经济与社会科学2016onlinelibrary.wiley.com
为什么混蛋总是赢：金钱压倒一切
Why the Assholes Are Winning: Money Trumps All
入门 · 约 30 分钟读完前置知识：组织行为学基础、博弈论基本概念
导读
这篇论文（作者 Pfeffer）探讨为何职场与社会中'混蛋'式的自私行为日益得势，认为金钱与利润最大化压倒了人类福祉、幸福感与长寿等价值。文章批评了以自利为核心的制度文化，并呼吁重视制度性因素对工作条件与生活质量的侵蚀。
HN 关注点：HN 读者围绕'金钱是否压倒一切'展开激烈争论：有人痛陈当代劳动者的困境，也有人反驳商业与金融带来的巨大进步，讨论焦点是资本主义、收入分配与职场文化的得失。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：支持 1 质疑 2 补充 1
支持高收入者也感到像奴隶，当代劳动者在时间与成就感上极度匮乏
同意。每当听到成功企业家说现在比过去好得多，就证明他们完全脱离现实。今天的工薪阶层确实能获得更多商品和服务，但在真正重要的东西——时间和工作成就感上——我们从未如此贫穷。工作条件在恶化，我们开始感觉像奴隶；房租或房贷沉重，不敢失业；说错话可能危及职业生涯。人们转向游戏和毒品来寻求急需的成就感。按美国统计我处于家庭收入前 5%，却仍感觉像工作中的奴隶，真难想象底层 95% 的人是什么感受。
jondubois查看英文原文
Agreed. Whenever I hear some big successful entrepreneur saying how everything is better now then it used to be (and sincerely believe this to be the case) - They are proving themselves to be completely out of touch with reality. Sure, today's working class can get access to more goods and services than ever before but when it comes to things that actually matter like our time and our ability to feel fulfilled in our work; we have never been so poor. People today are unhappy. Our working conditions are deteriorating and we are starting to feel like slaves. Our rents or mortgages are massive and we cannot afford to lose our jobs. People are no longer allowed to be themselves because saying the wrong thing to the wrong person might have serious negative repercussions for their careers and livelihoods. People are turning to video games and drugs to give themselves the feeling of fulfilment that they desperately need. Based on US statistics I'm like in the top 5% of household income bracket but I feel like a slave at work - I seriously wonder how people in the bottom 95% must feel! The distribution of income seems so unnatural: http://money.cnn.com/calculator/pf/income-rank/ I bet the distribution of wealth is even worse.
质疑左翼改革思路仍困于旧制度框架，应转向互助信贷等去中心化货币方案
当代左翼评论者的一个讽刺是：尽管强调关注制度因素（如 Pfeffer 构造的'自利与利润最大化'对立于'人类福祉与幸福'的流行但错误的二分法），他们仍困在自己厌恶的同一套制度框架内思考，认为现有体制只需微调改革成'社会民主主义'即可。如果金钱是问题所在，解决方案不是福利改革，而是终结货币垄断，让社区和个人用自己创造的货币来协调储蓄投资决策——这是 19 世纪无政府主义者倡导的互助信贷方案。'充分就业'一直是凯恩斯主义者等各派的怪异执念；新教工作伦理是右翼版的劳动价值论。一边哀叹内卷式工作条件，一边主张用充分就业政策把所有人塞进这场竞赛，这是自相矛盾的。
vezzy-fnord查看英文原文
One of the great ironies of contemporary left-leaning commentators is that despite their insistence on paying attention to institutional factors that others allegedly neglect (see how Pfeffer constructs the popular but false dichotomy of "self-interest and profit maximization" versus "human well-being, longevity and happiness"), they are largely stuck in thinking in terms of the very same institutions they abhor. Effectively, the current approach is mostly fine, it just needs a few tweaks and reforms to turn it into a "social democracy". If money is the problem, then the solution is not to engage in petty social democratic welfare reforms, but to end the monopoly on currency and allow for communities and individuals to coordinate savings-investment decisions and account for their local capital using the denomination of currency that they have decided to create. This is the mutual credit solution as advocated by 19th century anarchists and a minority of monetary reformers since then. Pfeffer quotes Article 23 on the "right to work," and indeed full employment has always been a bizarre fetish for Keynesians, social democrats, Marxists and conservatives. The Protestant work ethic is the right-wing version of the labor theory of value. It is a contradiction how so many bemoan the supposed rat race working conditions and then advocate the "solution" of having the state put everyone into the rat race through full employment policy. Nowhere have I seen any social democratic reformer argue for artisanal crafts and decentralized governance. It's always more and more massive centralization. I will note it was the mercantilists who first provided economic rationales for full employment. And they went to great lengths to achieve it: anti-vagrancy and poor laws to forcefully turn people into serfs. The current proposals are more humane, but borne of the same logic of "to live is to toil". I will also note that a reason why formal models haven't focused that much on things like subjective utility and happiness is because those suffer from intractable aggregation problems. It's easy to speak of the "public interest" in colloquial language, it is brutally difficult to model and quantify it, actually drawing the line of how far it extends. Then, of course, interpersonal comparison of utility is fraught with issues because there is no measurement of utility as such. Robert Nozick's thought experiments have been good at illustrating this. This trite paternalistic reformism leads nowhere except to further exacerbation of instability.
质疑用数据反驳'混蛋'叙事：商业与金融带来了死亡率、教育和环保的巨大进步
过去 75 年，得益于医疗、制药和华尔街那些'混蛋'的资助，年龄调整死亡率下降了 60%（CDC 数据）。大学入学率增长超 1000%，毕业率提高 10%，多亏经营大学和承销学贷的'混蛋'们（美国人口普查局）。自 1900 年以来，环保行业和政府里的'罪犯'们把美国空气污染削减了约三分之二，而人口还在爆炸式增长（EPA）。进步派妖魔化商业、金融和政府有其作用，能推动有时催生新业务的改革。但他们不知道何时收手，歇斯底里的戏剧化引擎不停运转，导致政府过度干预，用感觉良好的立法和监管掏空国库和企业，抢走了培训、雇佣和维持高薪岗位所需的资金。
rrggrr查看英文原文
Age adjusted mortality rates have declined 60% over the past 75 years courtesy of those "assholes" in health care, pharmaceuticals and Wall Street who financed them. (Source: CDC) College enrollment has increased by more than 1000% and graduation rates have increased by 10% thanks to those "assholes" who run colleges and those "jerks" who underwrite college loans. (US Census) Those "assholes" in the environmental industry and their "criminal" counterparts in government have cut by about 2/3 air pollution in the US since 1900, while the population has exploded. (US EPA). Progressives have an important role to play in demonizing business, finance and government. It gets the ball rolling for reform that sometimes creates new businesses. Thank you progressives. They don't know when to stop and the hysteria/drama engine chugs along causing government to over-reach with feel good legislation and regulation & boondoggles that rob the treasury and business of funds needed to train, hire and maintain a vibrant work force... of good paying jobs... not retail and fast food gigs.
补充用囚徒困境解释：当背叛能换来金钱收益时，作弊者自然胜出
其实混蛋们赢是因为他们愿意作弊。想想'囚徒困境'这个思想实验：两人分别被审讯，可以选择出卖同伙或保持沉默。都沉默则刑期都短；一方出卖另一方则出卖者自由、被出卖者重判；都出卖则都获中等刑期。玩这个游戏的人可分为两类：追求最短刑期的，和追求与朋友建立信任的。现在想象一下，出卖邻居换来的不是减刑，而是几千美元。
dawnbreez查看英文原文
Actually, the assholes are winning because they're willing to cheat. There's a thought experiment called the "Prisoner's Dilemma": two people are caught robbing a bank, and are taken to separate interrogation rooms; they can either rat their "friend" out or stay silent. If they both keep their mouths shut, they both take a short sentence; if one talks and the other doesn't, the rat goes free and the other guy gets a big sentence; if they both talk they both get a mid-range sentence. The people who play this game can be neatly divided into the ones who play for the minimum jail time, and the ones who play to build trust with their friend. Now imagine that, instead of reducing your jail time, screwing your neighbor nets you a few thousand dollars.
历次讨论
- 2016Hacker News 讨论帖193 分 · 177 评
- 2017Hacker News 讨论帖12 分 · 1 评
同领域还值得读
一切的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
利用1870–2015年多国的长期数据，估算股票、住房等各类资本的回报率，并将其与经济增长率进行比较。
经济与社会科学2019 · 487 分 · 260 评进阶 · 约 100 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
构建了 1870–2015 年 16 个国家的长周期资产回报数据集，覆盖股票、住房、政府债券和短期票据，系统比较各类资产的真实回报与波动性。
经济与社会科学2018 · 215 分 · 151 评进阶 · 约 120 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015（2019）
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015 (2019)
这篇发表于《经济学季刊》的论文构建了 1870–2015 年间 16 个主要发达国家的股票、债券、房地产等资产收益率的长周期数据库。
经济与社会科学2024 · 190 分 · 148 评进阶 · 约 80 分钟编辑精选想法是否越来越难找？
Are ideas getting harder to find?
探讨“想法是否越来越难找到”：通过衡量多个领域的“研究生产率”，发现维持相同的增长需要投入指数级增长的研究资源，即研究效率在持续下降。
经济与社会科学2016 · 182 分 · 106 评入门 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选比特币与区块链的经济极限
The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain
芝加哥大学 Eric Budish 的论文从经济学角度分析比特币与区块链的根本限制：核心论点是只要攻击网络（双花或砸盘做空）的收益超过挖矿成本，51% 算力攻击就有利可图，而挖矿…
经济与社会科学2018 · 176 分 · 37 评进阶 · 约 90 分钟编辑精选