the purchasing power of money, and merely reflect a shift in demand away from televisions and into oil. On the other hand, if all prices (quoted in money) in the community increased exactly by 10 percent in one year, then it would be clear that the purchasing power of money had fallen and was the driver of the price increases. But in the real world, things are never so clear-cut. Typically some prices rise while others fall, and the price movements are not in the same percentages across commodities. There is no nonarbitrary way to determine how much of a given good’s change in price is due to changes in its relative value (with respect to other commodities) versus a change in the purchasing power of money.
一些數(shù)值案例可以闡明米塞斯對(duì)指數(shù)的觀察（英文版第188-190頁(yè)）。如果石油價(jià)格從90美元上漲到100美元，而電視價(jià)格從100美元下降到90美元，這些變化可能與貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力無(wú)關(guān)，僅僅反映了需求從電視轉(zhuǎn)向石油。另一方面，如果社區(qū)所有價(jià)格（以貨幣報(bào)價(jià)）在一年內(nèi)精確上漲10%，那么很明顯貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力下降，而且這是價(jià)格上漲的驅(qū)動(dòng)因素。但在現(xiàn)實(shí)世界中，事情從來(lái)沒(méi)有這么明晰過(guò)。通常情況下，有些價(jià)格上漲，而另一些價(jià)格下跌，而且不同商品之間價(jià)格變動(dòng)的百分比不相同。沒(méi)有一種非任意的方法來(lái)確定一種給定商品的價(jià)格變化有多少是由于其相對(duì)價(jià)值（相對(duì)于其他商品）的變化，有多少是由于貨幣購(gòu)買(mǎi)力的變化。
研究問(wèn)題
Explain: “Only by letting fall morsels of statistics is it possible for the economic theorist to maintain his prestige in the face of questions of this sort.” (p. 188)
解釋：“經(jīng)濟(jì)理論家在面對(duì)這類(lèi)問(wèn)題時(shí)，只有提出一些統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)，才能維護(hù)其聲譽(yù)?！保ㄓ⑽陌娴?88頁(yè)）
Explain:“He who cares to go to the trouble of demonstrating the uselessness of index numbers for monetary theory and the concrete tasks of monetary policy will be able to select a good proportion of his weapons from the writings of the very men who invented them.” (p. 188)
解釋：“那些不辭辛苦想證明指數(shù)對(duì)于貨幣理論和貨幣政策的具體任務(wù)沒(méi)有任何作用的人們，可以從指數(shù)發(fā)明者的著作中選擇他們可用的大部分武器?！保ㄓ⑽陌娴?88頁(yè)）
Why are index numbers not very important for the “extension of the theory of the nature and value of money”? (pp. 189–90)
為什么指數(shù)對(duì)于“貨幣性質(zhì)和價(jià)值的理論的擴(kuò)展”不是很重要？（英文版189-190頁(yè)）
Even if we grant for the sake of argument that a loaf of bread possesses a constant utility in the objective sense of food value, why is this approach unhelpful when it comes to the use of index numbers in monetary theory? (p. 193)
即使我們?yōu)榱苏撟C而假設(shè)在客觀意義上，一條面包總是具有相同的效用，永遠(yuǎn)具有相同的食物價(jià)值，為什么這種方法對(duì)于指數(shù)在貨幣理論中的應(yīng)用沒(méi)有幫助？（英文版第193頁(yè)）
Does Mises think that index numbers are completely useless? (p. 194)
米塞斯認(rèn)為指數(shù)是完全無(wú)用的嗎？（英文版第194頁(yè)）
