金银岛: 贸易的力量 第二部分,贸易如何改变我们的生活水平

Trade, on the surface, seems simple. You have something I want and I have something you want. So we trade and both of us are better off. Yet, the deepest power of trade is hidden. The unseen side of trade is its impact on how we use our time and the wages we earn. Being able to trade with others, whether it’s our neighbors across the street or our neighbors across the border, gives us the opportunity to rely on others for some or most of the goods and services we enjoy. And that reliance on others, in turn, allows even the poorest among us to have a standard of living that would be unimaginable under self-sufficiency. How does trade transform our standard of living? 从表面上看，雷德似乎很简单。 你有我想要的东西我也有你想要的东西。 所以我们进行交易，我们两个都会过得更好。 然而，贸易的最深层力量是隐藏的。 贸易看不见的一面是它对我们如何使用我们的时间和我们赚取的工资的影响。 能够与他人进行贸易，无论是我们街对面的邻居还是我们边境对面的邻居，都给了我们依靠他人获得我们所享受的部分或大部分商品和服务的机会。 而这种对他人的依赖反过来又使我们中间最贫穷的人也能享有在自给自足的情况下难以想象的生活水平。 贸易如何改变我们的生活水平？

To begin to answer that question in the first part of this essay, I told the story of the Fishers and the Palmers, two newly-wed families shipwrecked on a tropical island, desperately seeking food and water. The Palmers can barely gather enough fish and fresh water to survive. The Fishers are better at both. But even though the Palmers are inferior in both tasks to the Fishers, they still have something to offer in trade—their time. By collecting water for the Fishers, the Fishers have more time to fish. And by fishing for the Palmers, the Fishers create more time for the Palmers to collect water.

为了在这篇文章的第一部分回答这个问题，我讲了渔夫和帕尔默夫妇的故事，这两个新婚家庭在一个热带岛屿上遭遇海难，拼命寻找食物和水。 帕尔默家族几乎无法收集足够的鱼和淡水来维持生计。 费舍尔夫妇在这两方面都做得更好。 不过，尽管帕尔默夫妇在这两方面都不如菲舍尔夫妇，但他们在交易方面仍有一些可以提供的东西——他们的时间。 通过为渔民取水，渔民有更多的时间捕鱼。 通过为帕尔默夫妇捕鱼，渔民为帕尔默夫妇创造了更多的时间来收集水。

In the example I used, the Fishers have a comparative advantage in fishing. Even though they are better water collectors than the Palmers, collecting water means not fishing. It is better for the Fishers to produce water by what I call the roundabout way—by fishing and swapping the fish for water. Similarly, the Palmers have a comparative advantage in collecting water. While they are able to fish, fishing is costly—it means giving time up from water collecting. Better to get fish by collecting water and swapping it for fish.

在我使用的例子中，渔民在捕鱼方面有一个比较优势。 尽管他们比帕尔默家的人更善于收集水，但收集水意味着不能捕鱼。 对于渔民来说，用我所说的迂回方式——钓鱼和用鱼换水——来生产水更好。 类似地，帕尔默家族也有一个比较优势收集水源。 虽然他们能够捕鱼，但捕鱼成本很高ーー这意味着他们要放弃收集水源的时间。 最好是通过收集水和交换鱼来获得鱼。

The result is a higher standard of living for both families. How does this happen?

其结果是两个家庭的生活水平都有所提高。 这是怎么发生的？

The Power of Specialization

专业化的力量

The simple answer is specialization. When we think of the benefits of specialization, we think of learning-by-doing, the extra productivity that comes from doing one thing over and over. This effect of specialization can be very powerful. If you only grow cedar trees, you learn a lot about how they grow and how they die. You learn a lot about how to respond to an increase in the price of cedar trees that’s temporary and one that’s permanent. You become a more effective user of land and human effort and equipment. So it can be productive to have someone specialize in growing cedar trees rather than having the maker of pencils, say, master not just the assembly of pencils, but the growing of the cedar necessary to make the wood of the pencil.

简单的答案就是专业化。 当我们想到专业化的好处时，我们想到的是边做边学，一遍又一遍地做一件事所带来的额外的生产力。 这种专业化的效果是非常强大的。 如果你只种植雪松树，你会学到很多关于它们如何生长和如何死亡的知识。 你会学到很多关于如何应对雪松价格的上涨，这是暂时的，也是永久的。 你成为一个更有效地使用土地和人类的努力和设备。 因此，让专门种植雪松树的人比让制铅笔的人更有效率，比如说，不仅要掌握铅笔的组装，还要掌握制作铅笔木材所必需的雪松的种植。

But learning by doing isn’t the source of the increased productivity of the Fishers and Palmers. No one has actually become more productive. The source of the increased productivity is simply a better assignment of people to the various tasks. It is tempting to say that people have been assigned to what they do best, but that statement has no meaning. After all, the Fishers are the best water collectors and they have given up water collecting.

但是在实践中学习并不是渔夫和帕尔默夫妇提高生产力的源泉。 实际上，没有人变得更有效率。 提高生产力的源泉仅仅是更好地分配人们去做各种各样的任务。 很容易说人们被分配去做他们最擅长的事情，但是这种说法没有任何意义。 毕竟，渔民是最好的集水者，他们已经放弃了集水。

People have been assigned to the tasks that lead to the greatest output where “greatest” takes into account the importance of extra protein relative to diminished water. Trade has allowed the two families to use the one truly scarce resource on the island—the time of the families—as productively as possible.

人们被分配去完成那些产量最大的任务，其中"最大"考虑到了额外蛋白质相对于减少水分的重要性。 贸易使这两个家庭能够尽可能有效地利用岛上真正稀缺的资源——家庭的时间。

In the first installment of this story, I portrayed the Fishers as cold, cruel and unfriendly. They traded with the Palmers out of the narrowest self-interest. What is remarkable about the post-trade assignment of tasks is that it is the assignment of tasks that the Fishers and Palmers would agree to if they were all members of one loving family. Yet the invisible hand of self-interest has induced the two families to create the same level of output they would create in a situation where they all cared about each other.

在这个故事的第一部分，我把费舍尔描绘成冷酷、残忍和不友好的人。 他们出于极其狭隘的自身利益与帕尔默家族进行交易。 交易后的任务分配值得注意的是，如果他们都是一个充满爱的家庭的成员，他们会同意分配任务。 然而，自身利益的"看不见的手"促使这两个家族创造了相同水平的产出，在这种情况下，他们彼此关心。

Trade, fundamentally, is about cooperation. Your skills allow me to leverage mine by specializing, making both of us better off. Notice that there is nothing constant about comparative advantage. If the Fishers manage to escape from the island and a new family arrives that is again better than the Palmers at each activity but in a different ratio, the Palmers could have a comparative advantage at fishing even though nothing about their skills has changed. The lesson is that the best use of your time in a world of trade depends on the skills of others. Our differences create the potential for specialization and the creation of wealth.

从根本上说，贸易就是合作。 你的技能让我可以通过专业化来充分利用我的技能，让我们双方都过得更好。 注意，比较优势并不是一成不变的。 如果渔夫们设法逃离这个岛屿，新的家庭到来，每次活动都比帕尔默家要好，但是比例不同，帕尔默家可以有一个比较优势，即使他们的技能没有改变。 我们得到的教训是，在一个贸易的世界里，如何最好地利用你的时间，取决于其他人的技能。 我们的差异创造了专业化和创造财富的潜力。

Adam Smith’s story of specialization is found in his story of the pin factory. David Ricardo talks about the differences between Portugal and England. The implicit differences between Smith’s and Ricardo’s views of specialization can be found in James Buchanan’s and Yong Yoon’s discussion in “Globalization as Framed by the Two Logics of Trade,”The Independent Review, v. VI, n.3, Winter 2002, pp. 399-405.)

亚当 · 斯密的专业化故事可以在他的大头针工厂的故事中找到。 大卫 · 李嘉图谈到了葡萄牙和英格兰之间的差异。 史密斯和李嘉图的专业化观点之间的隐含差异可以在詹姆斯 · 布坎南和永允在《贸易的两个逻辑框架下的全球化》中的讨论中找到，《独立评论》 ，v. VI，n. 3，Winter 2002,399-405页

Trade based on our differences is one source of specialization. The other comes from Adam Smith’s insight that the division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. Smithian specialization comes from what we might call economies of scale. When there are enough families collecting water or enough families fishing, then someone can make a living fabricating canteens or fishing nets. And when the markets for canteens or fishing nets grows large enough, they can be produced by workers as part of an assembly line or production process rather than by individual craftsmen. Both forms of specialization, from trade based on our differences and from economies of scale based on the expansion of the market, increase our opportunities beyond what they would be under self-sufficiency.

基于我们差异的贸易是专业化的一个来源。 另一个来自亚当 · 斯密的洞察力，即劳动分工受到市场范围的限制。 史密斯专业化来自于我们所说的规模经济。 当有足够多的家庭集水或者足够多的家庭捕鱼时，就可以有人以制造食堂或者渔网为生。 当食堂或渔网市场足够大时，它们可以由工人生产，作为流水线或生产过程的一部分，而不是由个体工匠生产。 这两种形式的专业化，一种是基于我们差异的贸易，另一种是基于扩大市场的规模经济，都增加了我们的机会，超出了在自给自足情况下的机会。

Self-sufficiency is the road to poverty. Trade creates wealth by letting me use your skills along with mine.

自给自足是通向贫穷的道路。 贸易通过让我使用你的技能和我的技能来创造财富。

This story of how trade expands opportunities has nothing to do specifically with international trade—trade across human-created borders. There is nothing significant about the nationality or the birthplace or the accents or language of the people in the story who do the trading.

这个关于贸易如何扩大机会的故事，与国际贸易——跨越人类创造的边界的贸易——没有特别的关系。 在这个故事里，从事贸易的人的国籍、出生地、口音或语言都没有什么重要的意义。

Specialization in a Modern Economy

现代经济中的专业化

What is the lesson of comparative advantage, specialization and the story of the Palmers and the Fishers for our lives?

比较优势的教训是什么，专业化和我们生活中帕尔默家族和渔民的故事？

The lesson of comparative advantage is that while anything we do is worth doing well, not everything we do well is worth doing. Not everything we do well is worth doing. A CEO who is a great cook still orders take-out, even take-out that isn’t as good as what the CEO can make. The cost of cooking isn’t just the grocery bill—it’s the time taken away from managing the company.

比较优势的教训是，尽管我们做的任何事情都值得做好，但并不是所有我们做好的事情都值得去做。 不是所有我们做得好的事情都值得去做。 一个优秀的厨师仍然会点外卖，甚至是不如 CEO 做的好的外卖。 烹饪的成本不仅仅是食品开支，还包括从管理公司所花费的时间。

For more on Coach Bill Belichick, see his official New England Patriots Bio.

想了解更多关于教练 Bill Belichick 的信息，请看他的官方新英格兰爱国者简介。

Consider Jane Galt, the pseudonym of an accomplished journalist who blogs on economics and policy. Evidently, she loves to cook. She recently blogged on the best kitchen gadgets. Her descriptions made we want to buy all of them—Jane writes very well and her passion for cool stuff is contagious. A visitor to the site commented, perhaps tongue in cheek, that the failure of Jane to be hired as a copywriter for a kitchenware catalog was proof that markets don’t work well. But of course, just the opposite is true. Jane remains a journalist precisely because markets do work well—as good as she is at writing catalog copy, she’s even better at journalism. For Jane to become a copywriter for a catalog would be very costly even though she’s very good at it. I presume the kitchenware makers can’t pay her enough to bid her away from her day job as a journalist.

想想 Jane Galt，一个有成就的经济和政策博客记者的笔名。 显然，她喜欢做饭。 她最近在博客上发表了一篇关于最好的厨房用具的博文。 她的描述让我们想要买下所有这些东西ーー简写得很好，她对酷玩意儿的热情具有感染力。 该网站的一位访问者评论说，简未能被聘为厨房用具目录的广告文案就是市场运作不佳的证据，这可能是开玩笑的。 当然，事实恰恰相反。 简仍然是一名记者，恰恰是因为市场运作良好ーー就像她擅长撰写目录副本一样，她更擅长新闻报道。 对简来说，成为一个目录的广告文案将是非常昂贵的，即使她非常擅长。 我估计厨具制造商付给她的工资不足以让她辞去记者的工作。

The same lesson applies to a country. Just because America could make fabulous televisions doesn’t mean we should have a television industry. The cost of producing televisions means less of something else. It might be better to make that something else and trade with foreigners for televisions. Letting people outside the United States sell us televisions and cars and watches and steel and shoes frees up resources that allow us to make more of other things we value.

同样的教训也适用于一个国家。 仅仅因为美国能够制造出惊人的电视机，并不意味着我们就应该拥有一个电视产业。 电视机的生产成本意味着其他东西的减少。 或许更好的做法是制造一些别的东西，与外国人交易换取电视机。 让美国以外的人向我们出售电视、汽车、手表、钢铁和鞋子，可以节省资源，使我们能够生产更多我们珍视的其他东西。

Or consider Bill Belichick, the coach of the New England Patriots who was an undergraduate economics major. He would probably make a fine economist. But he is also a fine football coach. It is tempting to say he’s a better football coach than he is an economist. But that’s not a meaningful statement. What can “better” possibly mean in the everyday sense of the word? Had Belichick lived in the 1930s, he might have chosen economics as his profession. But the productivity of coaching football in 2006 is much higher than it was in 1930. So he coaches. The most productive use of one’s time depends on the skills that others can provide. But it also depends on the value of those skills. When football is more popular as it is today compared to the 1930s, being an economist is too expensive a route for Mr. Belichick.

或者想想 Bill Belichick，他是新英格兰爱国者的教练，主修经济学。 他可能会成为一名优秀的经济学家。 但他也是一名优秀的足球教练。 人们很容易说他是一个比经济学家更好的足球教练。 但这并不是一个有意义的陈述。 在这个词的日常意义上,"更好"可能意味着什么？ 如果贝利奇克生活在上世纪30年代，他可能会选择经济学作为自己的职业。 但是2006年执教足球的效率比1930年要高得多。 所以他教练。 一个人时间的最有效利用取决于其他人所能提供的技能。 但这也取决于这些技能的价值。 当足球比上世纪30年代更受欢迎的时候，对贝利奇克先生来说，当一名经济学家的代价太高了。

These real world examples help us understand the significance of trade in the real world where there are millions of people, millions of products and millions of ways to spend our time working in the marketplace. In what activities do I have a comparative advantage? How can I possibly make the calculations of the ratio of my productivity to yours and everyone else’s? What is my comparative advantage?

这些现实世界的例子帮助我们理解贸易在现实世界中的重要性，在现实世界中，有数百万的人、数百万的产品和数以百万计的方式花费我们的时间在市场上。 我在哪些活动中有比较优势？ 我怎么可能计算出我的工作效率与你和其他人的工作效率的比率呢？ 我的比较优势是什么？

The existence of prices and wages makes it possible to answer these impossible questions. Prices and wages emerge as we trade with one another. They are a by-product of trade. But the prices and wages are in turn what make trade so powerful in an economy with millions of people doing millions of tasks. Prices and wages help us decide what to produce via trade—the roundabout way—and what to produce on our own—the direct way. Suppose fish is $5 a pound and I can catch three pounds of fish in a day. Look at my lecturing wage. If I can earn more than $15 dollars a day lecturing, I lecture and visit the fish market at the end of the day. And so it is with most of the things we enjoy. We produce them the roundabout way by buying them with the money we earn working at the most productive activity the marketplace find for our time.

价格和工资的存在使得回答这些不可能的问题成为可能。 当我们相互交易时，价格和工资就会浮现。 它们是贸易的副产品。 但是，价格和工资反过来又使得贸易在一个有数百万人从事数百万项工作的经济体中如此强大。 价格和工资帮助我们决定通过贸易生产什么ーー迂回的方式ーー以及自己生产什么ーー直接的方式。 假设鱼是5美元一磅，我一天可以捕到3磅的鱼。 看看我讲课的工资。 如果我每天讲课能挣到15美元以上，我就会在一天结束的时候去讲座和参观鱼市。 我们所享受的大多数事物也是如此。 我们用市场为我们的时间找到的最有生产力的活动赚来的钱，用迂回的方式生产它们。

See Friedrich Hayek‘s “The Use of Knowledge in Society” for a discussion of the role of prices in guiding economic decisions. See Leonard Read’s “I, Pencil” for the role of prices in facilitating specialization.)

参见弗里德里希 · 哈耶克的《知识在社会中的应用》 ，讨论价格在指导经济决策中的作用。 参见 Leonard Read 的"i，Pencil"中价格在促进专业化方面的作用。)

Money is not all that matters. I might still teach even if I earned less than $15 a day simply because I love teaching compared to fishing. And I might fish even if it is “inefficient” because I love to fish. Prices and wages allow us to choose how we spend our time in the most productive way possible, where “most productive” includes the non-monetary satisfactions we receive on the job alongside the money. Without prices and wages we would have no way of possibly figuring out the best ways to use our time, what we should specialize in and what we should let others make for us via trade.

钱不是最重要的。 即使我每天挣不到15美元，我仍然可以教书，仅仅因为我喜欢教书，而不是钓鱼。 即使效率很低，我也会去钓鱼，因为我喜欢钓鱼。 价格和工资让我们可以选择如何以最有成效的方式度过我们的时间，其中"最有成效"包括我们在工作中得到的非金钱上的满足以及金钱。 没有价格和工资，我们就不可能找到最好的方式来利用我们的时间，我们应该专注于什么，我们应该让别人通过贸易为我们做什么。

Without prices and wages, how could Bill Belichick possibly know that football makes a good hobby in 1930 but a passionate 80-hour a week job in 2006?

如果没有价格和工资，比尔 · 贝利奇克怎么可能知道足球在1930年是一个很好的爱好，但在2006年却是一份充满激情的每周80小时的工作呢？

The simple story of the Palmers and the Fishers captures many of the essential lessons of trade:

帕尔默夫妇和菲舍尔夫妇的简单故事抓住了贸易的许多重要教训:

• Trade creates wealth. Self-sufficiency is the road to poverty. 贸易创造财富。 自给自足是通向贫穷的道路
• The specialization we see in the world around us is the result of trade. We would do very different tasks and be much poorer if we limited either foreign or domestic trade 我们在周围世界看到的专业化是贸易的结果。 如果我们限制对外贸易或国内贸易，我们的任务就会大不相同，我们也会穷得多
• The truly scarce resource in our lives is time and trade allows us to leverage our time and productivity in extraordinary ways by cooperating with others 我们生活中真正稀缺的资源是时间和贸易，这使我们能够通过与他人合作，以非凡的方式利用我们的时间和生产力
• Not everything we do well as individuals or as a nation is worth doing 不是所有我们作为个人或国家做得好的事情都值得去做
• Whether what we do well is worth doing, depends on the skills and desires of those around us. What is wise and productive in one time and place may not be wise and productive in another. 我们做好的事情是否值得去做，取决于我们周围人的技能和愿望。 在一个时间和地点具有智慧和生产力的东西在另一个时间和地点可能并不具有智慧和生产力

Coping with Economic Change

应对经济变化

What’s the most important element missing from the simple story of the Fishers and the Palmers? In this simple story, everybody gains from trade all the time. In the real world, the distributional aspects of trade are the source of much of the concern some have about globalization and the expansion of trade. But even here, I think the simple story of the Fishers and the Palmers has something to teach us.

渔夫和帕尔默夫妇这个简单的故事中最重要的元素是什么？ 在这个简单的故事中，每个人都一直从贸易中获益。 在现实世界中，贸易的分配方面是一些人对全球化和贸易扩张关切的主要原因。 但即使在这里，我认为渔夫和帕尔默夫妇的简单故事可以教给我们一些东西。

Let’s go back to Treasure Island with the Fishers and the Palmers. Suppose the two families settle into their new life of trade where the Palmers spend their days specializing in water collecting and the Fishers spend their days fishing. They are surviving and decide to stay on the island and raise their families there. One day, something happens that benefits one family and harms the other. Which of the following scenarios would you tolerate and which would you try and stop if you were the ruler of the island:

让我们回到金银岛与渔夫和帕尔默夫妇。 假设这两个家庭开始了他们的新生活，帕尔默夫妇专门打水，而渔夫们则整天钓鱼。 他们生存下来，决定留在岛上，在那里养家糊口。 有一天，一些事情发生了，对一个家庭有利而对另一个家庭有害。 如果你是这个岛的统治者，你会容忍以下哪种情况，哪种情况你会尝试停止:

• One day, a thirsty fisherman shows up on the island. He has dozens of fish in his boat. He is thrilled to swap many of them with the Palmers in return for a coconut shell of fresh water to quench his thirst on the way home. He promises to return the next day and the day after and make the same trade. The Fishers are despondent. Their skills are in lower demand than before. 一天，一个口渴的渔夫出现在岛上。 他的船上有几十条鱼。 在回家的路上，他兴奋地用椰子壳换取新鲜的水解渴。 他承诺第二天和第二天再来，做同样的交易。 费舍尔夫妇很沮丧。 他们的技能需求比以前低了
• One day, a new family is shipwrecked on the island. This family is exactly twice as good as the Fishers at both fishing and water collecting. The Fishers are despondent. Their skills are in lower demand than before. 一天，一个新家庭在岛上遭遇了海难。 这个家庭在捕鱼和集水两方面都是渔民的两倍。 费舍尔夫妇很沮丧。 他们的技能需求比以前低了
• One day, the Palmers discover a new cove on the island where the fishing is much easier. You simply have to reach down and pick up the fish. The Fishers are despondent. Their skills are in lower demand than before 一天，帕尔默夫妇在岛上发现了一个新的海湾，那里的捕鱼更加容易。 你只需要把手伸下去，把鱼捡起来。 费舍尔夫妇很沮丧。 他们的技能需求比以前低了
• One day, the Palmers figure out a way to craft a net. The net lets them catch as many fish as they want. The Fishers are despondent. Their skills are in lower demand than before. 有一天，帕尔默夫妇想出了一个编织渔网的办法。 这张网让他们想捕多少鱼就捕多少鱼。 费舍尔夫妇很沮丧。 他们的技能需求比以前低了

If you were in charge of this island, would you interfere with any of these changes that harm the Fishers? Would you ban imports of fish? Would you keep out immigrants who fish? Would you fence off the cove? Destroy the net? You might want to know if the fall in the Fisher’s well-being is temporary or permanent. But would there be any logic to treating the first two scenarios involving trade, differently from the last two scenarios involving increases in productivity from the cove or the net?

如果你掌管这个岛屿，你会干预这些损害渔民利益的变化吗？ 你会禁止进口鱼类吗？ 你会把捕鱼的移民拒之门外吗？ 你能把海湾围起来吗？ 破坏网络？ 你可能想知道费雪幸福感的下降是暂时的还是永久的。 但是，对于前两种涉及贸易的情形，与后两种涉及从海湾或网络提高生产力的情形有什么不同的逻辑吗？

Our political system treats them very differently. Congress won’t bail out Chrysler if Ford finds a way to make cheaper and better cars. But Congress might bail out Chrysler if Honda makes cheaper and better cars. Is there any fundamental difference between these two examples? Cheaper cars, whether they are from Ford or Honda, ultimately make America a richer country though not every American will benefit right away.

我们的政治体系对待他们非常不同。 如果福特找到一种方法来生产更便宜更好的汽车，国会是不会救助克莱斯勒的。 但如果本田生产更便宜更好的汽车，美国国会可能会为克莱斯勒纾困。 这两个例子之间有什么根本的区别吗？ 更便宜的汽车，不管是福特还是本田，最终都会使美国成为一个更富裕的国家，尽管并不是每个美国人都会立即受益。

Even the Fishers can benefit from economic change. That change creates the opportunity for the Fishers to move away from fishing and do something else productive. There is more to life than fish and water. And the Fishers have other skills outside of fishing. They chose fishing because at the time, that was the most productive activity for them. But they can do other things. Now that cheap fish are available, something else is the best use of the Fisher’s time. And if the Fishers struggle to adapt to the changes on Treasure Island, their children will surely inherit a richer range of choices.

即使是渔民也能从经济变化中受益。 这种变化给渔民创造了机会，让他们放弃捕鱼，转而从事其他生产活动。 生命中有比鱼和水更重要的东西。 除了捕鱼，渔夫们还有其他的技能。 他们选择捕鱼是因为在当时，这是他们最有生产力的活动。 但是他们可以做其他事情。 既然现在可以买到便宜的鱼，那么其他的东西就是对费舍尔时间的最佳利用。 如果渔夫们努力适应金银岛的变化，他们的孩子肯定会继承更丰富的选择范围。

Without an increase in productivity or the opportunity to trade beyond these two families, the Palmers and the Fishers will always live near subsistence. But if the families on the island can now acquire fish more easily, then the Fishers and their children can devote their time to doing other things that enrich their lives and the lives of those around them. The Palmers will have the ability to pay for those things now that fish are cheaper.

如果没有生产力的提高，也没有机会在这两个家庭之外进行贸易，帕尔默一家和菲舍尔一家将永远生活在勉强维持生计的状态。 但是，如果岛上的家庭现在可以更容易地获得鱼，那么渔民和他们的孩子可以把他们的时间用于做其他事情，丰富他们的生活和他们周围的人的生活。 帕尔默夫妇将有能力支付这些东西，现在鱼更便宜。

This is the story of American economic life in the 20th century. Innovation and expanded trade reduce the number of Americans necessary to produce what we want. Yet the number of jobs doesn’t fall. The number of jobs grows steadily with population and the desire to work. As innovation and trade reduce the number of people working in agriculture or manufacturing, that frees up capital and human skills to make other things, things we couldn’t have if we lived in a static world, the antibiotics and iPods and cell phones and heart valves and MRI machines and flat screen TVs. Banal things and glorious things. Things that entertain and things that extend our lifespan. Our skills and the skills of the next generation can turn to creating and making those things.

这是20世纪美国经济生活的故事。 创新和扩大的贸易减少了生产我们想要的东西所必需的美国人的数量。 然而，就业岗位的数量并没有下降。 工作岗位的数量随着人口的增加和对工作的渴望而稳步增长。 随着创新和贸易减少了在农业或制造业工作的人数，这释放了资本和人力技能来制造其他东西---- 如果我们生活在一个静态的世界，我们不可能拥有的东西---- 抗生素、 ipod、手机、心脏瓣膜、核磁共振成像机和平板电视。 陈腐的东西和光荣的东西。 娱乐和延长寿命的东西。 我们的技能和下一代的技能可以转向创造和制造这些东西。

Not everything we do well is worth doing. And even the things worth doing now are not necessarily worth doing tomorrow. Self-sufficiency is the road to poverty. Innovation and trade are the road to prosperity.

不是所有我们做得好的事情都值得去做。 甚至现在值得做的事情明天也不一定值得去做。 自给自足是通向贫穷的道路。 创新和贸易是通往繁荣的道路。