You probably don't know me, but I am one of those .01 percenters that you hear about and read about, and I am by any reasonable definition a plutocrat. And tonight, what I would like to do is speak directly to other plutocrats, to my people, because it feels like it's time for us all to have a chat. Like most plutocrats, I too am a proud and unapologetic capitalist. I have founded, cofounded or funded over 30 companies across a range of industries. I was the first non-family investor in Amazon.com. I cofounded a company called aQuantive that we sold to Microsoft for 6.4 billion dollars. My friends and I, we own a bank. I tell you this — (Laughter) — unbelievable, right?
Verovatno me ne poznajete ali ja sam jedan od onih 0,01 procenata za koje ste čuli i o kojima ste čitali, i prema svakoj razumnoj definiciji, ja sam plutokrata. Večeras bih voleo da govorim direktno drugim plutokratama, svojim ljudima, jer izgleda da je vreme za sve nas da razgovaramo. Poput većine plutokrata, takođe sam ponosan i nepomirljivi kapitalista. Osnovao sam, potpomogao i finansirao više od 30 kompanija širom različitih industrija. Bio sam prvi vanporodični investitor na sajtu Amazon.com. Suosnovao firmu po imenu "aQuantive" koju smo prodali Majkrosoftu za 6,4 milijarde dolara. Moji prijatelji i ja imamo banku. Govorim vam ovo - (Smeh) - neverovatno, zar ne?
I tell you this to show that my life is like most plutocrats. I have a broad perspective on capitalism and business, and I have been rewarded obscenely for that with a life that most of you all can't even imagine: multiple homes, a yacht, my own plane, etc., etc., etc. But let's be honest: I am not the smartest person you've ever met. I am certainly not the hardest working. I was a mediocre student. I'm not technical at all. I can't write a word of code. Truly, my success is the consequence of spectacular luck, of birth, of circumstance and of timing. But I am actually pretty good at a couple of things. One, I have an unusually high tolerance for risk, and the other is I have a good sense, a good intuition about what will happen in the future, and I think that that intuition about the future is the essence of good entrepreneurship.
Govorim vam ovo da bih vam pokazao da je moj život poput većine plutokrata. Imam široki uvid u kapitalizam i biznis, i nepravedno sam nagrađen za to životom koji većina svih vas ne može ni da zamisli: nekoliko kuća, jahta, moj lični avion, i tako dalje, i tako dalje. Ali budimo iskreni: ja nisam najpametnija osoba koju ste ikada sreli. Sigurno nisam ni najvrednija. Bio sam osrednji student. Nisam uopšte stručan. Ne mogu da napišem ni jedan kod. Iskreno, moj uspeh je posledica neobične sreće, rođenja, prilika i tajminga. Ali sam zapravo prilično dobar u par stvari. Jedna, imam neobično visoku trpeljivost rizika, i druga je da imam dobar osećaj, dobru intuiciju o onome što će se desiti u budućnosti, i mislim da intuicija o budućnosti predstavlja srž dobrog preduzetništva.
So what do I see in our future today, you ask? I see pitchforks, as in angry mobs with pitchforks, because while people like us plutocrats are living beyond the dreams of avarice, the other 99 percent of our fellow citizens are falling farther and farther behind. In 1980, the top one percent of Americans shared about eight percent of national [income], while the bottom 50 percent of Americans shared 18 percent. Thirty years later, today, the top one percent shares over 20 percent of national [income], while the bottom 50 percent of Americans share 12 or 13. If the trend continues, the top one percent will share over 30 percent of national [income] in another 30 years, while the bottom 50 percent of Americans will share just six.
Dakle, šta vidim u našoj budućnosti danas, pitate se? Vidim vile, kao vile u besnim ruljama, jer dok ljudi poput nas plutokrata žive van pohlepnih snova, ostalih 99 procenata naših sugrađana spotiču se sve dalje i dalje iza nas. 1980. godine, jedan procenat Amerikanaca podelio je oko 8 procenata nacionalnih prihoda, dok je poslednjih 50 procenata Amerikanaca podelilo 18 procenata. Danas, trideset godina kasnije, 1 procenat na vrhu deli preko 20 posto nacionalnog prihoda dok poslednjih 50 procenata Amerikanaca deli 12 ili 13 procenata. Ako se trend nastavi, najviši procenat deliće preko 30 procenata nacionalnog prihoda, u narednih 30 godina, dok će poslednjih 50 procenata Amerikanaca deliti samo šest.
You see, the problem isn't that we have some inequality. Some inequality is necessary for a high-functioning capitalist democracy. The problem is that inequality is at historic highs today and it's getting worse every day. And if wealth, power, and income continue to concentrate at the very tippy top, our society will change from a capitalist democracy to a neo-feudalist rentier society like 18th-century France. That was France before the revolution and the mobs with the pitchforks.
Vidite, problem nije u tome da imamo neke nejednakosti. Nejednakost je neophodna za visoko funkcionalnu kapitalističku demokratiju. Problem je u tome što je nejednakost istorijski visoka danas i pogoršava se svakog dana. Ako novac, moć i prihodi nastave da se koncentrišu na samom vrhu, naše društvo će se promeniti od kapitalističke demokratije do neofeudalističko izdavačkog društva poput Francuske u 18. veku. To je bila Francuska pre revolucije i rulje sa vilama.
So I have a message for my fellow plutocrats and zillionaires and for anyone who lives in a gated bubble world: Wake up. Wake up. It cannot last. Because if we do not do something to fix the glaring economic inequities in our society, the pitchforks will come for us, for no free and open society can long sustain this kind of rising economic inequality. It has never happened. There are no examples. You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state or an uprising. The pitchforks will come for us if we do not address this. It's not a matter of if, it's when. And it will be terrible when they come for everyone, but particularly for people like us plutocrats.
Imam poruku za moje plutokrate i zilionere i sve koji žive u ograđenom zatvorenom svetu: Probudite se. Probudite se. To ne može da traje. Jer ako ne uradimo nešto kako bismo popravili očitu ekonomsku nejednakost u našem društvu, vile će doći po nas jer nijedno slobodno i otvoreno društvo ne može više da podnese ovu vrstu rastuće ekonomske nejednakosti. Nikad se to nije dogodilo. Nema primera. Pokažite mi visoko nejednako društvo, a ja ću vam pokazati policijsku državu ili pobunu. Vile će doći po nas ako se ne pozabavimo ovim. Ne radi se o "ako" već "kada". I biće užasno kada dođu po sve, ali posebno po ljude poput plutokrata.
I know I must sound like some liberal do-gooder. I'm not. I'm not making a moral argument that economic inequality is wrong. What I am arguing is that rising economic inequality is stupid and ultimately self-defeating. Rising inequality doesn't just increase our risks from pitchforks, but it's also terrible for business too. So the model for us rich guys should be Henry Ford. When Ford famously introduced the $5 day, which was twice the prevailing wage at the time, he didn't just increase the productivity of his factories, he converted exploited autoworkers who were poor into a thriving middle class who could now afford to buy the products that they made. Ford intuited what we now know is true, that an economy is best understood as an ecosystem and characterized by the same kinds of feedback loops you find in a natural ecosystem, a feedback loop between customers and businesses. Raising wages increases demand, which increases hiring, which in turn increases wages and demand and profits, and that virtuous cycle of increasing prosperity is precisely what is missing from today's economic recovery.
Znam da verovatno zvučim poput nekog liberalnog idealiste. Nisam. Ne dajem moralni argument da je ekonomska nejednakost pogrešna. Tvrdim da je rastuća ekonomska nejednakost glupa i krajnje samouništavajuća. Rastuća nejednakost ne povećava samo naše rizike od vila, već je i užasna za posao. Dakle, model za nas bogate momke treba da bude Henri Ford. Kada je Ford svečano predstavio dan od 5 dolara, što je bilo duplo veće od najveće dnevnice u to vreme, on nije samo povećao produktivnost svojih fabrika, već je preokrenuo ekspolatisane radnike koji su bili siromašni, u naprednu srednju klasu koja je sada mogla da priušti da kupi proizvode koje su napravili. Ford je predvideo ono što sada znamo da je istina, da je ekonomija najbolje shvaćena kao ekosistem i karakterisana istim vrstama okvira povratnih informacija koje nađete u prirodnom ekosistemu, karika između mušterija i poslova. Povećanje dnevnica povećava zahteve, što povećava zapošljivost, koja u zamenu za to povećava dnevnice, potražnje i profite, i kvalitetni krug rastućeg prosperiteta je upravo ono što nedostaje oporavku današnje ekonomije.
And this is why we need to put behind us the trickle-down policies that so dominate both political parties and embrace something I call middle-out economics. Middle-out economics rejects the neoclassical economic idea that economies are efficient, linear, mechanistic, that they tend towards equilibrium and fairness, and instead embraces the 21st-century idea that economies are complex, adaptive, ecosystemic, that they tend away from equilibrium and toward inequality, that they're not efficient at all but are effective if well managed. This 21st-century perspective allows you to clearly see that capitalism does not work by [efficiently] allocating existing resources. It works by [efficiently] creating new solutions to human problems. The genius of capitalism is that it is an evolutionary solution-finding system. It rewards people for solving other people's problems. The difference between a poor society and a rich society, obviously, is the degree to which that society has generated solutions in the form of products for its citizens. The sum of the solutions that we have in our society really is our prosperity, and this explains why companies like Google and Amazon and Microsoft and Apple and the entrepreneurs who created those companies have contributed so much to our nation's prosperity.
Zbog ovoga treba da stavimo iza sebe ova pravila koja smanjuju greške koja dominiraju u obe političke partije i obuhvataju nešto što ja zovem srednjim ekonomijama. Srednje ekonomije odbacuju neoklasičnu ekonomsku ideju da su ekonomije efikasne, linearne, mehanističke, da teže ka jednakosti i poštenju, i umesto toga podržavaju ideje 21. veka da su ekonomije kompleksne, prilagodljive, ekosistemske, da izbegavaju jednakost i teže nejednakosti, da uopšte nisu efikasne ali su efikasne ako se dobro uklope. Ovo gledište iz 21. veka omogućava vam da jasno vidite da kapitalizam ne funkcioniše na osnovu efikasne raspodele postojećih izvora. On funkcioniše putem efikasnog kreiranja novih rešenja za ljudske probleme. Prednost kapitalizma je to što je evolucioni sistem za pronalaženje rešenja. Nagrađuje ljude za rešavanje problema drugih ljudi. Razlika između siromašnog društva i bogatog, očigledno, je nivo na kojem je to društvo stvorilo rešenja u obliku proizvoda za svoje građane. Zbir rešenja koje imamo u svom društvu predstavlja naš prosperitet i ovo objašnjava zašto su kompanije poput Gugla i Amazona, Majkrosofta i Epla, i preduzetnika koji su stvorili te kompanije doprineli toliko prosperitetu naše nacije.
This 21st-century perspective also makes clear that what we think of as economic growth is best understood as the rate at which we solve problems. But that rate is totally dependent upon how many problem solvers — diverse, able problem solvers — we have, and thus how many of our fellow citizens actively participate, both as entrepreneurs who can offer solutions, and as customers who consume them. But this maximizing participation thing doesn't happen by accident. It doesn't happen by itself. It requires effort and investment, which is why all highly prosperous capitalist democracies are characterized by massive investments in the middle class and the infrastructure that they depend on.
Gledište 21. veka takođe ističe da je ono što mislimo o ekonomskom rastu najbolje shvaćeno kao nivo na kojem rešavamo probleme. Ali taj nivo je totalno zavisan od toga koliko ima različitih razrešivača problema i koliko sposobnih razrešivača problema imamo i koliko naših sugrađana aktivno učestvuje i kao preduzetnici koji mogu da ponude rešenja, i kao mušterije koje ih koriste. Ali ovaj momenat povećanja učešća ne događa se slučajno. Ne događa se samo od sebe. Zahteva napor i ulaganje, što objašnjava zašto su visoko prosperitetne kapitalističke demokratije okarakterisane ogromnim investicijama u srednjoj klasi i infrastrukturi od koje zavise.
We plutocrats need to get this trickle-down economics thing behind us, this idea that the better we do, the better everyone else will do. It's not true. How could it be? I earn 1,000 times the median wage, but I do not buy 1,000 times as much stuff, do I? I actually bought two pairs of these pants, what my partner Mike calls my manager pants. I could have bought 2,000 pairs, but what would I do with them? (Laughter) How many haircuts can I get? How often can I go out to dinner? No matter how wealthy a few plutocrats get, we can never drive a great national economy. Only a thriving middle class can do that. There's nothing to be done, my plutocrat friends might say. Henry Ford was in a different time. Maybe we can't do some things. Maybe we can do some things. June 19, 2013, Bloomberg published an article I wrote called "The Capitalist’s Case for a $15 Minimum Wage." The good people at Forbes magazine, among my biggest admirers, called it "Nick Hanauer's near-insane proposal." And yet, just 350 days after that article was published, Seattle's Mayor Ed Murray signed into law an ordinance raising the minimum wage in Seattle to 15 dollars an hour, more than double what the prevailing federal $7.25 rate is. How did this happen, reasonable people might ask. It happened because a group of us reminded the middle class that they are the source of growth and prosperity in capitalist economies. We reminded them that when workers have more money, businesses have more customers, and need more employees. We reminded them that when businesses pay workers a living wage, taxpayers are relieved of the burden of funding the poverty programs like food stamps and medical assistance and rent assistance that those workers need. We reminded them that low-wage workers make terrible taxpayers, and that when you raise the minimum wage for all businesses, all businesses benefit yet all can compete.
Mi plutokrate treba da se rešimo ove ekonomije, te ideje da ukoliko je nama bolje, bolje će biti i drugima. To nije tačno. Kako može biti? Ja zarađujem 1000 puta više od prosečne plate, ali ne kupujem 1000 puta više stvari, zar ne? Zapravo sam kupio dva para ovih pantalona, ono što moj partner Majk naziva mojim menadžerskim pantalonama. Mogao sam da kupim 2000 pari, ali šta bih radio sa njima? (Smeh) Koliko frizura mogu da kupim? Koliko često mogu da izađem na večeru? Bez obzira koliko se nekoliko plutokrata obogati, ne možemo da pokrenemo veliku nacionalnu ekonomiju. Samo razvijena srednja klasa to može da učini. Ne treba ništa da se uradi, rekle bi moje plutokrate. Henri Ford je živeo u drugačijem vremenu. Možda ne možemo da uradimo neke stvari. Možda možemo da uradimo neke stvari. 19. juna 2013. godine Blumberg je objavio članak koji sam napisao pod imenom "Kapitalistički slučaj za minimalne dnevnice od 15 dolara." Dobri ljudi u magazinu Forbs, među mojim najvećim poštovaocima, nazvali su ga "skoro potpuno ludim predlogom Nika Hanauera". Zatim, samo 350 dana nakon što je članak objavljen, gradonačelnik Sijetla, Ed Marej potpisao je uredbu za podizanje minimalne dnevnice u Sijetlu na 15 dolara po satu, više nego duplo od većinske državne dnevnice od 7,25 dolara. Kako se ovo dogodilo, zapitaće se razumni ljudi. Dogodilo se jer je grupa nas podsetila srednju klasu da su oni izvor rasta i prosperiteta u kapitalističkim ekonomijama. Podsetili smo ih da kada radnici imaju više novca, preduzeća imaju više mušterija, i treba im više zaposlenih. Podsetili smo ih da kada preduzeća plaćaju radnike standardnom dnevnicom, poreski obveznici su oslobođeni finansiranja programa siromaštva poput markica za hranu i medicinske pomoći i pomoći za stanarinu koje trebaju tim radnicima. Podsetili smo ih da radnici sa niskom nadnicom predstavljaju užasne poreske obveznike, i da kada povećate minimalnu platu za sva preduzeća, sva preduzeća imaju korist od toga, a ipak mogu da budu konkurentna.
Now the orthodox reaction, of course, is raising the minimum wage costs jobs. Right? Your politician's always echoing that trickle-down idea by saying things like, "Well, if you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it."
Prirodna reakcija, naravno, je da podizanje minimalne plate košta preuzeća. Zar ne? Vaši političari su uvek ponavljali tu ideju teorije "kapanja nadole", govoreći stvari poput: "Ako podignete cenu zapošljivosti, pogodite šta se dešava? Dobijate je manje."
Are you sure? Because there's some contravening evidence. Since 1980, the wages of CEOs in our country have gone from about 30 times the median wage to 500 times. That's raising the price of employment. And yet, to my knowledge, I have never seen a company outsource its CEO's job, automate their job, export the job to China. In fact, we appear to be employing more CEOs and senior managers than ever before. So too for technology workers and financial services workers, who earn multiples of the median wage and yet we employ more and more of them, so clearly you can raise the price of employment and get more of it.
Da li ste sigurni? Jer, javljaju se suprotni dokazi. Od 1980. godine, plate direktora u našoj zemlji su porasle sa 30 puta veće cifre od prosečne plate do 500 puta veće od prosečne plate. To je rast cene zapošljivosti. I prema svom iskustvu, nikad nisam video firmu koja izvozi posao svog direktora, koja automatizuje svoj posao, i izvozi svoj posao u Kinu. Zapravo, sve više zapošljavamo direktore i starije menadžere nego ikada ranije. Ovo važi i za tehnološke radnike i radnike finansijskih usluga, koji zarađuju više prosečnih plata i njih zapošljavamo sve više i više. i očito možete podići cenu zaposlenja i dobiti više.
I know that most people think that the $15 minimum wage is this insane, risky economic experiment. We disagree. We believe that the $15 minimum wage in Seattle is actually the continuation of a logical economic policy. It is allowing our city to kick your city's ass. Because, you see, Washington state already has the highest minimum wage of any state in the nation. We pay all workers $9.32, which is almost 30 percent more than the federal minimum of 7.25, but crucially, 427 percent more than the federal tipped minimum of 2.13. If trickle-down thinkers were right, then Washington state should have massive unemployment. Seattle should be sliding into the ocean. And yet, Seattle is the fastest-growing big city in the country. Washington state is generating small business jobs at a higher rate than any other major state in the nation. The restaurant business in Seattle? Booming. Why? Because the fundamental law of capitalism is, when workers have more money, businesses have more customers and need more workers. When restaurants pay restaurant workers enough so that even they can afford to eat in restaurants, that's not bad for the restaurant business. That's good for it, despite what some restaurateurs may tell you.
Znam da većina ljudi smatra da je minimalna dnevnica od 15 dolara totalno suluda i rizični ekonomski eksperiment. Ne slažemo se sa time. Verujemo da je minimalna dnevnica od 15 dolara u Sijetlu zapravo nastavak logične ekonomske politike. To omogućava našem gradu da pobedi vaš. Jer, vidite, država Vašington uveliko ima najvišu minimalnu dnevnicu od svih država u Americi. Plaćamo sve radnike 9,32 dolara što je skoro 30 procenata više od saveznog minimuma od 7,25 dolara, ali najvažnije je da 427 puta više od državne minimalne napojnice od 2,13 dolara. Ako su zagovornici teorije kapanja bili u pravu, onda država Vašington treba da ima ogromnu nezaposlenost. Sijetl bi trebalo da sklizne u okean. A zapravo, Sijetl je najbrže rastući veliki grad u zemlji. Država Vašington proizvodi poslove malih preduzeća na višem nivou od bilo koje države u naciji. Restoranski posao u Sijetlu? Prosperitetan. Zašto? Zato što je glavni zakon kapitalizma, kada radnici imaju više novca, preduzeća imaju više mušterija, i treba im više radnika. Kada restorani plaćaju restoranske radnike dovoljno da čak i oni mogu da priušte da jedu u restoranima, to nije loše za restoranski posao. Dobro je za to, uprkos onome što bi vam neki vlasnici restorana rekli.
Is it more complicated than I'm making out? Of course it is. There are a lot of dynamics at play. But can we please stop insisting that if low-wage workers earn a little bit more, unemployment will skyrocket and the economy will collapse? There is no evidence for it. The most insidious thing about trickle-down economics is not the claim that if the rich get richer, everyone is better off. It is the claim made by those who oppose any increase in the minimum wage that if the poor get richer, that will be bad for the economy. This is nonsense. So can we please dispense with this rhetoric that says that rich guys like me and my plutocrat friends made our country? We plutocrats know, even if we don't like to admit it in public, that if we had been born somewhere else, not here in the United States, we might very well be just some dude standing barefoot by the side of a dirt road selling fruit. It's not that they don't have good entrepreneurs in other places, even very, very poor places. It's just that that's all that those entrepreneurs' customers can afford.
Da li je komplikovanije nego što vam ja to iznosim? Naravno da jeste. Postoji mnogo dinamika u igri. Ali možemo li molim vas da prestanemo da insistiramo da će nezaposlenost skočiti ako radnici sa niskim platama zarađuju malo više, i da će se ekonomija urušiti? Ne postoje dokazi za to. Najlukavija stvar o ekonomijama kapanja nije činjenica da će ako bogati postanu bogatiji, svima biti bolje. To je tvrdnja stvorena od strane onih koji se suprotstavljaju svakom povećanju u minimalnoj plati, da ako se siromašni obogate, to će biti loše za ekonomiju. To je glupost. Možemo li molim vas da prestanemo sa ovom retorikom koja kaže da su bogati ljudi poput mene i mojih kolega plutokrata stvorili ovu zemlju? Mi plutokrate znamo, čak i ako ne volimo da priznamo javno, da smo bili rođeni negde drugde, ne ovde u Sjedinjenim Državama, verovatno bismo bili samo neki momci koji stoje bosi pored prašnjavog puta prodajući voće. To ne znači da na drugim mestima ne postoje dobri preduzetnici, čak i na veoma, veoma siromašnim mestima. Radi se o tome da je to sve što mušterije tih preduzetnika mogu da priušte.
So here's an idea for a new kind of economics, a new kind of politics that I call new capitalism. Let's acknowledge that capitalism beats the alternatives, but also that the more people we include, both as entrepreneurs and as customers, the better it works. Let's by all means shrink the size of government, but not by slashing the poverty programs, but by ensuring that workers are paid enough so that they actually don't need those programs. Let's invest enough in the middle class to make our economy fairer and more inclusive, and by fairer, more truly competitive, and by more truly competitive, more able to generate the solutions to human problems that are the true drivers of growth and prosperity. Capitalism is the greatest social technology ever invented for creating prosperity in human societies, if it is well managed, but capitalism, because of the fundamental multiplicative dynamics of complex systems, tends towards, inexorably, inequality, concentration and collapse. The work of democracies is to maximize the inclusion of the many in order to create prosperity, not to enable the few to accumulate money. Government does create prosperity and growth, by creating the conditions that allow both entrepreneurs and their customers to thrive. Balancing the power of capitalists like me and workers isn't bad for capitalism. It's essential to it. Programs like a reasonable minimum wage, affordable healthcare, paid sick leave, and the progressive taxation necessary to pay for the important infrastructure necessary for the middle class like education, R and D, these are indispensable tools shrewd capitalists should embrace to drive growth, because no one benefits from it like us.
Evo ideje za novu vrstu ekonomije, novu vrstu politike, koju ja zovem novim kapitalizmom. Priznajmo da kapitalizam pobeđuje alternative, ali i da što više ljudi uključimo, i kao preduzetnike i kao mušterije, bolje će funkcionisati. Hajde da svim sredstvima smanjimo veličinu vlasti, ali ne režući programe siromaštva, već omogućujući da su radnici dovoljno plaćeni tako da im zapravo ne trebaju ti programi. Ulažimo dovoljno u srednju klasu da bismo učinili našu ekonomiju poštenijom i inkluzivnijom, i poštenijom, istinski takmičarskom, i pod istinski takmičarskom, sposobnijom da stvara rešenja za ljudske probleme koji su istinske vodilje rasta i prosperiteta. Kapitalizam je najveća društvena tehnologija ikada osmišljena za stvaranje prosperiteta u ljudskim društvima, ako je dobro vođen, ali kapitalizam, zbog glavnih umnožavajućih dinamika kompleksnih sistema, neumoljivo teži ka nejednakosti, koncentraciji i slomu. Posao demokratija je da se poveća inkluzija mnogih kako bi se stvorio prosperitet, a ne da omogući nekolicini da gomilaju novac. Vlada stvara prosperitet i rast, stvaranjem uslova koji omogućavaju i preduzetnicima i njihovim mušterijama da napreduju. Balansiranje snage kapitalista poput mene i radnika nije loše za kapitalizam, već je ključno za njega. Programi poput razumske minimalne dnevnice, pristupačne zdravstvene nege, plaćenog bolovanja, i progresivnog oporezivanja neophodnog za plaćanje važne infrastrukture, neophodne za srednju klasu poput obrazovanja, istraživanja i razvoja, ovo su nezamenjivi alati koje bi zli kapitalisti trebalo da prigrle da bi razvili rast, jer niko ne profitira od toga poput nas.
Many economists would have you believe that their field is an objective science. I disagree, and I think that it is equally a tool that humans use to enforce and encode our social and moral preferences and prejudices about status and power, which is why plutocrats like me have always needed to find persuasive stories to tell everyone else about why our relative positions are morally righteous and good for everyone: like, we are indispensable, the job creators, and you are not; like, tax cuts for us create growth, but investments in you will balloon our debt and bankrupt our great country; that we matter; that you don't. For thousands of years, these stories were called divine right. Today, we have trickle-down economics. How obviously, transparently self-serving all of this is. We plutocrats need to see that the United States of America made us, not the other way around; that a thriving middle class is the source of prosperity in capitalist economies, not a consequence of it. And we should never forget that even the best of us in the worst of circumstances are barefoot by the side of a dirt road selling fruit.
Mnogi ekonomisti bi voleli da verujete da je njihova oblast objektivna nauka. Ne slažem se sa time i mislim da je to jednako i alat koji ljudi koriste kako bi podržali i kodirali naše društvene i moralne predrasude o statusu i snazi, zbog čega su plutokrate poput mene uvek trebale da nađu ubedljive priče da ispričaju svakome o tome zašto su naše povezane pozicije moralno pravične i dobre za svakoga: kao, mi stvaraoci posla smo neophodni, a vi niste; kao, ukidanje poreza za nas stvara rast, ali ulaganje u vas će povećati naš dug i dovesti do bankrota našu veliku državu; da smo bitni, a da vi niste. Hiljadama godina, ove priče su se zvale božanskim pravom. Danas, imamo ekonomije kapanja. Koliko je samo očigledno da je sve ovo u korist nas samih. Mi plutokrate treba da vidimo da su Sjedinjene Američke Države stvorile nas, a ne obrnuto, da je napredujuća srednja klasa izvor prosperiteta u kapitalističkim ekonomijama, a ne posledica toga. Nikada ne bismo smeli da zaboravimo da su čak i najbolji od nas u najgorim situacijama bosi po strani prašnjavog puta i prodaju voće.
Fellow plutocrats, I think it may be time for us to recommit to our country, to commit to a new kind of capitalism which is both more inclusive and more effective, a capitalism that will ensure that America's economy remains the most dynamic and prosperous in the world. Let's secure the future for ourselves, our children and their children. Or alternatively, we could do nothing, hide in our gated communities and private schools, enjoy our planes and yachts — they're fun — and wait for the pitchforks.
Kolege plutokrate, smatram da nam je vreme da se posvetimo svojoj državi, posvetimo novoj vrsti kapitalizma koji je inkluzivniji i efektivniji, kapitalizma koji će omogućiti da američka ekonomija ostane najdinamičnija i najprosperitetnija na svetu. Hajde da osiguramo svoju budućnost, budućnost svoje i njihove dece. Ili bismo mogli da ne uradimo ništa, da se sakrijemo u svojim ograđenim zajednicama i privatnim školama, uživamo u svojim avionima i jahtama - zabavne su - i da čekamo na vile.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)