打破垄断天下白，自由竞争百花开
打破垄断天下白，自由竞争百花开
本文导读Winner takes all不仅仅发生在互联网行业，在金融危机之后，也发生在美国几乎所有的行业。这是美国大公司最好的十年。其市场集中度不断提高，带来更强的盈利。然而，从长期来看，传统行业的集中度提高似乎对美国就业并不利。这些大公司占美国整体就业市场比例偏低，却拿掉了大部分利润。未来自由竞争主义会抬头，对于大公司并不是好消息。
AMERICA used to be the land of opportunity and optimism. Now opportunity is seen as the preserve of the elite: two-thirds of Americans believe the economy is rigged in favour of vested interests. And optimism has turned to anger. Voters’ fury fuels the insurgencies of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders and weakens insiders like Hillary Clinton.
美国曾是一片充满机会与乐观主义的沃土。但现在机会却被视为精英的特权：三分之二的美国人相信经济被既得利益者操控。乐观已化为愤怒。选民们的暴怒助长了唐纳德·特朗普和伯尼·桑德斯的叛逆，也削弱了希拉里·克林顿般的圈内人士。
The campaigns have found plenty of things to blame, from free-trade deals to the recklessness of Wall Street. But one problem with American capitalism has been overlooked: a corrosive lack of competition. The naughty secret of American firms is that life at home is much easier: their returns on equity are 40% higher in the United States than they are abroad. Aggregate domestic profits are at near-record levels relative to GDP. America is meant to be a temple of free enterprise. It isn’t.
这场选举已经发现了大量需要被批判的事情，从自由贸易协定到华尔街的鲁莽。但是美国的资本主义有一个被忽视掉的问题：极度的缺乏竞争。美国公司有一个顽劣的小秘密，那就是在国内会舒服得多：他们的净资产收益率比起在国外会高出40%。国内总利润占GDP比例已经接近历史最高水平。美国本应是自由主义企业的殿堂。然而事实并非如此。
High profits might be a sign of brilliant innovations or wise long-term investments, were it not for the fact that they are also suspiciously persistent. A very profitable American firm has an 80% chance of being that way ten years later. In the 1990s the odds were only about 50%. Some companies are capable of sustained excellence, but most would expect to see their profits competed away. Today, incumbents find it easier to make hay for longer (seeBriefing).
高盈利或许是杰出的创意又或明智的长期投资的表现，但实际上持续的高盈利反而令人心生质疑。一家盈利颇丰的美国公司有80%的几率在十年后依旧如此。而在上世纪90年代，这种几率只有大约50%。少数公司能够持续盈利，但是大多数公司会预期其利润因竞争而减少。现在，企业家们发现保持高利润比起过去更加容易。
You might think that voters would be happy that their employers are thriving. But if they are not reinvested, or spent by shareholders, high profits can dampen demand. The excess cash generated domestically by American firms beyond their investment budgets is running at $800 billion a year, or 4% of GDP. The tax system encourages them to park foreign profits abroad. Abnormally high profits can worsen inequality if they are the result of persistently high prices or depressed wages. Were America’s firms to cut prices so that their profits were at historically normal levels, consumers’ bills might be 2% lower. If steep earnings are not luring in new entrants, that may mean that firms are abusing monopoly positions, or using lobbying to stifle competition. The game may indeed be rigged.
或许你认为选民们会因其雇主如此繁荣而欢欣鼓舞。但是，如果利润没有被用于再投资或被股东消费，高利润会抑制需求。美国公司在国内产生超出其投资预算的剩余现金已达每年8000亿美元，相当于GDP的4%。税务机制鼓励他们将海外利润留在海外。如果反常的高利润是持续地物价走高和工资低迷的结果，那么这会加剧社会不平等的恶化。如果美国的公司降低价格使得利润保持在历史正常水平，消费者的开支会降低2%。如果高额收益没有吸引到新进入者，这意味着公司在滥用其垄断地位，或利用游说扼杀竞争。规则事实上已经被操控了。
One response to the age of hyper-profitability would be simply to wait. Creative destruction takes time: previous episodes of peak profits—for example, in the late 1960s—ended abruptly. Silicon Valley’s evangelicals believe that a new era of big data, blockchains and robots is about to munch away the fat margins of corporate America. In the past six months the earnings of listed firms have dipped a little, as cheap oil has hit energy firms and a strong dollar has hurt multinationals.
对这个高利润时代的一种回应就是静心等待。创造性的颠覆需要时间：之前的利润高峰期，比如上世纪60年代末，都戛然而止。硅谷的狂热派相信大数据、区块链和机器人的新时代将会消化掉美国公司的丰厚利润。在过去的六个月，上市公司的收入有些许下降，因为油价的低迷打击了能源企业并且强劲的美元使得跨国公司受损。
Unfortunately the signs are that incumbent firms are becoming more entrenched, not less. Microsoft is making double the profits it did when antitrust regulators targeted the software firm in 2000. Our analysis of census data suggests that two-thirds of the economy’s 900-odd industries have become more concentrated since 1997. A tenth of the economy is at the mercy of a handful of firms—from dog food and batteries to airlines, telecoms and credit cards. A $10 trillion wave of mergers since 2008 has raised levels of concentration further. American firms involved in such deals have promised to cut costs by $150 billion or more, which would add a tenth to overall profits. Few plan to pass the gains on to consumers.
不幸的是，种种迹象表明现有公司正变得愈加坚不可摧而非受到动摇。微软公司现在的利润是2000年反垄断机构盯上其时的两倍。我们对于普查数据的分析显示，经济中的900多个行业有2/3在1997年之后变得更加集中。从狗粮、电池到航空、电信和信用卡，经济的10%由少数几个大公司支配。自2008年以来总值10万亿美元的并购潮进一步提升了集中度。参与进来的美国公司许诺会降低1500亿美元的成本甚至更多，这会使总利润提高10%。但是鲜有公司计划将这部分收益让渡给消费者。
Getting bigger is not the only way to squish competitors. As the mesh of regulation has got denser since the 2007-08 financial crisis, the task of navigating bureaucratic waters has become more central to firms’ success. Lobbying spending has risen by a third in the past decade, to $3 billion. A mastery of patent rules has become essential in health care and technology, America’s two most profitable industries. And new regulations do not just fence big banks in: they keep rivals out.
变得更大并不是挤垮竞争对手的唯一方法。随着2007~2008年金融危机之后监管愈加严格，在官僚体系中纵横捭阖对于公司的成功变得更加重要。在过去的10年中，游说支出上升了1/3,达到30亿美元。在健康和科技这两个美国最赚钱的领域中，掌握专利法案变得至关重要。新的规则不仅仅把大银行保护在内，而且把竞争者拒之门外。
Having limited working capital and fewer resources, small companies struggle with all the forms, lobbying and red tape. This is one reason why the rate of small-company creation in America has been running at its lowest levels since the 1970s. The ability of large firms to enter new markets and take on lazy incumbents has been muted by an orthodoxy among institutional investors that companies should focus on one activity and keep margins high. Warren Buffett, an investor, says he likes companies with “moats” that protect them from competition. America Inc has dug a giant defensive ditch around itself.
营运资本有限，资源不充足，小公司与各种表格、游说、官僚程序苦苦斗争。这也是美国小公司的创新率达到自上世纪70年代以来最低点的原因之一。机构投资者信奉这样的正统观点：公司应该专注于一项活动并且保持高利润，这抑制了大公司进入新的市场并且挑战现有企业的能力。投资大师沃伦·巴菲特说他喜欢有“护城河”的公司，这会使他们免于竞争。美国的公司已经围绕自己挖掘了一条巨大的“护城河”。
Most of the remedies dangled by politicians to solve America’s economic woes would make things worse. Higher taxes would deter investment. Jumps in minimum wages would discourage hiring. Protectionism would give yet more shelter to dominant firms. Better to unleash a wave of competition.
政客们解决美国经济不景气的大部分方法只会把事情弄得更糟。提高税率将会抑制投资。提升最低工资标准会降低雇佣。贸易保护主义会给国内的公司更多庇护。其实更好的方法是掀起一波竞争浪潮。
The first step is to take aim at cosseted incumbents. Modernising the antitrust apparatus would help. Mergers that lead to high market share and too much pricing power still need to be policed. But firms can extract rents in many ways. Copyright and patent laws should be loosened to prevent incumbents milking old discoveries. Big tech platforms such as Google and Facebook need to be watched closely: they might not be rent-extracting monopolies yet, but investors value them as if they will be one day. The role of giant fund managers with crossholdings in rival firms needs careful examination, too.
第一步要把矛头瞄准备受保护的现有企业。现代化的反垄断组织将会有所帮助。那些会导致更高市占率和更大定价权的并购仍然需要监管。但是公司还有许多方法获利。需要放宽版权和专利法案来防止既有企业从旧的发明中获取利润。如谷歌和脸书一样的大型科技企业需要加强监管：他们或许还未成为抽租的垄断企业，但是投资者是基于他们将会变成垄断企业来给予估值的。大财团的经理们在对手公司有交叉持股的现象，也需要警惕。
The second step is to make life easier for startups and small firms. Concerns about the expansion of red tape and of the regulatory state must be recognised as a problem, not dismissed as the mad rambling of anti-government Tea Partiers. The burden placed on small firms by laws like Obamacare has been material. The rules shackling banks have led them to cut back on serving less profitable smaller customers. The pernicious spread of occupational licensing has stifled startups. Some 29% of professions, including hairstylists and most medical workers, require permits, up from 5% in the 1950s.
第二步是使创业企业和小公司日子更好过一点。关于官僚程序和管制型政府扩张的问题必须引起注意，而不是将其当成反政府茶党的胡言乱语嗤之以鼻。诸如奥巴马医改之类法案使小公司的负担极其沉重。限制银行的法案使银行减少了对利润微薄的小企业的服务。职业注册制度的恶性扩张抑制了创业。包括发型师和医药从业者在内大约29%的职业需要执照，而这个比例在上世纪50年代只有5%。
A blast of competition would mean more disruption for some: firms in the S&P 500 employ about one in ten Americans. But it would create new jobs, encourage more investment and help lower prices. Above all, it would bring about a fairer kind of capitalism. That would lift Americans’ spirits as well as their economy.
竞争之风将颠覆一些企业：名列标普500公司的雇员数约占美国人口的10%。但它将会创造新的岗位，鼓励更多投资并且帮助降低价格。总而言之，它将会带来一个更加公平的资本主义。这将振奋美国人的精神，正如振兴美国的经济一样。
来源：微信公众号 东北偏北