| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
亲爱的经济学家, Dear Economist, George Soros sets aside a proportion of the profits from his financial gambles to fund educational foundations and other good works. In a humble1 way, I do the same. My modest five-figure portfolio2 of shares has performed well, and I give my adult children and the local church an occasional £500 out of the profits. I had imagined I was doing good, but my satisfaction was recently punctured3 by an article in a left-wing journal which suggested that every successful mega-deal made by Soros is necessarily set off by an equivalent loss divided between a multitude of innocent little punters further down the line. In other words, he harms more people than he helps. 这样说对么?我是否也是一个伪君子、一个坏人? Is this correct? Am I also a hypocrite and a bad man? John, Germany Dear John, You write as if you and Soros have been playing roulette. But financial markets are not a zero-sum game; if they work they create more winners than losers - or, more accurately4, more winnings than losses. Think of Soros's speculations5 on currencies. If they make money for him, it is because he bought low and sold high. Selling high reduces the height of peaks in a currency's value, while buying low makes the troughs more shallow. So, while making money, Soros is also smoothing out currency fluctuations6. How many central banks can boast of the same (profitable) record? More generally, the ultimate purpose of financial markets is to direct capital to where it is most valued for spending or investment. When they work, the world is better off. It is incompetent7 investors8 who destabilise markets. Worry less about how you make the money, and more about where the vicar invests your profits. 点击收听单词发音
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- 发表评论
-
- 最新评论 进入详细评论页>>