奥巴马挽救了美国经济,但犯下一个大错

How should we assess the economic success or failure of Barack Obama’s presidency?

我们如何评价巴拉克?奥巴马(Barack Obama)担任总统期间在经济方面的成功或失败呢？

This is a difficult question to answer. After all, the incumbent of the White House cannot determine the performance of the huge and complex US economy. Indeed, policy initiatives usually have a modest impact. But the story of Mr Obama’s presidency is a little different from the usual, since it began amid the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. If we consider the disaster he inherited and the determination of the Republicans in Congress to ensure he would fail, his record is clearly successful. This does not mean it is perfect. Nor does it mean the US confronts few economic challenges. Neither statement would be close to correct. Yet it does mean he has laid a strong foundation.

这个问题很难回答。毕竟，坐镇白宫之人决定不了庞大而复杂的美国经济的表现。事实上，政策举措通常只会产生一定程度的影响。但奥巴马的总统任期与历届略有不同，因为他走马上任的时候，美国处于自上世纪30年代以来最严重的金融危机期间。如果我们考虑到他初上任时要面对这场灾难以及国会共和党人决心要让他一败涂地，那么他任内的作为明显是成功的。这不等于说他取得的功绩是完美的，也不是说美国如今面临的经济挑战很少——这两种说法都距离正确甚远。不过这确实意味着他打下了坚实的基础。

The latest Economic Report of the President analyses the Obama record. It is also the brief for the defence. But Mr Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers does first-rate analysis. This report is no exception to that rule.

最近一份《总统经济报告》(Economic Report of the President)分析了奥巴马在任内取得的成绩。这也是一篇简略的辩护报告。但奥巴马的经济顾问委员会(US Council of Economic Advisers)往往会做出一流的分析。该报告也不例外。

The starting point must be with Mr Obama’s inheritance: the economy was in free fall in early 2009. As the report notes, perfectly correctly: “It is easy to forget how close the US economy came to an outright depression during the crisis. Indeed, by a number of macroeconomic measures?.?.?.?the first year of the Great Recession?.?.?.?saw larger declines than at the outset of the Great Depression in 1929-30.”

出发点必然是奥巴马刚接手时的情况：2009年初美国经济呈自由落体式下滑。该报告完全正确地提到：“我们很容易忘记美国经济在这次危机期间是多么接近彻底萧条。的确，从多个宏观经济指标来看……大衰退(Great Recession)的第一年……经历了比1929-1930年大萧条伊始更严重的衰退。”

Responsibility for the successful recovery does not rest with this administration alone: the administration of George W Bush was responsible for the immediate response (though bearing some responsibility for the severity of the crisis); the US Federal Reserve acted effectively; and Congress passed important legislation. Yet, shockingly, most congressional Republicans opposed all significant monetary, financial and fiscal actions taken to deal with the crisis.

成功实现经济复苏的责任不只落在这届政府身上：小布什(George W Bush)政府作出了快速反应（尽管该政府对危机的严重性也负有部分责任）；美联储(Fed)采取了有效行动；国会通过了重要法案。不过，令人震惊的是，大多数共和党议员反对货币、金融和财政方面一切为了解决危机的重大措施。

The Obama administration implemented a number of important fiscal measures, notably the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. It also provided strong moral support for the Fed (including the reappointment of Ben Bernanke, who had been President Bush’s nominee). The administration also restored the financial sector faster than expected and carried out a highly successful rescue of the car industry.

奥巴马政府实施了一系列重要财政措施，特别是2009年出台的《美国复苏与再投资法案》(American Recovery and Reinvestment Act)。这届政府也为美联储提供了有力的精神支持（包括让小布什总统提名的本?伯南克(Ben Bernanke)接着担任美联储主席）。奥巴马政府还以超出预期的速度复苏了金融业，并且极其成功地拯救了汽车产业。

Meanwhile, Republicans decried the fiscal stimulus, complaining about the huge fiscal deficits caused by the crisis. Yet it was as absurd to complain about deficits then as it is to slash taxes now, when the economy seems close to full employment. Some Republicans claimed Fed policies risked hyperinflation. Most opposed the re-regulation of the financial sector and savaged the bailout of the car industry. Yet President-elect Donald Trump might not be in a position to bully automakers today if they had not been rescued back then.

另一方面，共和党人则指责财政刺激措施，抱怨危机造成巨额财政赤字。不过，在当时抱怨赤字，与如今在经济看似接近充分就业状态之际削减税收一样荒谬。一些共和党人声称美联储政策有造成恶性通胀的风险。大多数共和党人反对重新加强金融业监管，也强烈抨击汽车业纾困计划。不过，如果当时政府没救助汽车行业的话，当选总统唐纳德?特朗普(Donald Trump)如今或许也就无法威胁汽车制造商了。

In all, given the starting point, the performance of the economy has been remarkable. The unemployment rate has consistently fallen faster than expected. US business has also added 15.6m jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in 2010. Real wage growth has been faster in the present cycle than in any since the early 1970s. In the third quarter of 2016, the economy was 11.5 per cent bigger than at its pre-crisis peak and real gross domestic product per head was 4 per cent above the pre-crisis peak, while that of the eurozone was still below it. Household net worth has also reached 50 per cent above its 2008 level.

总而言之，考虑到这样的起点，美国经济在奥巴马任内的表现是相当不错的。失业率比预期更快地持续下滑。自2010年私营部门就业实现正增长以来，美国商业领域增加了1560万个工作岗位。当前周期的实际工资增长速度，超过自上世纪70年代以来任何一个周期。2016年第三季度，美国经济规模比危机前峰值扩大了11.5%，人均实际国内生产总值(GDP)比危机前峰值高4%，而欧元区人均实际GDP仍然低于危机前峰值。家庭净资产也比2008年的水平增长了50%。

Yet Mr Obama was interested in more than economic recovery. He tried to move the US closer to the universal health insurance taken for granted in other high-income countries. The Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) has added an estimated 20m adults and 3m children to the insurance rolls. Healthcare costs have also grown exceptionally slowly since the law was enacted, relative to past US performance.

不过，奥巴马关心的不只是经济复苏。他试图让美国更接近于实现全民医保，这种医疗保障制度在其他高收入国家被认为是理所应当的。《平价医疗法案》（Affordable Care Act，也称“奥巴马医改”）据估计让2000万成人和300万儿童上了医疗保险。自该法案颁布以来，相对于过去，医疗费用增长也非常缓慢。

These are all genuine achievements. Yet some problems could not be cured.

这些都是实实在在的成绩。不过也有些问题无法解决：

First, US economic outcomes have become exceptionally unequal, despite a modestly progressive shift in the impact of fiscal policy under Mr Obama. Doing something effective about this was beyond his powers, both because it is difficult and because his opponents had no interest in helping.

第一，美国经济成果的分配变得非常不平等，尽管奥巴马任内财政政策所产生的影响出现轻微进步的转变。在这方面采取切实有效的行动超出他的力量范围，既是因为难度很大，也因为他的对手们一点都不想出力帮忙。

Second, the participation in the labour force of prime-aged males (25 to 45) has been on a 60-year downward trend, while that of prime-aged females has flatlined for three decades. This is a poor performance by the standards of most high-income economies. It is impossible to argue credibly that this is the result of particularly generous US welfare benefits or particularly high minimum wages. The failure is deeper.

第二，青年男性（25岁至45岁）劳动参与率的下滑态势已延续60年，而青年女性的劳动参与率30年来保持平坦。以大多数高收入经济体的标准来看，这是很糟糕的。认为这是由美国特别慷慨的福利制度、或特别高的最低薪资标准造成的观点并不可信。失败缘于更深层次的原因。

Third, growth of labour productivity has slowed sharply, though it was still higher than in other members of the Group of Seven leading high-income countries between 2005 and 2015. The reasons for this slowdown are a puzzle. Possibilities include the post-crisis weakening of business investment and a broader post-crisis loss of animal spirits. It is also likely that the underlying rate of innovation is slowing. Some argue that this is the result of excessive regulation. The next administration is set to test that hypothesis to destruction.

第三，美国劳动生产率增长大幅放缓，尽管在2005年至2015年期间仍然高于七国集团(G7)其他成员国。放缓原因成谜。可能的因素包括后危机时期企业投资疲软和动物精神广泛缺失，也可能是由于基本的创新速度放缓。还有一些人认为这是过度监管的结果。下届政府将验证这种假设不成立。

Finally, the US has a key role to play in tackling the threat of unmitigated climate change. In the absence of any consensus on this question in the US, Mr Obama relied on executive actions, which will now presumably be reversed.

最后，美国在应对严峻气候变化所带来的威胁方面应扮演关键角色。由于美国国内在该问题上没有形成任何共识，奥巴马依靠的是行政命令，而这些今后想必将被推翻。

In all, the administration rescued the US economy and bequeathed a sound foundation for its successor to build on. But it made a big mistake: it did not go all out to punish those whose malfeasance and irresponsibility blew up the financial system and economy. This sense of injustice is one reason why the US has elected the wrecking crew that is about to take office. Mr Obama could not channel rage. Mr Trump, alas, can.

总之，奥巴马政府挽救了美国经济，给继任者留下了一个坚实的基础。但这届政府也犯下了一个重大错误：它没有尽最大努力让那些以违法乱矩和不负责任的行为重创了美国金融体系和经济的人受到处罚。这种不公平的感觉正是美国民众选出那位即将上任的破坏能手的原因之一。奥巴马无法疏导愤怒情绪。唉，特朗普可以。