Who Wouldn’t Like Prices to Start Falling? 誰不想讓物價下跌？

Many Americans are in a sour mood about the economy for one main reason： Prices feel too high.

許多美國人對經濟情況感到不滿，一個主要原因是物價太高了。

Maybe they’re not rising as fast as they had been， but average prices are still painfully above where they were three years ago. And they’re mostly heading higher still.

或許物價上漲的速度沒有之前那么快，但其平均價格依然遠超2021年的水平，而且大多數商品價格仍在持續上漲。

Consider a 2-liter bottle of soda： In February 2021， before inflation began heating up， it cost an average of $1.67 in supermarkets across America. Three years later？ That bottle is going for $2.25—a 35% increase.

以一瓶2升裝蘇打水為例：在通貨膨脹升溫前的2021年2月，它在美國各地超市的平均售價為1.67美元。而三年后呢？這瓶蘇打水的價格為2.25美元——上漲了35%。

Or egg prices. They soared in 2022， then fell back down. Yet they’re still 43% higher than they were three years ago.

再看看雞蛋的價格。雞蛋的售價于2022年飆升，隨后回落，但其價格較三年前仍高出43%。

Likewise， the average used-car price： It rocketed from roughly $23，000 in February 2021 to $31，000 in April 2022. By last month， the average was down to $26，752. But that’s still up 16% from February 2021.

二手車的均價也是如此：從2021年2月的約2.3萬美元飆升至2022年4月的3.1萬美元。截至上個月，二手車均價降至2.6752萬美元，相較于2021年2月仍高出16%。

Wouldn’t it be great if prices actually fell—what economists call deflation？ Who wouldn’t want to fire up a time machine and return to the days before the economy rocketed out of the pandemic recession and sent prices soaring？

如果物價真的下跌——也就是發生經濟學家所說的通貨緊縮——那該多好啊？誰不想坐上時光機，回到經濟從疫情中強勢復蘇導致物價飆升之前的日子呢？

At least prices are now rising more slowly—what’s called disinflation. On Friday， for example， the government said a key price gauge rose 0.3% in February， down from a 0.4% gain in January. And compared with a year earlier， prices were up 2.5%， way down from a peak of 7.1% in mid-2022.

至少當前物價上漲的速度放緩了，即出現反通貨膨脹。例如上周五，政府稱某關鍵價格指標于2月份上漲了0.3%，低于1月份0.4%的漲幅。相較于2023年，物價同比上漲了2.5%，遠低于2022年中期7.1%的峰值。

But those incremental improvements are hardly enough to please the public.

然而這些緩慢的改善不足以讓大眾滿意。

“Most Americans are not just looking for disinflation，’’ Lisa Cook， a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors， said last year. “They’re looking for deflation. They want these prices to be back where they were before the pandemic.’’

“大多數美國人不僅盼著反通貨膨脹，”美聯儲理事會成員麗莎·庫克去年表示，“他們想看到通貨緊縮，希望物價回歸疫情之前的水平。”

Many economists caution， though， that consumers should be careful what they wish for. Falling prices across the economy would actually be an unhealthy sign.

但是，許多經濟學家警告稱，人們應該謹慎對待這一期望。在各個經濟領域出現普遍的物價下跌實際上是一個不良信號。

“There are，’’ the Bank of England warns， “more consequences from falling prices than meets the eye1.’’

英格蘭銀行發出警告：“物價下跌帶來的后果并非看上去那么簡單。”

What could be so bad about lower prices？

那么，物價下跌有什么壞處呢？

What is deflation？

什么是通貨緊縮？

Deflation is a widespread and sustained drop in prices across the economy. Occasional month-to-month drops in consumer prices don’t count. The United States hasn’t seen genuine deflation since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

通貨緊縮是指經濟中普遍且持續的價格下跌。偶爾發生的消費價格逐月下跌并不作數。美國自20世紀30年代的大蕭條以來，就沒有經歷過真正的通貨緊縮。

Japan has experienced a much more recent bout of deflation. It is only now emerging from decades of falling prices that began with the collapse of its property and financial markets in the early 1990s.

日本近期則經歷了一陣通貨緊縮。20世紀90年代初期，日本房地產和金融市場崩潰，由此引發數十年物價下跌，日本剛剛從這場動蕩中走出來。

What’s wrong with deflation？

通貨緊縮有什么問題？

“Although lower prices may seem like a good thing，’’ Banco de Espa?a， the Spanish central bank， says on its website， “deflation can in fact be highly damaging to the economy.’’

“雖然物價更低可能看起來是好事，”西班牙銀行在其網站上表示，“但實際上，通貨緊縮可能會對經濟造成嚴重損害。”

How so？ Mainly because falling prices tend to discourage consumers from spending. Why buy now， after all， if you can purchase what you want—cars， furniture， appliances， vacations—at a lower price later？

這是為什么呢？主要是因為物價下跌往往會抑制消費者的購買欲望。如果你能在以后以更低的價格買到想要的東西，比如汽車、家具、電器、度假等等，為什么要現在買呢？

The reality is that the economy’s health depends on steady consumer purchases. In the United States， household spending accounts for around 70% of the entire economy. If consumers were to pull back， en masse， to await lower prices， businesses would face intense pressure to cut prices even more to try to jump-start sales.

而現實是經濟健康依賴于穩定的消費支出。在美國，家庭支出約占整個經濟的70%。如果消費者大規模延遲消費以等待更低的價格，企業將面臨巨大的壓力，不得不進一步降價以刺激銷售。

In the meantime， employers might have to lay off waves of employees or cut pay—or both. Unemployed people， of course， are even less likely to spend， so prices would likely keep falling. All of which risks triggering a “deflationary spiral’’ of price cuts， layoffs， more price cuts， more layoffs. And on and on. Another recession could follow.

與此同時，雇主可能不得不進行一波又一波裁員或削減工資，或是二者并行。而失業的人更不可能消費，所以物價會進一步下跌。這些狀況可能會引發“螺旋式通縮”，即降價、裁員、進一步降價、更多的裁員……如此循環往復，就可能會引發另一場經濟衰退。

It was to prevent that very kind of economic nastiness that explains why the Bank of Japan resorted to negative interest rates in 2016 and why the Fed kept U.S. rates near zero for seven straight years during and after the Great Recession of 2007—2009.

正是為了防止這種經濟惡性循環，日本銀行在2016年采取了負利率政策，美聯儲在2007—2009年的經濟大蕭條期間及之后的七年中，始終將美國利率維持在趨于零的水平。

Deflation exerts another painful effect， too： It hurts borrowers by making their inflation-adjusted loans more expensive.

通貨緊縮還會產生另一種不好的影響：它使通脹調整后的貸款價值更高，從而對借款人造成不利影響。

Are there any benefits of deflation？

通貨緊縮有好處嗎？

It’s certainly true that Americans can make their paychecks go further when prices are falling. If food or gasoline prices were to tumble， households would surely find it less painful to afford groceries or their commutes to work—as long as they remained employed.

的確，當物價下跌時，美國人的工資更經用了。如果食品或汽油價格暴跌，家庭在購買雜貨、支付通勤費用時會輕松一些——只要他們還能保得住工作。

Some economists even question the notion that deflation poses a serious economic threat. In 2015， researchers at the Bank for International Settlements， a forum for the world’s central banks， reviewed 140 years of deflationary episodes in 38 economies and reached this conclusion： The correlation between falling prices and economic growth “is weak and derives mostly from the Great Depression.’’

一些經濟學家甚至開始質疑通貨緊縮是否會對經濟構成嚴重威脅。2015年，國際清算銀行（一個全球央行銀團）的研究人員回顧了38個經濟體140年以來的通貨緊縮情況，得出了如下結論：物價下跌與經濟增長的相關性“很弱，主要是因為大蕭條”。

But the exception was a doozy2： From 1929—1933， U.S. economic output plummeted by a third， prices sank by a quarter and the unemployment rate shot up from 3% to a crushing 25%.

但例外情況格外引人注目：從1929年至1933年，美國經濟產出暴跌1/3，物價下跌1/4，失業率由3%飆升至令人窒息的25%。

The bank’s researchers said the biggest economic risk came not from falling prices for goods and services but rather from a freefall in the price of assets—stocks， bonds and real estate. Those collapsing assets， in turn， can topple banks that hold crumbling investments or that made loans to struggling real estate developers and homebuyers.

該行研究人員表示，最大的經濟風險并非源于商品和服務價格的下跌，而是來自資產價格（如股票、債券和房地產）的自由落體式下跌。這些垮掉的資產可能反過來導致銀行倒閉，而這些銀行往往或是持有不良投資，或是向陷入困境的房產商和購房者放貸款。

The damaged banks may then cut off credit—the lifeblood of the broader economy.

受損的銀行隨后可能會切斷信貸，而信貸是整個經濟的命脈。

The likely result？ A painful recession.

這可能會導致什么結果呢？令人痛苦的經濟衰退。

（譯者為“《英語世界》杯”翻譯大賽獲獎者）

1 more than meets the eye 并非看起來那么簡單。

2 doozy非常特別的，不同尋常的（通常指不好的事物）。