The Zeitgeist Movement


文章漢化組亞伯 » 2014-04-29, 01:02


Our current economic paradigm is one in which the continuous acquisition of monetary wealth and material resources is both demanded and valued. In many of the wealthier nations economic growth has come at great cost to indigenous populations who were invaded and usurped, and to other nations who suffered the looting of their resources as they were colonized. In some cases populations suffered by literally being enslaved for the sake of generating further wealth for the already powerful owners of capital. Current statistics regarding the unequal distribution of wealth in today’s society indicate that little has changed since the days of the conquistadores and their ilk.
我們目前的經濟模式,是要持續獲得金融貨幣的利益和物質資源,這兩點成為必要的需求並被重視。在許多更富有的國家中,經濟成長已大量犧牲了原住民人口,這些人的土地被殖民者入侵和篡奪,也犧牲了其它被殖民的國家,因為遭受到殖民者掠奪其資源的痛苦。在某些狀況下,人民確確實實遭到身為奴隸的痛苦,為了產生出更多的財 富,以滿足本身就已有強大資本的奴隸主。目前關於今日社會財富分配不均的數據顯示,自從征服者和其親屬入侵以來,情況幾乎沒有任何改變。

Disproportionate rates of poverty, unemployment and homelessness reflect the inherent inequalities that are built into a system based on violent acquisition of scarce resources. In order to understand how best to address the failings of our current paradigm it is necessary to examine the model and its alternatives.

The Economics of Today

Our current economic paradigm is one of continuous, unchecked growth with no commonly accepted notion of the point at which an economy has reached the level of ‘enough'. Growth in economic terms relates to increased capacity regarding the production of goods and services and is usually associated with technological development, which raises productivity levels while lowering the requirements for labour, capital, and energy. In comparing one country's economic growth to another, per capita GDP is the measurement of choice regardless of its lack of attention to the equity of distribution within any given country. It tends to be assumed that the higher a country’s per capita GDP is the higher the standard of living is for its population as a whole. However no state has yet achieved the ideal of a high standard of living for all people despite its economic successes.
我們目前的經濟模式是不斷的、未節制的成長,一般大眾對於經濟發展是否到達「足夠」的程度 也沒有普遍的共識。經濟學中「成長」是關於增加能力去生產物品和提供服務,而且通常與科技發展的水平有關,提高生產力並降低對於勞動、資本和能源的需求。 當比較一國與另一國經濟成長時,人均GDP是衡量的標準,不論其是否缺乏關注任何給定的國家內分配不均的問題。人們傾向於假設一國更高的人均GDP成長, 是其整體人口更高生活水準的體現。然而至今沒有國家達到所有國民高生活水準的理想,儘管在經濟上或許已取得所謂的成功。

Classical Economics

Classical economics refers to theories surrounding the functioning of markets and market economies, developed in the 18th and 19th centuries by the so-called founding fathers of economics: Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill, whose emphasis on economic “freedoms” formed the basis of the system of free trade that characterizes contemporary economics. The paradigm began as the concept of "the wealth of nations" in which the development of a country’s economy beyond that generated by population growth and its implicit increase in labour and productivity were first considered.
古典經濟學表示 圍繞在市場運作功能和市場經濟的理論,在18、19世紀由所謂的經濟學之父建立,像是亞當.史密斯、大衛.李嘉圖、馬爾薩斯和約翰.斯圖亞特.穆勒,他們 皆強調「經濟自由」,此點形成了當代經濟學自由貿易體系的特徵。這個模式一開始是「國家財富」的概念,其中一國經濟發展的首要考量,超越了一國人口成長的 發展和內在勞動和生產力的增長。

It was Adam Smith who developed the paradigm beyond agricultural productivity to include the notion that manufacturing was central to a country’s economy. David Ricardo further developed the paradigm by introducing the concept of “comparative advantage” to complement this. Comparative advantage argues that trade is beneficial for economic growth because some products and services can be obtained more cheaply if imported rather than produced within a country’s borders. This theory became central to today’s argument that free trade is an essential component of economic growth.
正是亞當.史密斯發 展了超越農業生產力的模式,其結論認為製造業是一國經濟的核心。大衛.李嘉圖更進一步發展的模式是引進了「比較利益」來落實這點。「比較利益」主張貿易對 於經濟成長而言是有益的,因為一些產品和服務可以更便宜地經由進口而獲得,而不需要在一國內生產。這個理論今日成為一項重點,主張自由貿易對於經濟成長是 一項關鍵的元素。

Neoclassical Economics

Neoclassical economics is a more sophisticated development of the classical economic model and is a school of thought that that enjoys a near-monopoly over what is taught to today’s budding economists. The school of thought makes a number of assumptions that are disputed by some due to their failure to represent realistic situations. One example is the relationship of supply and demand to an individual's rationality and ability to maximize utility or profit. This assumption ignores the fact that people do not always behave rationally. Neoclassical economic theorists also claim that issues such as labour rights and standard of living will automatically improve as a result of economic growth, a claim thus far unsubstantiated.
新古典經濟學是比古典經濟學發展更複雜的一套模式,而且此流派被認為享有 近乎壟斷地位的聲望,影響力超越了今日一些新人經濟學家。此流派提出了許多假設,但受到一些人的反駁,因為新古典經濟學家不能表現實際的經濟狀況。其中一 個例子是供需之間的關係,認為一位具有理性和能力的人會將事物的效用和利潤最大化。但這項假設忽略了一個事實,即人們並不總是理性地行動。新古典經濟學理 論家也主張像是勞動權利和生活水準等問題,將由於經濟成長而自動改善,但這種論點完全毫無根據。

Robert Solow and Trevor Swan developed the Solow-Swan Growth Model in the 1950s, which involved a series of equations demonstrating the relationship between labour-time, capital goods (means of production), output and investment. This model emphasized technological change as playing an even more important role than the accumulation of capital. An erroneous assumption of this model, however, is that countries use their resources efficiently.
羅伯特.索洛和斯萬在1950年代發展了「索洛-斯萬成長模型」,演變成為一系 列的方程式,說明勞動時間、資本貨物(生產方式)、輸出和投資之間的關係。這個模型強調科技的演變比起資本的累積,甚至扮演了更重要的角色。然而,此模型 的一個錯誤假設是各國會有效率地運用資源。

The neoclassical model makes three important predictions based on the Solow-Swan growth model. The first involves the assumption that people will be more productive if given more capital, hence the prediction that increasing capital relative to labour promotes economic growth. The second prediction is that economies of poorer countries with lower per capita GDP will grow faster. This prediction is based on the assumption that each investment in capital produces higher returns in poor countries than in rich countries. The third prediction is that economies will eventually cease to grow due to diminishing returns to capital, thus leading to a ‘steady-state’ economy. This steady state, according to the Solow-Swan model, can be overcome by the invention of new technology, allowing for greater production with the use of fewer resources, thus allowing for further growth. None of these predictions are well supported by the evidence available, particularly the prediction that poorer countries will grow faster until the steady-state is reached.
根據索洛-斯萬成長模型,新古典經濟學模型作出三點 重要的預測。第一點假設是如果人們得到了更多的資本,人們將會變得更有生產力,因此預測增加的資本與勞動,將會促進經濟成長。第二點預測是有著較低人均 GDP的窮國,其經濟將成長得更快。此預測所根據的假設是每項資本的投資,比起富國,窮國將產生出更高的報酬。第三點預測是經濟最終將會停止增長,因為資 本得到的報酬將會逐漸減少,因此會導致一種「穩定的」經濟狀態。根據索洛-斯萬成長模型,這種穩定狀態會被新科技的發明所超越,新科技能利用更少的資源達 到更高程度的生產,因此會讓經濟進一步成長。但這些預測都沒有可得的證據來有力地支持,特別是預測窮國將會發展得更快,直到達到穩定的狀態。

Alternative Economic Models

Alternatives to classical and neoclassical economic theories are largely underrepresented by academia and are given little attention in the teachings of universities. For this reason there is very little awareness of their existence and their presence in public discourse is barely discernible. There are, however, a number of alternative models, each presenting its own solutions to issues perpetuated within the current system.
關於古典和新古典經濟理論的替代方案,大部份都未在學術圈中引起討論,而且在各大學的課程中不受重視。因 此,很少人會知道這條路徑,而這些方案的存在,也幾乎未出現在一般大眾的論述中。然而,確實有許多替代的模式,而且每一種都提出了對於目前體系中持續出現 的問題的解決方法。

Steady-State Economics

From classical economists to contemporary ecological economists the transition from a growth economy to a steady-state, as originally conceptualized by John Stuart Mill as an economy that is stable or only mildly fluctuating, has been considered a desirable goal. The expectation was that this steady-state would generally be reached after a period of economic growth.

In Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations it was theorized that open-market trading would eventually lead to a Goldilocks-like production of just the right quantities of commodities, division of labour, wage-increase, and economic growth. Smith also recognized that such growth is limited as, in the long term, population growth would lead to declining wages, increased scarcity of resources, and ineffective division of labour. Smith predicted that a growth period could not exceed 200 years before it would become necessary to stabilize. Indeed, John Stuart Mill commented that such stabilization was, in fact, desirable as illustrated by his famous words:
在亞當.史密 斯的書「國富論」中,其理論是開放的市場貿易,最終將會導致黃金時期般的生產:商品的數量、勞動分工、薪資增加和經濟成長皆正確無誤。史密斯也認知到這樣 子的成長,長期而言將受制於人口成長,導致薪資下降、資源越來越匱乏、勞動分工的無效率。史密斯預測一段經濟的成長期,在其穩定下來之前,不會超過200 年。確實約翰.斯圖亞特.穆勒評論道這樣的穩定狀態,確實是人們想要達成的,他的名言是:

“It is scarcely necessary to remark that a stationary condition of capital and population implies no stationary state of human improvement. There would be as much scope as ever for all kinds of mental culture, and moral and social progress; as much room for improving the Art of Living and much more likelihood of its being improved, when minds cease to be engrossed by the art of getting on.”

John Maynard Keynes also advocated aiming for a steady-state economy in which society would be able to focus on ends, being happiness and well-being, and not simply the means of survival, as characterized by economic growth at the national level and pursuit of profit at the individual level. His almost utopian view is represented in his prediction that:

“The day is not far off when the economic problem will take the back seat where it belongs, and the arena of the heart and the head will be occupied or reoccupied, by our real problems – the problems of life and of human relations, of creation and behavior and religion.”

Keynes was, however, mistaken. That day has not yet come. We are still striving within a growth economic paradigm and have yet to reach this steady-state which was considered the end goal, in which humanity would be able to concentrate on creative arts and the pursuit of knowledge and well-being as opposed to the mere struggle for survival.

The arrival of an economy at a steady-state, although it theoretically follows a period of growth, may also follow a period of downsizing. This point is especially pertinent when considering that one of the defining factors of a steady-state economy is that it may not exceed ecological limits. This means that if an economy, whether local, national or global, has already reached or surpassed the carrying capacity of its landbase, a period of downshifting will be necessary in order to reach a sustainable steady-state.
雖然理論上穩定狀態經濟的達成會遵循一段時間的成長期,但它之後也可能會遇到一段衰 退期。當考慮到穩定狀態的其中一個決定因素時,這點尤其有理,即穩定的經濟狀態不能超越其生態上的極限。這意味著如果一個經濟體,不論是地區性、國際性或 全球性的,若已到達或超越了其地基的承載能力,則將必會出現衰退期,以為了再次達到永續的穩定狀態。

For a steady-state economy to be feasible, according to the theory, it is necessary to maintain stable or only mildly fluctuating population, meaning that birth rates must not exceed death rates. In addition, the consumption of energy and material resources must remain steady - in that production and consumption rates must be equal to, and not exceeding, depreciation rates. Up until fairly recently economic activity functioned at a low enough level to avoid detrimental interference with ecological sustainability. However, the growth economic paradigm of the neoclassical era has upset this natural balance and has led us to the brink of environmental disaster without achieving economic stability for the majority. For this reason it is of urgent priority, according to steady-state advocates, that rebalancing the equation occurs.
根據理論,為了讓穩定的經濟狀態成為可行的,必須維持穩定或只輕微波動的人口,這意味著出生率一定不能超 過死亡率。此外,能源和物資的消耗一定也要維持穩定,因為生產和消費的比例,一定要等同且不超過折舊率。直到非常近代,經濟活動的程度都是足夠低到避免有 害地干擾生態上的永續性。然而,新古典年代的無限成長經濟模式,已擾亂了這種自然平衡,而且已帶領我們至環境災難的邊緣,而且也未實現大多數人經濟上的穩 定。因此跟據此種穩定的經濟狀態理論所要求的,急迫的優先任務是要重新平衡經濟學上的等式。

Achieving the balance is not an easy task. There are cases in which the benefits of growth appear to outweigh the costs, for example, in situations where a population’s consumption is insufficient to meet its needs. In this particular case, reaching a steady-state may necessitate redistribution of resources in order to provide for everyone’s needs while maintaining ecologically sustainable levels of consumption. There are also situations in which an economy has overshot the carrying capacity of its landbase, meaning that downsizing will be necessary before a sustainable steady-state can be established.
達到平衡不是簡單的任務。在一些情況中,經濟 成長的益處似乎超過其所付出的代價。例如人口對於資源的消耗還不足以滿足其人口的需求。在這種特殊的情況中,為了達到穩定的經濟狀態,可能需要重新分配資 源,以滿足每個人的需求,並也同時維持生態上永續的資源消耗程度。也有其它情形,其中經濟體已過度濫用其地基的承載能力,意味著在建立一個穩定狀態的經濟 之前,就必將出現衰退。

It is clear from our experience thus far that economic growth cannot be relied upon to alleviate poverty. Our current paradigm sees the dual threat to environmental sustainability of the poor, who struggle to meet their basic needs, placing the environment lower down on the scale of priority, and the rich, who tend to consume resources far beyond the limits of sustainability. As economic growth and long-term sustainability are not realistically compatible it is necessary for an economy to distribute wealth more equally, as well as efficiently, in order to effectively reach a steady-state.
從我們至今的經驗很明白地體認到,不能依賴經濟成長去緩和貧窮的苦難。我們目前的模式也同時預見了窮人對於環境 永續性的雙重災難。這些人掙扎求生,以滿足他們的基本需求,將環保視為次要,而富人傾向於消耗比永續性的極限遠遠更多的資源。當經濟成長和長期的永續性實 際上完全不相容時,對於一個經濟體而言,需要更均等地分配財富,也要更有效率,以有效地達到一種穩定的狀態。

True Cost Economics

The true cost economic school of thought is one that is gaining traction during our era of increasing environmental awareness. This is a model that takes into account the cost of negative externalities, thus placing a higher price tag on goods and services that cause damage to the environment or any living being. There is also support within the true cost school of thought for the notion that any product or activity that causes harm to the environment or any living being, either in a direct or indirect manner, should be taxed in accordance with the damage incurred.
「真實成本經濟學」流派,在我們環保意識高漲的年代正受到注意。這個模型考慮到負面外部性的成本,因此對於造成環境破壞 或傷害任何生物的物品和服務,其價格會更高。真實成本經濟學此流派也支持以下論點:任何造成環境破壞或傷害任何生物的產品或活動,不論是直接或間接,其稅 率也應該與所造成的損害符合一致。

This increased emphasis on ethics can, however, have negative consequences for many, in that many of the items and services that most people, at least those in the developed world, take for granted are likely to be rendered unaffordable if their true costs are really taken into consideration. One example provided to demonstrate such costs is the price of a new car; with the externalities of air, noise and other kinds of pollution caused by both the use and manufacture of the vehicle taken into account, being estimated at $40,000 above that at present. Such cost increases effectively prohibit the closing of the gap in opportunities between the rich and the poor and perpetuate a cycle whereby resources are largely inaccessible for the majority while the minority may continue to consume and exploit at the level to which their swollen bank account permits.
然而,這種強調倫理的論 述會有許多負面的後果,因為許多物品和服務,如真要考慮到其真實的成本,對於那些視其為理所當然的大多數人而言,或至少那些已開發國家的人民,其價格將因 此高到無法負擔。說明這種成本的一個例子是一輛新車的價格。因為會造成空氣汙染、噪音和其它種類汙染的外部性,不論是要考慮到使用或製造時的成本,目前皆 會造成一台車預計要在四萬美元以上。這樣的成本增加,將不能有效地縮短富人和窮人之間取得物品服務的機會差距,只會延續惡性循環,其中大部份的人都沒有錢 能取得昂貴的資源,而少數人就能繼續消費和剝削,只要他們爆滿的銀行帳戶裡有足夠的金錢允許如此做。

A true-cost economic paradigm, although intended to encourage a more sustainable mindset and thus influence behavior via directly influencing pricing may, in effect, render an economy stagnant by inhibiting monetary circulation due to cost increases. If wealth is not distributed in a manner that facilitates access to resources for the majority then the majority will be unable to participate in the system in any meaningful way. Only a transition to genuinely more sustainable forms of production is likely to facilitate participation on a scale needed to maintain the feasibility of the system. Of course this is a possible scenario; however, the transition to such a system requires courage on the part of those with the political power to institute changes that are likely to be extremely unpopular at the corporate level, where the majority of the real clout lies.
真實成本經濟模式雖然意圖鼓勵一種更為永續的思維方式,並因此透過直接 影響價格來影響人們的行為,但可能實際上會造成經濟停滯,因為成本的增加限制了金融貨幣的流通。如果財富的分配方式,不是去促進讓大多數人能取得資源,那 麼大多數的人,將無法在目前的金融貨幣體系以有意義的方式參與整個經濟活動。只有轉變成一種真正更為永續的生產形式,才有可能使人們參與進來,達到維持體 系運作下去的規模。當然,這是一種可能的狀況。然而,轉變到如此永續的體系,需要那些擁有政治權力的人提起勇氣,制定對目前的公司而言絕不歡迎的改革,且 這些公司擁有真正的影響力。

Participatory Economics

Unlike the steady-state and true-cost models, participatory economics is the only alternative to classical economics discussed here that is not capitalist in nature. An anarchist’s near-utopian vision of a democratized economy, participatory economics, often referred to as parecon, was originally proposed by Michael Albert, an activist political theorist and Robin Hahnel, a radical economist. In the system of parecon decisions regarding the production, consumption and distribution of commonly owned resources are participatory, meaning that the decisions are made by those affected by their outcomes. The anarchist’s answer to centrally-planned socialism places not only the means of production in the hands of the population, but also the control over the direction the economy takes. Parecon intends to facilitate equity, solidarity, diversity and self-management, while maximizing efficiency. Central to the functioning of this system are workers' and consumers' councils which implement self-managerial methods for decision-making, balanced job complexes, remuneration for work according to effort and sacrifice made and participation in planning.
不像穩定狀 態經濟學和真實成本經濟學,參與式經濟學是唯一本質上不是資本主義式的替代方案,與此處討論的古典經濟學不同。看似一種無政府式的近乎烏托邦願景,一種民 主化的經濟,參與式經濟通常被稱為Parecon,原本是由Michael Albert所提出,他是一位政治理論家和行動主義者,另一位提出該概念者為Robin Hahnel,是一位激進的經濟學家。在Parecon裡,關於公眾共有的生產、消費和分配等決策是參與式的,意味著決策是由那些會受到影響的人們所決 定。這種取代中央集權規劃式社會主義的無政府解決方式,不只將生產的手段置於參與的人口中,而且也將經濟發展方向的控制權置於人民手中。Parecon意 圖促進平等、團結、多樣化和自我管理,並將效率最大化。此體系的核心是工人和消費者的會議,其制定對於決策的自我管理方法,並平衡工作的複雜度,根據在計 畫中參與的努力和奉獻程度給予工作的報酬。

In allaying the fears that some might have about fully participatory planning it is important to mention that in the parecon system of self-managerial decision-making people have input to decisions in a manner that is directly proportional to the degree to which they are affected by them. This system is effectively parecon’s answer to the neoclassical concept of economic freedom within a market paradigm, which, as proponents of parecon argue, is a concept that has been co-opted and abused by capitalist ideologues.
為了平息某些 人對於完全參與式計畫可能有的恐懼,重要的是指出在自我管理決策的Parecon體系中,人們輸入決策的方式是直接與其受到決策影響的比例程度成正比。這 個體系實際上是Parecon對於新古典主義的市場模式下經濟自由概念的回應,其中Parecon的支持者主張Parecon的理念是一種被資本主義意識 型態支持者所同化和濫用的概念。

Within a participatory economic paradigm, decisions affecting a number of people may be arrived at via a majority vote or via consensus. Depending on factors such as potential risk or harm, or the level of effort to be expended in order to accomplish a goal, some decisions may require a higher majority than others in order to be passed, or even total consensus. Such a scenario bestows the power of veto upon any individual who is greatly affected by the outcome of the decision. However, in cases where decisions are purely personal and do not affect others there is no need for collective decision-making or voting; these decisions are left up to the autonomous individuals affected by them.
在參與式經濟模式中,影響許多人的決策可能透過大部份 人的投票或共識來達成。取決於各種因素的考量,像是潛在的風險或傷害,或達成目標所需花費的努力程度,而一些決策可能需要更多人的同意才能通過,或有完全 一致的共識。這樣的景象賦予了任何人否決權,只要這些人會被決策的結果大大影響。然而,在一些純粹個人式的決策情況中,而且不會影響其它人的話,就沒有必 要共同集體決策或投票。這些決定可留給受到決策影響的自發性個體。

With the balanced division of labour proposed by the parecon system the notion of economic hierarchy is theoretically absent with the goal being equity via the empowerment of all participants. As some tasks are clearly more comfortable and empowering than others, job complexes are balanced with each individual taking responsibility for a range of tasks, some of which are more empowering, some less so. This essentially dissolves the system of class stratification that characterizes our current economic paradigm in which an accountant or manager, for example, assumes an empowered role that facilitates the formulation of plans and ideas, while a janitors or shop assistant does not have either the capacity or training to be so empowered. Without balance those assuming less empowered positions have little to no genuine participation in decision-making, as is evident within our current economic paradigm.
隨著Parecon體系提出來的平衡式勞動分工,理論上不會出現經濟不平等階級的狀況,因為目標是透過給予所有參與者權力以達到平等。雖然一些任務明顯比其 它工作輕鬆且需要更多的權力,工作的複雜度仍然能夠平衡,因為每個人都負起一系列任務的責任,有些工作需要更多的權力,有些則反之。這實際上消弭了階級的 劃分,像是我們目前的經濟體系特徵,例如一位會計師或經理承擔更多責任的角色,以促進計畫或想法的形成,而一位警衛或店員沒有能力或訓練來得到如此權力。 若失去平衡,那些承擔較少權力位置的人,幾乎不可能真正參與決策,如同我們目前的經濟體系中顯而易見的結果。

As regards remuneration for labour this is calculated on the basis of effort expended and sacrifice made. Dangerous or uncomfortable work, for example, would be paid more highly for the same number of hours as more comfortable work in the parecon paradigm, allowing those making greater sacrifices the opportunity to work fewer hours for the same pay and enjoy more leisure time in return for their sacrifice. It is recognized, however, that not everyone has full capacity to work equally. Therefore remuneration of those with disabilities, the elderly, and those otherwise unable to work to full capacity is based on their level of need. Free health care, education and skills training are provided to all in the parecon system as there is no notion of profiting from providing for people’s basic needs.
關於勞動的回報,其計算是根據所花費的努力和作出的犧牲。例如危 險或不舒服的工作,同樣的工時下,比起在Parecon體系內更輕鬆的工作,將會被支付更高的薪水,讓那些付出更多犧牲的人有機會工時更短就能賺取等值的 報酬,並有更多的休閒時間來回報他們的犧牲。然而,Parecon也認知到不是每個人都有能力平等地工作。因此對於那些殘障、老年或其它沒有完全工作能力 的人,其報酬是根據他們需求的程度而定。免費的醫療照護、教育和技能訓練在Parecon體系內會提供給所有人,因為其對於利潤的概念,不是從提供並滿足 人們的基本需求而來。

Parecon gets particularly interesting when it comes to the concept of money. Instead of traditional currency, in the parecon system money would be replaced by a personal voucher system in which vouchers would be non-transferable and only usable to purchase goods from stores. Workers would be rewarded for their labour with electronic credits, which would be allocated in terms of the level of effort and sacrifice necessary to carry out their work. These credits could be shared and distributed among people in any way they wish. Accumulated credits would have an inflexible value, and once used for purchase they would be deducted from the individual’s total, and from the system, rather than being passed from one individual to another in the monetary rollercoaster-ride that characterizes a capitalist paradigm.
當談到金錢的概念時,Parecon變得特別有趣。與傳統的貨幣不同,在Parecon體系內,金錢將會被個人的保證系 統取代,其中保證文件會是不可讓渡轉移的,而只能用於從商店中購買物品。工人會因為他們的勞動得到報酬,即電子信用點數,這將會根據必要的努力和奉獻程度 來分配,以去執行工人們的工作。這些信用點數將會在人們所希望的人之間,以任何他們所想要的方式分享和分配。累計的信用點數將有一個固定的價值,而一旦被 用於購買,它們將會從個人的保證系統總額中扣除,而不像是資本主義模式的金融貨幣雲霄飛車特色那樣,從一個人身上轉移讓渡到另一個人身上。

There would be no banking system or any form of investment. For an individual to accumulate more credits they would simply have to work more, or carry out less desirable labour in which the remuneration is higher. It would, however, be possible to borrow credits if necessary, but this loan would be interest-free as there is no notion of profiting from the handling of finance within a parecon system. This extreme makeover of the monetary system is expected to have the effect, according to its proponents, of rendering bribery, corruption or even begging impossible. It is unclear, however, how a parecon country would trade with other non-parecon countries who may not agree to parecon terms of exchange. It is possible that a parecon country would either have to be self-sufficient, or accept the use of money exclusively for the purpose of international trade.
將不會有任何形式的銀行系統或投資。為了讓一個人去累積更多信用點數,人們將只能工作更 多,或去執行較不受人喜好的工作,其中報酬會更高。然而,如果有必要的話,人們也可能去借信用點數,但這種貸款會是免利息的,因為在Parecon的體系 中,沒有去從處理金融程序上獲得利潤這種東西。這種對於金融貨幣體系極端的改革,根據其支持者的說法,預期將會有效使得賄賂、貪汙或甚至乞討消失。然而, 不清楚的地方在於,一個實施Parecon體系的國家如何與其它非Parecon體系的國家貿易,因為非Parecon體系的國家可能不會同意按照 Parecon的觀點交易。很可能Parecon的國家將必須自給自足,或是僅僅為了國際貿易而接受使用金錢。

Within the parecon system, regular participatory planning events would be held in which participants would decide upon what and how much would be produced. Regarding decision-making at community planning level Albert and Hahnel proposed the creation and organization of consumer's and producers' councils. The proposed functioning of these is similar to workers' councils, but they are the decision-making bodies for the planning of consumption and production. Councils may operate on a variety of levels from local through to national, with regard to the scope of the decision to be made.
在Parecon的體系中,正常的參與式計畫事件將會被舉辦,其中參 與者將決定要生產什麼和生產多少。關於社群等級的決策,Albert和Hahnel提議創造並組織一個消費者和生產者的會議。這些提議的功能與工人會議類 似,但是他們是消費和生產計畫的決策主體。會議的運作可能會有各種層級,從區域性到國際性的,討論所做成決策的範圍。

The management body for the consumers’ and producers’ councils is known as an Iteration Facilitation Board (IFB), and is responsible for decisions regarding economic allocation. These boards function by accepting a range of proposals for pricing regarding production and consumption, and operate at maximum transparency with limited powers of mediation. The result is a consistency of pricing and production quotas, and takes into account the social and ecological costs of production. Prices of goods that are harmful would be inflated in order to discourage consumption and redirect it toward more benign alternatives.
對於消費者和生產者的管理主體會議, 被稱為Iteration Facilitation Board (IFB),負責經濟分配的決策。這些委員會的功能是接受一系列關於生產和消費價格範圍的提議,然後用最大化的透明程度去運作,其中調解的權力受到限制。 結果會是一致的價格和生產配額,並考慮生產時造成的社會和環境成本。有害物品的價格將會提高,以為了抑制消費,並重新導向更好的替代選擇。

Critics of parecon tend to emphasize the perceived level of bureaucracy involved in lengthy participatory decision-making and ensuring administration is kept transparent. Such criticisms can also be applied, however, to other systems with heavy administrative loads shouldered by governments and corporations. What these critics often seem to overlook is that the overhaul of the monetary system frees up workers from the former banking and finance sectors, thus making them available for the tasks associated with facilitation boards, etc. Albert and Hahnel estimate no increase in the level of bureaucracy, nor the number of workers involved in it, from that of our current capitalist system.
Parecon 的批評者傾向強調,在一個冗長的參與式決策過程中,為了確保行政管理是保持透明的,該體系會出現官僚主義。然而,這種批評也可以適用在其它的體系中,伴隨 著政府和企業繁雜的行政負擔。這些批評家經常看似忽略的是,對於金融貨幣體系的徹底檢修,將能把工人從之前的銀行和金融部門中解放出來,因此讓這些人能夠 參與和促進委員會相關的任務。Albert和Hahnel估計,從目前我們的資本主義體系來看,在Parecon體系中不會增加官僚的嚴重性,也不會增加 工人參與官僚的數量。

Regarding innovation, parecon has an advantage of efficiency over the current capitalist system. Capitalism tends to attribute innovation to individuals and corporations with the process of applying patents and intellectual property rights and rendering the products or services unavailable for further development by the collective intelligence of the wider community. Industry structures and barriers to market entry within the capitalist system also reward some individual innovators while restricting others and limiting the availability of the full range of new technologies. In parecon all innovations would be made fully available in order to maximize efficiency and harness the collective intelligence of the community at large to achieve maximum potential.
至於創新,Parecon有著超越目 前資本主義體系的效率優勢。資本主義傾向於將創新歸因於個體和企業財團,利用專利和智慧財產權,讓產品或服務不能經由更廣泛範圍的集體社群智慧來發展。資 本主義體系內的產業結構和市場關稅障礙,也獎勵一些個別的創新者,並限制它人得到完整使用範圍的新科技。在Parecon中,所有的創新將會完全公開提供 給所有人,以為了將效率提升至最大化,最終利用社群集體的共同智慧來達到最大的潛力。

Parecon also holds an added value over and above capitalism in that justice and fairness are qualities that are built into the system in much the same way as injustice and unfairness are built into the neoclassical system. A market economy only takes into consideration the interests of supply and demand, or of the consumer and producer. However, these are not the only individuals affected by a given transaction, with all others being excluded from the decision-making process. These others may, in some cases, bear the social or environmental costs of the transactions that others benefit from. Parecon does not unjustly thrust negative externalities upon individuals who have no part in decision-making, but empowers all who may be affected by a given decision with a right to input; thus the defaults of parecon include justice and fairness. In contrast, our market-driven capitalist paradigm accepts abuses perpetrated by corporations wielding hefty influence over government decisions, thus externalizing all negative costs onto society whilst perpetuating the upward flow of capital into their perpetual cycle of wealth-driven power.
Parecon也擁有超越資本主義的額外價值,因為公平正義是內建至該體系中的品質,如同不公不 義內建至新古典主義體系中。市場經濟只考慮供需的利益,或消費者和生產者的利益。然而,不只有交易中的個體會受到影響,而是所有的他者都被排除在決策過程 之外。在某些情況中,這些人可能要去承擔社會和環境的代價,而其它參與交易的人則從中獲益。Parecon不會不公正地將負面的外部性,加諸於未參與決策 的個體,而是會給予所有可能受到既定決策影響的人權力,讓他們有權力去輸入。因此Parecon的預設包含了公平正義。相反地,我們由市場驅動的資本主義 模式,接受由財團企業所帶來的濫用,它們運用了巨大的影響力去超越政府的決策,因此讓社會全體承擔所有的負面外部性,並延續向上流動的資本趨勢,使它們永 遠維持由財富驅動權力的循環。

Resource-Based Economics

A resource-based economy, or RBE, strives for a combination of the benefits of steady-state, true cost and participatory economic models, but does so within a governance system that is neither capitalist nor socialist in nature.

Like steady-state economics, an RBE seeks no economic growth, recognizing the necessity of remaining within the boundaries set by the carrying capacity of any given landbase. Within the RBE paradigm it is necessary to gain as full an understanding as is scientifically possible of exactly what carrying capacity entails. With a more holistic perspective it is understood that while carrying capacity does not change, efficiency and sustainable management of resources can be optimized to work in harmony with fluctuations in population, developments in the realms of science and technology, and with unforeseen circumstances such as natural disasters. The RBE paradigm does not advocate downshifting as a response to overshooting carrying capacity, but tends more toward applying technical solutions that can reinstate balance while continuing to provide a good standard of living for all. An RBE may be compared with a steady-state economy in the sense that its core principle is sustainability, although various other principles are also of great importance.
如同穩定狀態的經濟,RBE不追求經濟成長,認知到經濟的界限,設立在任何給定地基的承載能力範圍內的必要性。在 RBE的模式中,需要完全理解科學上的承載能力到底有什麼可能性。更全面的觀點是儘管RBE認知到承載能力不會改變,但效率和永續的資源管理可以被最佳 化,與人口波動和諧一致,也與科學和科技的發展和諧一致,並也能處理不可預見的狀況如自然災難。RBE模式不提倡衰退或退化,不以此作為濫用承載能力的對 治方法,而是更傾向於運用科技上的解決方案,使其可以重新恢復平衡,並也同時為所有人持續提供高水準的生活。可能會拿RBE來與穩定狀態經濟互相比擬的地 方,在於它的核心原則是永續性,雖然其它各種原則也同樣非常重要。

The value of true-cost is also implicit within an RBE in that the social and environmental costs of any endeavor are studied scientifically, evaluated, and applied to decisions regarding production, consumption and distribution of resources. However, as an RBE is a non-monetary economic paradigm the exploitation and destruction of resources is not mitigated by price controls, and the encouragement of more sustainable practices is not facilitated by cost-effectiveness. Instead, the complete elimination of the monetary system removes the incentive for exploitation and destruction while also facilitating the uninhibited development of technical solutions that ensure the sustainability of abundant resources. Sustainable practice therefore becomes the default while freedom from the restrictions of labour and cost necessitated by a monetary economic paradigm enables greater creativity and innovation for the continued development of society. An RBE consolidates the concept of true-cost in the removal of monetary value, recognizing that money is simply an arbitrary artificial barrier to sustainable access to resources.
真實成本的價值觀也同樣反映在RBE內,因為任何耗費社會和環境精力的成本,都被科學地研究過、評估過,並被運用於關 於生產、消費和資源的分配決策上。然而,因為RBE不是金融貨幣體系的模式,所以不是透過價格上的控管來減緩剝削和資源的破壞,而且更永續方式的實踐,也 不是經由成本效益來促進。相反地,RBE完全移除了金融貨幣體系,這點會消除剝削和毀滅的動機,並也同時促進科技上可行解決方案的無限發展,藉此確保豐富 資源的永續性。永續的實踐因此是預設內建的,並解放勞動和成本的限制,這些限制是金融貨幣體系的必要條件,而RBE對此限制的解放,將能促進更高的創造力 和創新,以讓社會持續發展。RBE鞏固加強了真實成本的概念,除去金融貨幣體系的價值,認知到對於永續取得資源而言,金錢僅僅是一種武斷的人造障礙。

The democratic involvement of the people as direct participants in decisions affecting their wellbeing is also implicit with an RBE, but operates on numerous levels. With the elimination of money and the socially stratified division of labour, like the parecon system, the default of an RBE is equality, rather than hierarchy and power-play. This equality is also present in access to education, healthcare and resources, and is a necessary prerequisite for equal access to participation in any system.
在RBE體系之中,身為直接的參與者,人們的民主參與也包含在內,人們可以直接 制定影響其福祉的決策,但運作的程度也將同時更為廣大。隨著金錢和勞動階級分層的消除,如同Parecon體系一樣,RBE的預設是平等,而不是階級和權 力遊戲。平等也體現在取得教育、醫療照護和資源這些方面,而且對於平等地取得所需和參與任何體系而言,這些都是必要的先決條件。

Ways in which the resource-based economic paradigm could be considered to supersede the benefits of even the participatory economic system include the automation of labour-intensive, repetitive, and also dangerous tasks. This freedom from such work, coupled with access to resources without the barrier of trade of any sort facilitates the steady-state vision John Maynard Keynes predicted of liberation from the struggle for the means of survival followed by the opportunity to pursue the ends of creativity and well-being. The emphasis on intrinsic motivation over extrinsic reward and punishment allows for work to be carried out for the love of it, for the sense of purpose it stimulates, and for the challenges and opportunities for development that may be presented. Value placed on the understanding of social structures, sociology, psychology and learning process intensifies the capability of an RBE to cater to the needs of all in a way that values the individual intrinsically and stimulates the maximization of human potential.
資源導向型經濟模式的方式,甚至可以被視為超越參與式經濟體系的好處,包括利用自動化去取代勞動密集、重複枯燥和危險的任務。將人們從這些性質的工作解放出 來,以及能取得資源而沒有任何種類的貿易障礙,將促進約翰.梅納德.凱因斯所預測的穩定經濟狀態的願景,將人類從掙扎於求取生存的手段中解放出來,並有隨 之而來的機會來追求創造力和幸福等終極目標。RBE強調內在動機而不是外部的獎勵和懲罰,能讓人們確實因為喜愛而去工作,能刺激對於目標的追求感,對於發 展而言,也能提供可能出現的挑戰和機會。RBE的價值觀將強調理解社會結構、社會學、心理學和學習過程等等,這些提倡會強化RBE的發展水準,以迎合所有 人的需求,重視個體的內在實現並刺激人類潛能到達極致。

The concept of decision-making within the RBE paradigm is, however, quite different from that of parecon, or indeed any other. Transparency and access to information and education form the basis of understandings, which are valued more highly than beliefs. The traditional process of deciding upon a course of action is unavoidably influenced, often with the potential for negative outcomes, by beliefs, emotional responses, ego-driven power-play between dominant personalities and suppression of more passive personalities.
然而,在RBE內部,其決策過程的概念與Parecon相當不同,也確實與任何其 它體系不同。透明度和取得資訊的能力和必要的相關教育,形成了理解的基礎,這些比起個人的單純信仰更受到高度重視。傳統上關於行動的決策過程,無可避免地 會受到人為主觀影響,通常造成潛在的負面結果,像是被主觀信仰、情緒反應、自我中心驅動的權力遊戲所牽引,在個人主導的強烈意識和壓抑更為被動的潛意識之 間搖晃不定。

A resource-based economic paradigm advocates the implementation of the scientific method in all areas of society, and planning is no exception. Instead of being vulnerable to personal whims, personality and ego-battles, decision-making within an RBE is a process of empirical investigation, presentation of evidence and arrival at the most logical conclusions. Rational consensus can be reached within this paradigm due to the requirement of evidence for all claims, which supersede any individual’s opinion. In cases where specialist knowledge is necessary certain decisions are the domain of entrusted experts who have the knowledge base required to arrive at such decisions expediently. In certain situations there would be no decision-making process at all, with actions simply being automated based on calculations. Such situations may include the production and allocation of resources which, in order to be both sustainable and equitable, must not be influenced by personal bias or vested interest, and can, therefore, be better achieved by a computer than by a boardroom full of politicians and lobbyists.
資源導向型經濟提倡將科學方法應用於社會上的所有方面,規劃本身也不例外。RBE內 部的決策是一種基於實際科學經驗的調查過程,提出證據達成最合乎邏輯的結論,而不是受限於個人主觀的偏好、性格和自我戰爭。理性的共識在這種模式中可以達 成,因為對於所有主張宣示,RBE要求具體證據,超越任何個人的主觀意見。在需要專業知識的情況中,特定的決策是交給受到委託的專家,他們擁有必要的知識 基礎來權宜地做成這些決策。在某些情況中,將完全不會有決策過程,而且行動將僅僅根據計算而交由自動化機械完成。這樣的情況可能包含了資源的生產和分配, 其中為了達到永續和公正兩者,一定不能不被個人偏見或既得利益所影響,因此這點可以由電腦完成,而不是在委員室內,由一群政治家和遊說團體達成。

It is thus that an RBE is governed not by politicians or corporations, nor even by popular opinion, but by its core principles as upheld by the equal participation of its members, assisted by the objective process of the scientific method as applied to human and environmental need. When the attributes of a range of economic alternatives are weighed up the resource-based economic paradigm presents an innovative and holistic response to the needs of humanity and the planet which sustains our very existence. This radical paradigm based on the principles of sustainability, equality and liberty is one that deserves to be at the forefront of contemporary economic discussion.
因此RBE不是由政治家或企業財團所治 理,甚至也不是由受到歡迎的意見所管理,而是其擁護的核心原則是其成員平等的參與,透過客觀的科學方法過程來輔助,並也同樣應用在人類和環境的需求上。當 考量過一系列的經濟替代方案後,資源導向型經濟模式對於人類和維持我們根本存在的星球本身, 呈現出一種創新且全面性的回應。這種以現有觀點而言激進的模式,是根據永續、平等和自由等原則,值得放在當代討論經濟學時的最前鋒。
文章: 84
註冊時間: 2014-04-26, 17:02

回到 TZM-時代精神的啟動


正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 1 位訪客