iStone: 美债解决方案：愤怒和欺诈引导美国的亿万富翁政变

Sent to you by iStone via Google Reader:

美债解决方案：愤怒和欺诈引导美国的亿万富翁政变

原作者：
来源Debt deal: anger and deceit has led the US into a billionaires\' coup | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
译者Kevin Wong

There are two ways of cutting a deficit: raising taxes or reducing spending. Raising taxes means taking money from the rich. Cutting spending means taking money from the poor. Not in all cases of course: some taxation is regressive; some state spending takes money from ordinary citizens and gives it to banks, arms companies, oil barons and farmers. But in most cases the state transfers wealth from rich to poor, while tax cuts shift it from poor to rich.

削减赤字有两种途径：增加税收或者减少开支。征税就意味着拿走富人的钱。减少开支则是从穷人那里拿钱。当然并非所有情况都是这样：一些税收是累退的；一些政府开支剥夺穷人而将钱送给银行、军火公司、石油大亨和农场主。但大多数情况下，增税可以实现财富从富人向穷人转移，而减税则恰恰相反。

So the rich, in a nominal democracy, have a struggle on their hands. Somehow they must persuade the other 99% to vote against their own interests: to shrink the state, supporting spending cuts rather than tax rises. In the US they appear to be succeeding.

所以，富人在名义民主的掩盖下，为了自己的利益抗争。他们必须说服其他99%的人投票反对自己的利益：减少这种情况，支持减少开支而不是增税。在美国，这些看起来在接连不断的发生。

Partly as a result of the Bush tax cuts of 2001, 2003 and 2005 (shamefully extended by Barack Obama), taxation of the wealthy, in Obama's words, "is at its lowest level in half a century". The consequence of such regressive policies is a level of inequality unknown in other developed nations. As the Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz points out, in the past 10 years the income of the top 1% has risen by 18%, while that of blue-collar male workers has fallen by 12%.

在一定程度上，由于布什2001、2003和2005年的三次减税（被巴拉克•奥巴马无耻的延长），对富人的征税，按奥巴马的话说，"达到了半个世纪以来的最低点"。这种倒退政策的后果已经到了在其他发达国家闻所未闻的不平等水平。正如诺贝尔经济学奖获得者约瑟夫•斯蒂格利茨指出，在过去的十年间，收入最高的1%的人收入增长了18%，而蓝领男工的收入则下降了12%。

The deal being thrashed out in Congress as this article goes to press seeks only to cut state spending. As the former Republican senator Alan Simpson says: "The little guy is going to be cremated." That means more economic decline, which means a bigger deficit. It's insane. But how did it happen?

在本文付印时，这项在国会惨败的债务解决方案仅剩下寻求削减政府开支。正如前共和党参议员艾伦•辛普森所说："这个小子在玩火自焚。"这个方案意味着更多的经济衰退，而衰退会导致更大的财政赤字。简直是疯了。但这是如何发生的？

The immediate reason is that Republican members of Congress supported by the Tea Party movement won't budge. But this explains nothing. The Tea Party movement mostly consists of people who have been harmed by tax cuts for the rich and spending cuts for the poor and middle. Why would they mobilise against their own welfare? You can understand what is happening in Washington only if you remember what everyone seems to have forgotten: how this movement began.

直接原因是茶党运动支持的国会共和党人不让步。但这并不说明问题。因为对富人减税、削减用于穷人和中产阶级的开支而受损的人是茶党运动的主力。为什么他们要动员反对自己的福利呢？要理解华盛顿发生的一切，只有记起人们似乎已经忘记的重要事件：茶党运动怎样产生的。

On Sunday the Observer claimed that "the Tea Party rose out of anger over the scale of federal spending, and in particular in bailing out the banks". This is what its members claim. It's nonsense.

周日，观察家报称"茶党的产生源于对联邦政府的开支规模，尤其是救助银行的开支规模的愤怒"。这是其成员的话，简直是胡说八道。

The movement started with Rick Santelli's call on CNBC for a tea party of city traders to dump securities in Lake Michigan, in protest at Obama's plan to "subsidise the losers". In other words, it was a demand for a financiers' mobilisation against the bailout of their victims: people losing their homes. On the same day, a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP) set up a Tea Party Facebook page and started organising Tea Party events. The movement, whose programme is still lavishly supported by AFP, took off from there.

这场运动的产生，源于里克•桑特利在消费者信息与商业频道（CNBC）上号召城市商人组成的茶党将有价证券扔进密歇根湖，来抗议奥巴马补贴次贷危机受害者。换句话说，这是动员金融家们反对救援他们引发的危机的受害者：无家可归的人。同一天，一个叫做"繁荣美国人"（AFP）的组织在脸谱上建立了一个茶党的页面，并开始组织茶党运动事件。这场运动从那时起步，它的许多活动仍得到AFP的大力支持。

So who or what is Americans for Prosperity? It was founded and is funded by Charles and David Koch. They run what they call "the biggest company you've never heard of", and between them they are worth $43bn. Koch Industries is a massive oil, gas, minerals, timber and chemicals company. In the past 15 years the brothers have poured at least $85m into lobby groups arguing for lower taxes for the rich and weaker regulations for industry. The groups and politicians the Kochs fund also lobby to destroy collective bargaining, to stop laws reducing carbon emissions, to stymie healthcare reform and to hobble attempts to control the banks. During the 2010 election cycle, AFP spent $45m supporting its favoured candidates.

那么AFP到底是什么组织呢？它由查尔斯•科氏和大卫•科氏创建并资助。他们掌握着一家被称为"一家你从未听过的最大公司"，他俩身价430亿美元。科氏工业是一家大公司，拥有大量的石油、天然气、矿藏、木材和化学品生意。在过去的15年里，两兄弟已经在游说团上花费了至少8500万美元，用于游说政府减少富人税和降低对工业的监管。在2010年大选期间，AFP花费了4500万美元支持其青睐的候选人。

But the Kochs' greatest political triumph is the creation of the Tea Party movement. Taki Oldham's film (Astro)Turf Wars shows Tea Party organisers reporting back to David Koch at their 2009 Defending the Dream summit, explaining the events and protests they've started with AFP help. "Five years ago," he tells them, "my brother Charles and I provided the funds to start Americans for Prosperity. It's beyond my wildest dreams how AFP has grown into this enormous organisation."

但是，科氏兄弟最大的政治成功就是创立了茶党运动。塔基•奥尔德姆的电影《地盘之争》展示了在"2009捍卫梦想"峰会上茶党组织者向大卫•科氏汇报，解释在AFP的资助下他们发起的事件和抗议。"5年以前，"他告诉他们："我的哥哥查尔斯和我出资成立了AFP 。我从未想到AFP能够发展成如此巨大的组织。"

AFP mobilised the anger of people who found their conditions of life declining, and channelled it into a campaign to make them worse. Tea Party campaigners take to the streets to demand less tax for billionaires and worse health, education and social insurance for themselves.

AFP煽动着由于发现自己生活水平正在下降而产生愤怒，并引导这种愤怒形成一种使人们生活状况更加糟糕的运动。茶党活动者走上街头要求给亿万富翁减税，并为自己要求更差的健康、教育和社会保险。

Are they stupid? No. They have been misled by another instrument of corporate power: the media. The movement has been relentlessly promoted by Fox News, which belongs to a more familiar billionaire. Like the Kochs, Rupert Murdoch aims to misrepresent the democratic choices we face, in order to persuade us to vote against our own interests and in favour of his.

他们愚蠢吗?不。他们被公司实力的另外一种工具——媒体，误导了。这场运动由福克斯新闻残忍地推动，而福克斯的老板是一个大家更熟悉的亿万富翁。就像科氏一样，默多克旨在歪曲我们所面对的民主选择，以说服我们投票反对自己的利益而支持他的利益。

What's taking place in Congress right now is a kind of political coup. A handful of billionaires have shoved a spanner into the legislative process. Through the candidates they have bought and the movement that supports them, they are now breaking and reshaping the system to serve their interests. We knew this once, but now we've forgotten. What hope do we have of resisting a force we won't even see?

一种政变正在国会中发生。一小撮亿万富翁已经开始插手立法程序。虽然他们买通的候选人和茶党运动支持他们，但是他们仍不满足，现在正在破坏原有的系统，重塑新系统来维护他们的利益。以前我们知道这些，但是现在我们忘了。我们还有什么希望来抵抗一种我们从未见过的力量呢？

相关文章：