財政懸崖大戰基本上是一場階級鬥爭
保羅·克魯格曼 2013年01月05日
中間派關於財政預算“大妥協”(Grand Bargain)的幻想從來不曾得到變成現實的機會。即便有了據說已經達成的某種協議，關鍵參與人員還是會很快背棄協議，很可能就在共和黨人下一次入主白宮的時候。
原因在於，現實情況是我們的兩個主要政黨已經就美國社會的未來形態展開了激烈鬥爭。民主黨人想要傳承“新政”(New Deal)和“偉大社會”綱領(Great Society)，也就是社會安全福利(Social Security)、聯邦醫療保險(Medicare)和聯邦醫療補助(Medicaid)，並添加其他發達國家都在實行的一項政策：大致上保證全民享有 基本醫療保健。共和黨人則想要逆轉前述的所有政策，為大幅削減富人稅賦讓路。是的，這基本上是一場階級鬥爭。
財政懸崖之爭只是這場鬥爭當中的一場戰役。可以說，此役以民主黨人的戰術性勝利告終。問題在於，這是不是一場代價巨大的慘勝，為將來的更大失敗埋下了伏筆。
為什麼說這是一場戰術性勝利呢？主要是因為它沒有導致福利削減。
這絕不是預料之中的事情。2011年，奧巴馬政府據稱曾願意提高聯邦醫療保險的受益年齡下限，接受這個糟糕又殘酷的政策主張。這一次，政府也願意通 過改變生活成本調整準則來削減社會安全福利，這個主張沒有那麼糟糕，但卻仍然會帶來很多困難，很可能還會導致政治災難。然而，這種情況最終沒有出現。那些 進步人士一直擔心奧巴馬總統在基本原則上進行妥協的願望過於強烈，現在終於鬆了一口氣。
從進步人士的角度來看，這次的協議還有一些實實在在的積極方面。擴大失業救助福利的政策得到了一年的延展，此項政策對於很多家庭來說都是巨大福利， 還能大幅度改善經濟前景（這筆錢將會被支出，因此能夠在一定程度上保護就業）。針對低收入家庭的其他福利政策也得到了五年的延展，但遺憾的是，工資稅減免 政策期滿未續，將會給工薪家庭和創造就業機會的努力帶來損害。
進步人士對這項法案的最大抱怨是，奧巴馬對富有階層課徵的稅收少於預期——接下來十年中的新增稅收大約是6000億美元，而不是8000億美元。然 而，若以正確眼光看待，這不算是多大的事情。這樣說吧：對未來十年國內生產總值的合理估計是200萬億美元左右。因此，即便徵稅數額符合預期，它仍然只會 佔據GDP的0.4%；事實表明，這個比例會降到0.3%。不管怎樣，這都不會給仍將持續進行的收支大戰造成太大不同。
對了，成績不只是共和黨於幾十年來第一次贊成了增加稅收，即將生效的稅制改革（包括和奧巴馬醫改[Obamacare]相關的新增稅收，以及這項新 法案）還會帶來收入差距顯著減小的整體效果，收入水平位於前1%的人群所受打擊會比中等收入家庭大得多，前0.1%的人群更是如此。
既然如此，很多進步人士——包括我自己在內——為什麼感到非常擔憂呢？因為我們擔心即將到來的對抗。
根據政治常規，共和黨目前沒有什麼議價能力。由於民主黨控制了白宮和參議院，共和黨不能通過法案；由於醫療改革（近年來最緊要的進步政策）已經成為法律，共和黨似乎不會有很多討價還加的籌碼。
但共和黨依然持有破壞的力量，特別是通過拒絕提高債務上限來進行破壞——此舉可能會引發金融危機。而且，共和黨已經清楚表明，他們計劃使用自身的破壞力量來榨取重大的政策讓步。
目前，總統稱自己不會在此基礎上進行協商，這麼做是對的。威脅說不如意就要傷害數千萬無辜的受害者——歸根到底，這就是共和黨的策略——這不該被看做合法的政治策略。
危急時刻到來之際，奧巴馬會不會堅持自己的反訛詐立場呢？在2011年的債務上限對抗中，他曾經膽怯退縮。在財政懸崖協商的最後幾天中，他也明顯地表現出了不願意讓期限截止的態度。由於錯過債務上限截止日期的後果可能會更加糟糕，這意味着政府的決心可能會在對抗之下動搖。
因此，如我所說，財政懸崖之爭只是在戰術意義上以白宮略勝告終。然而，這樣的勝利一不小心就會在短短數周之內轉化為失敗。
原因在於，現實情況是我們的兩個主要政黨已經就美國社會的未來形態展開了激烈鬥爭。民主黨人想要傳承“新政”(New Deal)和“偉大社會”綱領(Great Society)，也就是社會安全福利(Social Security)、聯邦醫療保險(Medicare)和聯邦醫療補助(Medicaid)，並添加其他發達國家都在實行的一項政策：大致上保證全民享有 基本醫療保健。共和黨人則想要逆轉前述的所有政策，為大幅削減富人稅賦讓路。是的，這基本上是一場階級鬥爭。
為什麼說這是一場戰術性勝利呢？主要是因為它沒有導致福利削減。
這絕不是預料之中的事情。2011年，奧巴馬政府據稱曾願意提高聯邦醫療保險的受益年齡下限，接受這個糟糕又殘酷的政策主張。這一次，政府也願意通 過改變生活成本調整準則來削減社會安全福利，這個主張沒有那麼糟糕，但卻仍然會帶來很多困難，很可能還會導致政治災難。然而，這種情況最終沒有出現。那些 進步人士一直擔心奧巴馬總統在基本原則上進行妥協的願望過於強烈，現在終於鬆了一口氣。
從進步人士的角度來看，這次的協議還有一些實實在在的積極方面。擴大失業救助福利的政策得到了一年的延展，此項政策對於很多家庭來說都是巨大福利， 還能大幅度改善經濟前景（這筆錢將會被支出，因此能夠在一定程度上保護就業）。針對低收入家庭的其他福利政策也得到了五年的延展，但遺憾的是，工資稅減免 政策期滿未續，將會給工薪家庭和創造就業機會的努力帶來損害。
進步人士對這項法案的最大抱怨是，奧巴馬對富有階層課徵的稅收少於預期——接下來十年中的新增稅收大約是6000億美元，而不是8000億美元。然 而，若以正確眼光看待，這不算是多大的事情。這樣說吧：對未來十年國內生產總值的合理估計是200萬億美元左右。因此，即便徵稅數額符合預期，它仍然只會 佔據GDP的0.4%；事實表明，這個比例會降到0.3%。不管怎樣，這都不會給仍將持續進行的收支大戰造成太大不同。
對了，成績不只是共和黨於幾十年來第一次贊成了增加稅收，即將生效的稅制改革（包括和奧巴馬醫改[Obamacare]相關的新增稅收，以及這項新 法案）還會帶來收入差距顯著減小的整體效果，收入水平位於前1%的人群所受打擊會比中等收入家庭大得多，前0.1%的人群更是如此。
既然如此，很多進步人士——包括我自己在內——為什麼感到非常擔憂呢？因為我們擔心即將到來的對抗。
根據政治常規，共和黨目前沒有什麼議價能力。由於民主黨控制了白宮和參議院，共和黨不能通過法案；由於醫療改革（近年來最緊要的進步政策）已經成為法律，共和黨似乎不會有很多討價還加的籌碼。
但共和黨依然持有破壞的力量，特別是通過拒絕提高債務上限來進行破壞——此舉可能會引發金融危機。而且，共和黨已經清楚表明，他們計劃使用自身的破壞力量來榨取重大的政策讓步。
目前，總統稱自己不會在此基礎上進行協商，這麼做是對的。威脅說不如意就要傷害數千萬無辜的受害者——歸根到底，這就是共和黨的策略——這不該被看做合法的政治策略。
危急時刻到來之際，奧巴馬會不會堅持自己的反訛詐立場呢？在2011年的債務上限對抗中，他曾經膽怯退縮。在財政懸崖協商的最後幾天中，他也明顯地表現出了不願意讓期限截止的態度。由於錯過債務上限截止日期的後果可能會更加糟糕，這意味着政府的決心可能會在對抗之下動搖。
因此，如我所說，財政懸崖之爭只是在戰術意義上以白宮略勝告終。然而，這樣的勝利一不小心就會在短短數周之內轉化為失敗。
翻譯：許欣、陶夢縈
Battles of the Budget
January 05, 2013
The centrist fantasy of a Grand Bargain
on the budget never had a chance. Even if some kind of bargain had
supposedly been reached, key players would soon have reneged on the deal
— probably the next time a Republican occupied the White House.
For the reality is that our two major political parties are engaged in a fierce struggle over the future shape of American society. Democrats want to preserve the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and add to them what every other advanced country has: a more or less universal guarantee of essential health care. Republicans want to roll all of that back, making room for drastically lower taxes on the wealthy. Yes, it’s essentially a class war.
The fight over the fiscal cliff was just one battle in that war. It
ended, arguably, in a tactical victory for Democrats. The question is
whether it was a Pyrrhic victory that set the stage for a larger defeat.
Why do I say that it was a tactical victory? Mainly because of what didn’t happen: There were no benefit cuts.
This was by no means a foregone conclusion. In 2011, the Obama administration was reportedly willing to raise the age of Medicare eligibility, a terrible and cruel policy idea. This time around, it was willing to cut Social Security benefits by changing the formula for cost-of-living adjustments, a less terrible idea that would nonetheless have imposed a lot of hardship — and probably have been politically disastrous as well. In the end, however, it didn’t happen. And progressives, always worried that President Obama seems much too willing to compromise about fundamentals, breathed a sigh of relief.
There were also some actual positives from a progressive point of view. Expanded unemployment benefits were given another year to run, a huge benefit to many families and a significant boost to our economic prospects (because this is money that will be spent, and hence help preserve jobs). Other benefits to lower-income families were given another five years — although, unfortunately, the payroll tax break was allowed to expire, which will hurt both working families and job creation.
The biggest progressive gripe about the legislation is that Mr. Obama extracted less revenue from the affluent than expected — about $600 billion versus $800 billion over the next decade. In perspective, however, this isn’t that big a deal. Put it this way: A reasonable estimate is that gross domestic product over the next 10 years will be around $200 trillion. So if the revenue take had matched expectations, it would still have amounted to only 0.4 percent of G.D.P.; as it turned out, this was reduced to 0.3 percent. Either way, it wouldn’t make much difference in the fights over revenue versus spending still to come.
Oh, and not only did Republicans vote for a tax increase for the first time in decades, the overall result of the tax changes now taking effect — which include new taxes associated with Obamacare as well as the new legislation — will be a significant reduction in income inequality, with the top 1 percent and even more so the top 0.1 percent taking a much bigger hit than middle-income families.
So why are many progressives — myself included — feeling very apprehensive? Because we’re worried about the confrontations to come.
According to the normal rules of politics, Republicans should have very little bargaining power at this point. With Democrats holding the White House and the Senate, the G.O.P. can’t pass legislation; and since the biggest progressive policy priority of recent years, health reform, is already law, Republicans wouldn’t seem to have many bargaining chips.
But the G.O.P. retains the power to destroy, in particular by refusing to raise the debt limit — which could cause a financial crisis. And Republicans have made it clear that they plan to use their destructive power to extract major policy concessions.
Now, the president has said that he won’t negotiate on that basis, and rightly so. Threatening to hurt tens of millions of innocent victims unless you get your way — which is what the G.O.P. strategy boils down to — shouldn’t be treated as a legitimate political tactic.
But will Mr. Obama stick to his anti-blackmail position as the moment of truth approaches? He blinked during the 2011 debt limit confrontation. And the last few days of the fiscal cliff negotiations were also marked by a clear unwillingness on his part to let the deadline expire. Since the consequences of a missed deadline on the debt limit would potentially be much worse, this bodes ill for administration resolve in the clinch.
So, as I said, in a tactical sense the fiscal cliff ended in a modest victory for the White House. But that victory could all too easily turn into defeat in just a few weeks.
For the reality is that our two major political parties are engaged in a fierce struggle over the future shape of American society. Democrats want to preserve the legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — and add to them what every other advanced country has: a more or less universal guarantee of essential health care. Republicans want to roll all of that back, making room for drastically lower taxes on the wealthy. Yes, it’s essentially a class war.
Why do I say that it was a tactical victory? Mainly because of what didn’t happen: There were no benefit cuts.
This was by no means a foregone conclusion. In 2011, the Obama administration was reportedly willing to raise the age of Medicare eligibility, a terrible and cruel policy idea. This time around, it was willing to cut Social Security benefits by changing the formula for cost-of-living adjustments, a less terrible idea that would nonetheless have imposed a lot of hardship — and probably have been politically disastrous as well. In the end, however, it didn’t happen. And progressives, always worried that President Obama seems much too willing to compromise about fundamentals, breathed a sigh of relief.
There were also some actual positives from a progressive point of view. Expanded unemployment benefits were given another year to run, a huge benefit to many families and a significant boost to our economic prospects (because this is money that will be spent, and hence help preserve jobs). Other benefits to lower-income families were given another five years — although, unfortunately, the payroll tax break was allowed to expire, which will hurt both working families and job creation.
The biggest progressive gripe about the legislation is that Mr. Obama extracted less revenue from the affluent than expected — about $600 billion versus $800 billion over the next decade. In perspective, however, this isn’t that big a deal. Put it this way: A reasonable estimate is that gross domestic product over the next 10 years will be around $200 trillion. So if the revenue take had matched expectations, it would still have amounted to only 0.4 percent of G.D.P.; as it turned out, this was reduced to 0.3 percent. Either way, it wouldn’t make much difference in the fights over revenue versus spending still to come.
Oh, and not only did Republicans vote for a tax increase for the first time in decades, the overall result of the tax changes now taking effect — which include new taxes associated with Obamacare as well as the new legislation — will be a significant reduction in income inequality, with the top 1 percent and even more so the top 0.1 percent taking a much bigger hit than middle-income families.
So why are many progressives — myself included — feeling very apprehensive? Because we’re worried about the confrontations to come.
According to the normal rules of politics, Republicans should have very little bargaining power at this point. With Democrats holding the White House and the Senate, the G.O.P. can’t pass legislation; and since the biggest progressive policy priority of recent years, health reform, is already law, Republicans wouldn’t seem to have many bargaining chips.
But the G.O.P. retains the power to destroy, in particular by refusing to raise the debt limit — which could cause a financial crisis. And Republicans have made it clear that they plan to use their destructive power to extract major policy concessions.
Now, the president has said that he won’t negotiate on that basis, and rightly so. Threatening to hurt tens of millions of innocent victims unless you get your way — which is what the G.O.P. strategy boils down to — shouldn’t be treated as a legitimate political tactic.
But will Mr. Obama stick to his anti-blackmail position as the moment of truth approaches? He blinked during the 2011 debt limit confrontation. And the last few days of the fiscal cliff negotiations were also marked by a clear unwillingness on his part to let the deadline expire. Since the consequences of a missed deadline on the debt limit would potentially be much worse, this bodes ill for administration resolve in the clinch.
So, as I said, in a tactical sense the fiscal cliff ended in a modest victory for the White House. But that victory could all too easily turn into defeat in just a few weeks.
沒有留言:
張貼留言