狮虎论道—美国总统大选及左右经济政策

狮子羔羊

2020, 9, 27

序

昨天狮子我出城办事，早上八点出门，晚上六点到家，开车七个小时，中间还出大力流大汗地搬东西。第一次开挂拖车的车，有点紧张。好在有小女儿陪帮忙、陪伴。

刚刚到家，一位群友向我提出了如下的问题：(为行文方便姑且称这位朋友为老虎朋友）

狮子，You always said you are social liberal, fiscal conservative. I can see you are indeed social liberal. What are your fiscal conservative views? You seem like to agree raising taxes in general.

Besides tax, there are business regulations, welfare, big/small government...  Do you agree supply side economics?

Do you like single payer health care system? Democrats are big favor of single payer care system like in some european countries. ObamaCare is the first step toward the single payer health care. That is why the right side hates so much.

Long time ago, I started to call myself social liberal and fiscal conservative. I agree almost all Republican's economic policies. But I am against gun ownership, pro-choice, pro LGBT in general.

为了尊重群友，我看到后立即回复道：老虎，我刚到家，一会儿回复你。

晚饭后，在又次搬运收拾后，我终于可以躺在床上休息了。我拿起iPad，拾起了与虎朋友的讨论，以下是讨论对话（稍做了一些文字订正）

上半部：经济政策

狮子：老虎，我的中文打字不好，英文拼写不好，对于我来说，最好的还是传统中文手写，thanks to Steven Jobs, Apple provided that in all apple devices, including MacBook. I will use Chinese, you can use English as your wish. 

首先，让我们进入一个假想的家族，这是一个大家族，几十号上百号人。经过家族会议讨论投票你被选为管理家族日常支出的管家人(像红楼梦里王熙凤一样）。具体的方法是这样：

大家根据自己的收入按一定比例交月供

你收到钱后为大家提供伙食，和为那些为家族的利益与外人争战的人提供经济支持，为家族里的孩子提供教育。

在这样的场景下，你就下面的问题想一想，做一个yes,no的回答，我相信你的回答大多与我的相似。

1、你会不会在大家收入不错的情况下，存一些所谓raining fund ，以备不时之需？

2、如果发生了与外界的争战，天灾人祸，大家都收入欠佳，有人还分文不收，在用完 raining fund 你会不会设法从三个方面想办法让一家人渡过难关？

A.增加仍然有收成的人的月供

B.降低伙食水平和其它支出

C.借钱

3、在灾情过后，大家的收成又慢慢好起来后，你会不会设法把债还清，再设法存回raining fund,最后才会给大家减月供，恢复伙食水平?

4.你会不会在家里债天天增长的情况下，给交月供的人减供?

5.外面很多人提供医疗服务，费用一天高过一天，你家里人六分之一的钱都用来付医药费了。大家都不堪重负，有时一生病就交不了月供。面对这种情况，你会不会提议大家多交一些月供(但多交的部分绝对少过大家总收入的六分之），然后你用这钱给家里学医的人，让他给家里的人看病，不另收费用？

狮子：这里的一个关键点在于public interest vs. private interest. As the ones managing the government, collectively, they need to focus on public interest. Sadly they are not.  在疫情之前。美国经济强劲，失业率持续下降，股市持续上涨。但是政府赤字持续上升。如果你是总统，你会减税吗？但是，如果你代表那些高收入的阶层而不顾整个国家的利益，你就会这么做！在ACA影响了你所代表的医疗机构，保险公司的收入后，你会想方设法地干掉它，虽然那是public interest 所在！

反之，如果你代表了那些低收入，中产阶级的利益，你就会支持ACA，反对减税。

By design ，毕竟穷人口多，富人口大，双方搏弈后总能弄出个大家都能接受但都不完全满意的方式案来。（这就是民主政治的重要前提）

老虎：I think both conservative and liberal have their own sophisticated economics theory. We don't need to re-invente wheels. Just tell me which side do you agree on the fiscal policies.

狮子：想通了这些后，你就知道他们都是在忽悠。他们讲天讲地就是不讲心里话，两党都是的。

举几个例子，从主党开始。

“Health care is not a privilege , is a basic human right ”

Any thing cost money, is not your “right”! You have the right to breath air , air does not cost money. You have right to pursuit of happiness, that does not cost money too. 

This is a example from the right side:

You cannot force everyone to buy your government insurance, it against constitution.

What they really want to say is: “ if government runs health care service , our interest groups ‘ interest will be affected , we cannot let it happen “

Here you are another one: 减税可以刺激经济

我认为“减税business tax可以增加公司盈利，但是不会刺激经济”

老虎：That is liberal side of fiscal opinion.

狮子：如果你是开餐馆的，你现在的正常盈利是10%，食客就是附近的人，增加不到哪里。政府少收税，你的盈利变成12%了。你会因此延长营业时间吗？或者再开一家？如果是我，我不会。反之，如果这城里多了许多人，食客如云。就是不减税我也设法多开几家。不论怎样减税，没有新的需求，我一定不雇新人。有需求，不减税也雇。我不懂经济理论，这些对于我来说都是common senses .

老虎：狮子， let me ask you a straight question. Do you think the business tax rate should be the current of 21% or should be what Biden proposed 28%?

狮子：It depends. There never be a simple answer like that. I only can tell you moving from 21 to 28 what would be the impact, moving from 28 to 21 what is the impact.

Assume covid19 is going to be over after vaccines are available， everyone’s life goes back to it was before. Consider the federal budget deficit such high, if I were the president, I would consider increase tax in general.

老虎：Ok. Another one, Do you think right now we have too many or too little regulations for the business?

狮子：Consider financial crisis gets us more and more frequently, In such high tech IT time, financial crisis can be prevented by demanding business enterprises provide real time financial information (anonymously), for monitoring purposes. So I support more monitoring to prevent financial crisis. 

老虎：monitoring is different from regulations. Monitoring is just to collect the data for analysis. regulation is enforcement.

狮子：你要monitoring ,人家不让你monitor,你不立法，成吗？你说：我要看到你实时现金流。他干吗？你发现他己经输得底裤都没了，却在骗大众“we are financially sound”，你不采取行动？

老虎：Do you prefer the private health insurance companies or single payer government health system?

狮子：I support mix of both.

老虎：You sound more and more in line with the liberals.

狮子：我这是common sense。我不要欠债，我不借钱玩酷，我想办法少花钱多办事。

老虎：There are good debt (mortgage) and bad debt (credit card).

狮子：No debt is good debt if you need to pay interest unless you are “guaranteed” to have some profit higher than the interest you pay should you invest the money you loan to somewhere else. But there are times, debt is necessary. Almost nobody buy house without mortgage. it is not good, it is a case of no choice. if you wait till you have the full cost to buy your house, you may not ever buy your own house, but you need a house to stay.

老虎：I agree everyone should have independent thinking and research. To my family, I have same way as most middle class Chinese, no debt except for mortgage, very seldom with an auto purchase if the finance is good deal.

狮子：so, we are all fiscal conservative. I don't even have car debts, even my car is less than one year old, and quite pricy.

老虎：But the economics does not work the same way as a family economy.

狮子：it does. People tell you otherwise is to bluff you. 忽悠你.

老虎：That is not what I mean fiscal conservative. Maybe I ask the wrong question.

狮子：Don’t live on debt, is conservative. Don’t spend more money if you are still in debt is conservative.

老虎：I should have asked you do you agree with Republican's economic policies or the Democrat's.

狮子：If I were as rich as trump, I might consider going with GOP’s policy. This is not because  i think it is good for the country, Rather than it is good for me.

老虎：Every politician says they are thinking what is good for the country.

狮子：这是最大的忽悠！Nobody, nobody does that. Not even one, Democrat or republican!

老虎：Can I conclude that you are on democratic side for both their social and economic policies?

狮子：I am on my side. I am not on either side. All I am saying is: I can see through both sides. I see them through crystal clear.

老虎：I agree with most of Dem's social policies but agree with all GOP side of fiscal policies. You can not cherry pick. You just have to side with someone in general.

狮子：I would say you haven’t seen through their bluff yet.

下半部：2020年大选选谁

老虎：You are on the moderate of democrats side. I don't want to label you. But these days, when you vote, you do have to take a side. Even both candidates are very bad like in 2016. You just have to pick one with less evil.

狮子：I am who I am. But tell you the truth., whom I am going to vote has nothing to do with anything we talk about here.  

狮子：I am voting for democracy, for decency. Jeff Flake said it well https://medium.com/@JeffFlake/heres-who-i-ll-be-supporting-for-president-and-why-ce983293fae6. I agree with every single word he said. If we have learned anything over the past four years, it is that character matters. Decency matters. Civility never goes out of style. And we should expect our president to exhibit these virtues.

老虎：I completely respect Jeff Flake ( I was the audience when he gave the commencement speech for Harvard Law School in 2018). He depicted an ideal scenario when he is not in the picture. Most people can see the problems now in US and can propose an ideal solution. But that is not going to work practically now. Once you are a candidate, you are forced to be in the mud. Each interest group pretty much has their own agenda. They just want you to take a position. 

狮子: Lincoln Project said in their mission statement : “Our many policy differences with national Democrats remain. However, the priority for all patriotic Americans must be a shared fidelity to the Constitution and a commitment to defeat those candidates who have abandoned their constitutional oaths, regardless of party” and I agree with them.

狮子：As a voter, this is my position, like Jeff is now. My position is: remove trump from White House by voting is much more important and urgent than and policy differences I have with democrats.

老虎：I completely respect your decision and Jeff’s. For the personal character, we are not voting for a moral leader. For personal character, Hitler is probably better than almost all modern politicians. So what!  Comparing personal characters, I agree Trump is worse than Biden. But for a politician, he is not.

狮子：And I respect yours too. But I am not going vote for someone who purposely lie to us for his political gain at the cost of american's lives. I am not going to vote for someone treat others badly just because they criticize him . I am not going to vote for someone treat our war heroes without respect.

老虎：The biggest lie a politician has is not to fulfill his campaign promise.

狮子：I disagree on that. There are some differences between telling lies and not keep one’s campaign promise.  " I am going to build a wall along the border, and Mexico will pay for it". the first part is a promise, the second part is a lie. 

Once you are a president, you are not only the president of the voters who voted for you, you are also the president of those voters who voted against you. You won the electoral vote so you are the president, let’s say you also won the the popular vote by 50.1%, that means there are 49.9 voters voted against your campaign promise, as a president, you need to reach out to them, and listen to them, make some adjustments to your campaign promise to win the hearts and minds of those voters who voted against you. so, another phrase for “Keeping campaign promise” is refuse to listen to people who voted against you, or “refuse to be the president of all people”.  That’s the difference between campaigning and governing.  In certain sense : The more promises he kept, the worse the president he is.

老虎：今天的金句。

狮子：If a president did not listen to those who voted against him (more than 50%) and still push for his original agenda , does that make him a not very good president? At least , not good In listening.

老虎：I agree what you said in general. And I know Trump is not a person with great character. Anyone grew up in NYC is questionable, particularly working in real estate business (not to offend folks in this business, but you really have to deal with some rough folks and you become them more or less)

I watched the apprentice show. He is a horrible boss to work with.  That was way before he touched the politics.

狮子：wait, NYC很大哦. Even in real estate business in NYC 也是成千上万哦. 你这话打击面太广, 我为NYC 做real estate 的人叫屈.  I have a few friends in NYC, and also in real estate business, and they are all very honest people. NYC should not be held responsible for Trumps characters defect.

狮子：To be clear, whom you will vote , it is your right and your private matter. You do not explain to me. 

老虎：I know

狮子：But we are in some kind discussion. Discussion needs to follow logic.  

老虎：Remember Trump is a buddy of Clintons, and many other dem. What I mean is that Trump in his heart was a liberal, at least for the social side.

狮子：In my mind ,He is not liberal, he is not conservatives. he has no principles.  He is a person with character defects.

老虎：That is your opinion.

狮子：You stated your opinion, And I stated mine. We can disagree without disrespect to each other.