Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览迈克尔·哈德森(Michael Hudson)档案
诱人的基础设施收入

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

“J 代表垃圾经济学”:Michael Hudson 在 TRNN 上 (2/5),二月28,2017。

经济学家迈克尔·哈德森表示,特朗普的基础设施计划将把金融家的所有利益私有化,并确保广大民众在支付成本的同时从中获得零收益

沙米尼·佩里斯:欢迎回到真实新闻网。我正在与迈克尔·哈德森交谈,他是以下书的作者: J 代表垃圾经济学,欺骗时代的现实指南。不要错过它。我们将讨论这本书,以及一些在经济学和理解经济学方面存在的误导性概念。

能够用比我们多一点的知识来谈论经济概念,需要阅读这本书。所以,谢谢你加入我们,迈克尔。

迈克尔·赫德森:很高兴回到巴尔的摩。

沙米尼·佩里斯:迈克尔,你在这本书中真正试图解决的问题之一是经济学的委婉概念。特朗普的经济计划将基础设施投资作为其关键经济计划之一。他表示,这将创造更好的商业环境和良好的就业机会。你对那个怎么想的?

迈克尔·赫德森:嗯,每个人都赞成基础设施。自文明诞生以来——从金字塔、寺庙和城墙开始——世界上每个国家的大部分资本投资,甚至在今天,都集中在基础设施上。这就是为什么银行、企业和富有的投资者想要将其私有化,因为私有化就像征服一个新国家并能够获取其收入。

为了您自己的利益,您可以将最大的资本投资掌握在自己手中——以前属于公共领域。公路、铁路、航空公司、供水和下水道系统以及人们需要的一切,包括现在的学校都可以私有化,而不是将它们提供给经济,为了使经济以更低的成本运行,你可以让人们支付两笔钱或者是他们所做的三倍。以盈利为目的运营这一基础设施(使用高息信贷)将大大增加经济成本,而不会增加工资或支付这些私有化服务的能力。这将压缩生活水平,同时吸纳越来越多的资金进入经济金字塔的顶端。

所以我在书中确实谈论了基础设施,但我也谈论了讨论它的重要经济学家。我在字典部分引用的一个人是西蒙·彭定康(Simon Patten)。他是美国第一所商学院——宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院的第一位经济学教授。

彭定康说,生产要素有四个。古典经济学谈论收入的三个因素——土地、劳动力和资本。但还有第四个生产要素,那就是公共基础设施。然而,彭定康说,公共基础设施、道路和学校的功能并不是像私人投资者那样以盈利为目的,这是一个亲资本主义的说法,这是商学院。公共目标是降低生活和经商成本,从而使经济更具竞争力。

如果一个国家效仿美国,资助庞大的公立学校系统、农业教育公共推广系统,并提供低成本道路、低成本交通、供水和下水道、公园和通讯——如果你提供所有这些自由地或至少以补贴价格——那么你将能够低价销售那些不将生产资料社会化的经济体。

彭定康说,这就是为什么拥有活跃公共基础设施的社会化经济体可以低于其他经济体。想象一下,如果你正在与一个像玛格丽特·撒切尔在英国所做的那样的经济体竞争。当她将电力和自来水公司私有化时,每个人的电费和水费都上涨了。如果国家将其道路和航空公司私有化,私人所有者将想要借入投资所需的所有资金,并且他们将为此支付利息。

这就是银行和经纪承销商热衷于私有化的原因。私有化者的通常回报率(超过美国的利息)为 12%。但这在50%甚至100%的资本收益面前就相形见绌了。这才是真正的诈骗,因为公共资产在出售给内部人士和银行承销商时价格被低估。

英国电话公司在短短一两天内就获得了约 25% 的回报!这就是米特·罗姆尼和其他对冲基金运营商进行私有化的方式。他们为其“服务”增加了各种管理成本(主要是掠夺、裁员和削减养老金,同时改善工作条件以消耗劳动力——美其名曰“提高生产力”)以及利息和利润。

他们将从所发行的股票中获得资本收益。所有这些向私有化者支付的费用,即所谓的公私合作伙伴关系(PPP),将大大增加大众使用这一基础设施的成本。

看看印第安纳州修建收费公路时发生了什么。该州表示需要一条高速公路。千真万确。每个州都需要高速公路。它向私有化者支付费用,以收回他们的投资(然后是一些!)。不用说,他们把通行费定得很高,以便向私人投资者支付利润——并向银行支付贷款,并向股东支付费用。所有这些都花费了太多钱,以至于印第安纳州的司机不使用收费公路。他们更喜欢较慢的旧路线。

为了阻止这种自由市场,私有化者及其银行坚持在公私合作伙伴关系中加入一项条款,向投资者保证,如果印第安纳州允许私人投资者修建一条收费公路,那么它就不能修建任何其他可能与之竞争的公路。目的是迫使人们使用收费公路。

这不是一个自由选择的经济。其目的是引导每个人进入私人基础设施垄断。

立即订购

相比之下,美国一百年来公共投资的目的就是为了防止这种垄断。这就是我们制定反垄断法规的原因。这就是美国在 100 世纪末和 19 世纪初变得更具竞争力的原因。它能够低于重视私营部门的欧洲和其他国家。

公私伙伴关系根本不是真正的伙伴关系。它将损失“社会化”,同时将利润私有化。社会——消费者和企业——不是道路、学校、有线电视系统和通信系统的受益者,而是受害者。你不是以低成本甚至免费向社会提供技术收益,这样人们就不必赚取足够高的工资来支付这些更高的私有化成本,而是提高成本。其结果是压缩家庭预算。

例如,通过医疗保健私有化,美国的人们必须支付比其他任何地方都高得多的医疗保险。你必须向保险公司付款,而且你不会对制药公司执行垄断规则。你甚至不与他们讨价还价或在最便宜的市场购买。你在最昂贵的市场购买,因为他们是你最大的竞选贡献者,这就是你所承诺要做的。

I fear that the way Trump will choose to finance infrastructure is the upside-down way to do it, the wrong way. Its aim is simply to make his class rich. If you’re building transportation, you’re going to vastly increase the rental yield and hence the price of real estate all along the new routes. If you build new schools, you make the neighborhood more desirable for people to go. Rents and housing prices are bid up – forcing people to take out even larger bank loans to move into such areas.

The guiding idea of classical economics was to recapture this added value created by infrastructure investment. A city or state could self-finance such expenditures by recapturing them as a windfall-gains tax on the rising rent-of-location. (I define these terms in my book.) That wouldn’t be the case with Trump. He’s not going to recapture anything. He wants to privatize the benefits of infrastructure. His aim is make sure that the population at large gets zero benefit from it. All the benefit is to go to the financiers and corporate owners.

SHARMINI PERIES: Why are you so apprehensive? I mean, when Trump talks about the cost of pharmaceuticals, he says the problem is that we don’t negotiate the price with the pharmaceutical companies, and he’s a negotiator. He’s a businessman. So, why shouldn’t we believe him?

MICHAEL HUDSON: We should hold his feet to the fire. We should say, “Hey, this is what you said. Nice to hear, but is it only rhetoric? When are you really going to do this?”

He’s going to try to say, “Oh, the Republican Congress won’t let me.” So then the reply should be: “When are you going to run against these candidates, and support candidates who will support what you’re trying to do?” So, he’ll reply, “That’s not my department.”

So, nice rhetoric, nice promises, but we’ve already had many years of broken promises by politicians.

SHARMINI PERIES: And also as a businessman, having run the Trump Empire, his attitude, and approach to business seems almost an antithesis to what he’s promised.

MICHAEL HUDSON: He’s made his business in real estate. The way most real estate operators make money is to have public investment increase the value of their property. In one of your shows we talked about the Second Avenue subway in New York. That’s increased the rents and property values all along the Second Avenue subway line. But they did it by raising the price on the subway fares, not taxing the windfall gains of the landlords who backed the projects. That’s how Trump made much of his money.

They did it by raising the taxes in New York City. The same thing is happening in Vancouver, Canada, which we also have talked about. They’re adding on a value-added tax to build transportation that’s going to vastly increase what landlords own.

So, of course he thinks this is a wonderful way to create wealth. Well, it does create wealth for him. But the wealth that he makes should have accrued to the population as a whole. It didn’t. That’s why he got wealthy, and the rest of New Yorkers didn’t.

SHARMINI PERIES: All right, Michael, let’s continue this discussion about J is for Junk Economics in our next segment. Thank you for joining us for now.

MICHAEL HUDSON: That would be fine.

SHARMINI PERIES:感谢您加入我们的真实新闻网络。

(从重新发布 迈克尔-哈德森.com 经作者或代表的许可)
 
• 类别: 经济学 •标签: 唐纳德·特朗普, 私有化, 华尔街 
隐藏24条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. All this cost so much money that drivers in Indiana didn’t use the toll road. They preferred the slower old routes.

    That’s my impression of what’s happening with the beautiful toll roads in Greece. The things are superb but virtually devoid of traffic. Not only were they likely financed, designed and built largely by foreigners, but I believe the tolls go out of country as well. I could be wrong tho.

    What a deal for the of Greece!

  2. When the truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie. Yevtushenko

    To write about privitization of infrastructure without writing about the out-of-control costs of government due to the public employee lobbies is to omit the truth.

    And, yes, I agree with Derb, they are 大堂, not unions.

    • 回复: @Colleen Pater
  3. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    Here’s a cheerful thought about the new serfdom. In other times the elites would have more to gain by inoculating the masses with a whiff of socialism à la FDR. Nowadays, thanks largely to the internet, repression has become a lot easier and cheaper. The opposition can be mapped out and neutered even before it opens its collective mouth.

  4. To be a socialist requires that one be deluded about human nature. Of course governmemts which privatise and contract out also suffer from some of the inadequacies of bureaucrats even when the politicians and bureaucrats are honest. It is an imperfect world.

    One neglected benefit of privatised infrastructure is the reasonably secure income stream going to a country’s savers who largely finance rather than rely on social security.

    • 回复: @bluedog
  5. RobRich 说: • 您的网站

    真是个白痴。

    “The roads, railroads, airline companies, water and sewer systems and everything that people need, including now the schools can be privatized and instead of providing them to the economy, to make the economy operate at a lower cost, you can make people pay two or three times as much as they were doing. ”

    All these things were often originally (before government seizures) and are now increasingly regularly privately provided. The result of ending coerced government monopolies with free choice via re-privatization is the services are increasingly low-cost or free.

    The Libertarian Reform is all around us but folks like Hudson still think they’re in Stalin’s 1930’s.

  6. I fear that the way Trump will choose to finance infrastructure is the upside-down way to do it, the wrong way. Its aim is simply to make his class rich.

    h.

    This may be absolutely correct but absolutely trivial in a world where China is building the future and we are not even playing catch up. The incestuous elite mindset that sees only the US as meaningful is in full bloom currently. The focus we have on the world vs the US, our place in it and the role we play, is so far removed from reality I wonder if our leaders ever look clearly abroad at what’s happening every day in Asia, Europe and Africa.
    While we reread from a 50’s playbook China puts down 30,000 K’s of new rail this year to link three Continents. We, on the other hand, debate fixing some bridges and roads. When the sun goes down on empire it gets real dark

    http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

  7. @another fred

    Certainly true and years ago Id have raised you one galts gulch. Its not that Im no longer a Austrian its I think we have worked our way into a situation where blind adherence to what we thought will make things worse.
    Infrastructure is a good place to look at where Im coming from (and I think Bannon is too). If we allow formerly American corporations to become international corporations that extract the technology, capital, etc then pass on the domestic labor but come back for the consumer market and then again pass on the taxation, or import the labor but have the labor subsidized by welfare paid for either by the few lucky americans who still have jobs or to offer to loan the government money at interest to pay for the welfare. The inflation that we now lie about that has made everything from housing, medicine, education, fuel,cars,pretty much everything but imported electronics 2-10 times more expensive than a decade or three ago; is directly tied to the cost of this a la carte capitalism. Capitalism where third world misery (caused by oligarchy and communism but sustained by emigration ) Is triangulated against first world labor markets. Its not sustainable eventually americans are going to be able to compete with third world wages, but not the way they told us. that any day africans would be just like canadians and all would be well, no america is halfway to brazilification.
    Now heres the thing My problem with libertarianism is they cuck on on property rights when it comes to the nation itself. Its as if every border contract one property right is sacred to them except the most important one the one that is the impetus of all civilization and law; the national boundary the one that keeps the other tribe from raping and pillaging, the one the violent men banded together to enforce giving the traders a safe space to operate in.And giving a safe space for all the benefits of civilization that also support trade.
    The nation, the school system that fosters tech development, the court and law making system and police that enforce contracts, the idaho farm boy on an aircraft carrier protecting the trade routes, The transportation and communication infrastructure that facilitates everything from shipping to financial trading,The first world labor market, access to the wealthiest consumer market in the world, etc etc is worth a lot. Its not moochers demanding free stuff. Oh sure their are moochers demanding free stuff for minorities, but its not them that own this infrastructure it the generation of americans that pioneered built maintained and defend it. If you doubt its value Imagine somehow say to support the subsidies globalists insist are basic human rights, our government sold it all off and Halliburton owned it. Do you think Halliburton would give it away to all these corporations that enjoy it.Do you think Halliburton would let amazon just use the highways for free, do you think it would allow Apple to simply sell iphones here while eschewing the labor and Halliburton’s potential income tax? Do you think Halliburton would allow Tyson and walmart to import third world peasants paying them $11 hr while Halliburton fed clothed medecined educated policed their entire peasant family and the family of whites they displaced? You think Halliburton would protect the property enforce the contracts and manage the 350 million inhabitants of their consumer market for free while they offshored their profits and bribed halliburton’s middle managers for deals? No of course not.
    No doubt the author is likely a commie and we dont want to give commies an inch.But in some ways blind loyalty to the outer party is how we got into this headlock.The capitalists have made a devils deal with the globalist marxists. Maybe they each plan to doublecross the other in the future or maybe they have both given up on the 60s version of capitalism and communism and settled for a 1000 year reich of corporatism.Lets not forget they are supported by cuck christianity and Israel, and of course because immigration and HBD its inescapable this becomes a racial issue, appalling the neocons and reactionaries. But of course the commies realized a long time ago communism didnt sell well in wealthy white countries so they morphed into racial redistributionists and hit on a way to partner with christians and capitalists,and of course the power hungry who wish to remake the world.
    This is the hope I think that some have with trump that he will break the dynamic, hes trying to beat the commies to the pivot back to white socialism while there’s an opening and hold the banksters over the hole they dug. Its doesnt look to be working, Trumps an idiot who only intuits vaguely, Bannon may not be fully woke or able to control trump and of course the deep state seems pretty much committed to killing trump if they have to. That might set off a civil war.But they probably wont have to hes pretty much been pwnd by the confederacy of dunces having no consistent outlook hes easily swayed piecemeal out of his gut feelings by his jew and neocon advisors

    • 回复: @another fred
  8. nsa 说:

    The first chunk of necessary infrastructure: a 2000 mile 40′ tall (and 20′ deep) reinforced concrete wall along the southern border…..topped and bottomed off with concertina razor wire. The second chuck of necessary infrastructure: 200 guard towers spaced every 10 miles.

  9. bluedog 说:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I hope its better than the re-building of Iraq by private companies and corporations which saw millions/billions go down into the black hole of tricky accounting,and as far as the countries savers I’m sure your not talking about the working class for they have little to invest anywhere..

    • 回复: @Wizard of Oz
  10. This seems like a good example of government provided infrastructure, at least in the U.S.

    Florida’s Government Built a Train — And It Didn’t Go Well

    Thanks to the grand vision of politicians, and the financial incentives created by the Federal government, Floridians have now spent hundreds of millions on a train that loses money charging customers to ride it. In the future, as government incentives expire, SunRail will face the issue of either raising ticket prices, likely further decreasing its already underwhelming demand, which will likely decrease the ad revenue the project was projected to be dependent on. The other response, perhaps more likely, is to simply pass the costs on to the millions of Floridians who have rejected the project by refusing to ride it.

    https://mises.org/blog/floridas-government-built-train-%E2%80%94-and-it-didn%E2%80%99t-go-well

  11. 例如,通过医疗保健私有化,美国的人们必须支付比其他任何地方都高得多的医疗保险。你必须向保险公司付款,而且你不会对制药公司执行垄断规则。你甚至不与他们讨价还价或在最便宜的市场购买。你在最昂贵的市场购买,因为他们是你最大的竞选贡献者,这就是你所承诺要做的。

    damn, this is so goddamn true it is crazy. this is why aca cause all the premiums to go up.

  12. @Colleen Pater

    I think we have worked our way into a situation where blind adherence to what we thought will make things worse.

    I don’t know quite what I said that your long “reply” is in reference to, but it does not refer to much of what I believe (or disbelieve). I do believe that about the only thing we can do to “make things worse” is to engage in an all-out nuclear exchange with another of the world nuclear powers. Other than that, our present circumstance is not sustainable and we are headed for some very hard times involving great loss of life and human pain. But not to worry, some will survive and life will go on.

    My comment to Mr. Hudson is prompted by the fact that I find half truths distasteful, especially so if they are told with political intent.

    …third world misery (caused by oligarchy and communism…

    “Third world misery” has been the lot of most humans since the dawn of agriculture, but the fact is that most hunter-gatherers will opt for it if given the chance. Life is hard because life is hard.

    You seem to think that there is some “solution” for society somewhere. I do not, other than continued evolution.

    • 同意: bluedog
  13. Anonymous [AKA "homeless soul"] 说:

    Yeah let’s sink tens of billions of hard earned U.S. taxpayer dollars into a worthless border wall, and concern ourselves with a $20,000,000,000,000.00 dollar national debt some other time.

    For those too naive to realize it, the border wall’s a joke and the joke’s on Americans. You want a cost-effective and efficient way to keep non-citizens from entering the United States illegally, then place legal liability firmly on the shoulders of self-serving contractors and small businesses who hire them.

    Try entering Mexico illegally, and asking its federal government to pay for your kid’s diapers and flip a $20,000 bill per year per kid for public education. “Buena suerte con eso, gringo!”

    In the mean time, it appears as if the House of Rothschild’s trust-fund nation is positioning itself, hoping to reap a cash windfall of U.S. taxpayer dollars, from this artificially engineered sociopolitical albatross of a border wall.

    “Israel’s Magal sees Mexican wall as no barrier to business” (https://goo.gl/haOeZZ)

  14. @bluedog

    Working class people do well in two main ways. Until recently there were plenty of bright and potentially energetic people who didn’t have the opportunity to rise through education and good health but most now leave the workung class. The other way is to belong to a nation which has conferred the luck on them of sharing in bountiful resources they have played no part in discovering or developing or in the product of superior brain power applied with imagination and discipline. Australia exemplifies (mostly) the first case, Germany the second. The US is spreading its generosity (not willed as such) to Latin America’s working classes …

    • 回复: @bluedog
  15. bluedog 说:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Sure we are that’s why we have a 100,000,000 unemployed and rising, with only God knows how many living in poverty, where even grads from institutions of higher learning can’t find a job, while running up a tab in the thousands for their education, why wages were drove down and have remained stagnant due to outsourcing and flood of people from South of the border, I suggest you read David Stockman’s book ‘The Great Deformation” The Corruption Of Capitalism in America and then you might just have an idea of where we are headed and its going to be a nasty ride…

    • 回复: @Wizard of Oz
  16. map 说:

    There is a kernel of truth here. It is true that you definitely do not want to privatize a monopoly, or, at least, privatize it in a way that regulates it like a public utility. Privatized infrastructure has monopolistic characteristics that need regulation.

    It is, however, wrong to imagine the supposed public benefits of government subsidy. This is the same multiplier fantasy that Keynesians use to prove how much more efficient government is. in effect, there is no government efficiency. When a road is built, a government contracts with a private company to have it built and maintains it using private resources. That government will pay at or above market rates for all of the inputs, depending on the level of corruption and cronyism. And where does the money come from to pay for these toll roads? Why, either budget surpluses, tax increases, or bond issues…ultimately from the tax payers. And taxpayers always pay through the nose, whether directly in toll rates or indirectly in fees and taxes. The only difference is how hidden it is.

    Furthermore, I happened to drive through Illinois and Indiana. Indiana has beautiful roads, built in a state with a budget surplus and a low cost of living. The ipass tolls were comparable to Illinois…with terrible roads. So, I don’t see Hudson’s take on Indiana.

  17. @bluedog

    Yes it hasn’t been great for at least half of US natives for a long time despite great new technology for those with reason or the time to use it. Mostly left side of the IQ Bell Curve but not all. Can democracy survive, or as some might say, begin? Oh, did I forget? Democracy has been exported

    • 回复: @bluedog
  18. Wally 说:

    Michael Hudson, a Marxist, trying to tell everyone about economics.

    权利。

    • 回复: @Anon
  19. bluedog 说:
    @Wizard of Oz

    No democracy is one item we never export well unless it comes from the muzzle of a gun, but we do export our brand of loot and steal or regime change to embrace our form of parasitic type capitalism..

  20. bjondo [又名“红白蓝橙”] 说:

    i use toll roads/areas for dumping garbage and paint ball practice.

  21. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Wally

    Really? A Marxist? On what basis of what’s posted here do you draw that conclusion?

  22. Agent76 说:

    “Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government.” Milton Friedman

    30年2011月XNUMX日公司法西斯主义:美国中产阶级的毁灭

    一种新的法西斯主义接管了美国:公司与政府合并,从而由公司权力主导。 随着越来越多的跨国公司的出现(由于美联储无休止的FIAT资金的推动而使合并),法团已经可以真正收购美国国会。

    • 同意: bluedog
  23. 这篇文章的许多说法都是正确的。但在大城市,特别是大都市地区,与政府相比,私营部门的管理效果更好。达到一定规模的政府会变得不负责任、腐败、无能、充满懒惰的工会工人、遭受使命蔓延之苦,而且通常根本无法正常运作。因此,大都市地区特别适合私有化,在我看来,这是两害相权取其轻。私营部门可以以更便宜、更有效的方式运营它。上述内容是“理论上”的。理论上大政府是可以运作的。在实践中,很难给出任何例子。你继续用希腊作为政府做得正确的例子,这有点滑稽。希腊是一个废墟,政府在那里不起作用。希腊政府是一个黑洞,无论投入多少钱,资金都会消失,而政府效率却不会提高。我无法理解这对任何人来说如何算是进步。

    在政府可以被关在笼子里的小城市,私有化可能没有意义。

    • 回复: @bluedog
  24. bluedog 说:
    @Linda Green

    And you don’t think the private sector is corrupt the companies and corporations that are just as corrupt as any, when the money is on the table with their over runs contributions to the political hacks to get the contract,spare me please…

当前评论者
说:

发表评论 - 不接受人身攻击和无端侮辱,作者将禁止此类评论者。


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有Michael Hudson的评论