DAVID FRENCH2026年3月27日 George DouglasThe American economy is the envy of the world.美国经济举世称羡。Actual Americans, however, are not happy about their economy, and they’ve been unhappy about it for a long time.但现实中的美国人却对他们的经济并不满意，而且这种不满已经持续了很长一段时间。Both of those statements are true, and until recently, frankly, they stumped me. How could it possibly be rational to feel such prolonged pessimism in the face of such extraordinary economic growth?这两种说法都没错。坦白说，直到最近，这都让我感到困惑。面对如此非凡的经济增长，为何会产生如此持久的悲观情绪，这怎么可能是理性的？Over the last quarter-century, G.D.P. growth in the United States has far outpaced growth in Europe and Japan, two of our primary economic competitors (outside of India and China), to such an extent that many of Europe’s most powerful nations have economies only as prosperous as those of our poorest states. British and French living standards, as measured by disposable income, for example, are more comparable to that of Mississippi, still the poorest state, than to America’s as a whole.过去25年间，美国的GDP增长远超（除印度和中国外的）主要经济竞争对手欧洲和日本，差距大到欧洲许多最强大国家的经济繁荣程度仅相当于美国最贫困的州。例如，以可支配收入衡量，相比美国整体水平，英国和法国的生活水平更接近仍然是美国最贫困州的密西西比州。We hear about a shrinking middle class, but it’s shrinking because the ranks of the rich and the upper middle class are growing. According to an analysis by the economists Scott Winship and Stephen Rose, the core middle class (defined as households with incomes from 250 percent to under 500 percent of the poverty line) shrank from 35.5 percent of families in 1979 to 30.8 percent in 2024. That may not look like much at first glance, but that’s a 13 percent decline.我们常听说中产阶级在萎缩，但这种萎缩是因为富裕阶层和中上阶层在扩大。根据经济学家斯科特·温希普和斯蒂芬·罗斯的分析，核心中产阶级（定义为家庭收入在贫困线的250%至500%之间）占全国家庭的比例从1979年的35.5%下降到2024年的30.8%。乍一看变化不大，但这是13%的降幅。It’s not because Americans are getting poorer. They’re getting richer — much richer. The percentage of Americans who were poor or near-poor (less than 150 percent of the poverty line) plunged from 29.7 percent to 18.7 percent over the same time period. The percentage of lower-middle-class families (150 percent to under 250 percent of the poverty line) shrank as well — from 24.1 percent to 15.8 percent.这并非因为美国人变穷了。他们变富了——远比之前更富有。在此期间，处于贫困或接近贫困（低于贫困线150%）的美国人口比例从29.7%骤降至18.7%。中下阶层家庭（贫困线150%至250%之间）的比例也从24.1%下降到15.8%。During the same period, the share of upper-middle-class and rich Americans exploded. In 1979, 10.4 percent of families were upper middle class, with incomes from 500 percent to under 1,500 percent of the poverty line. By 2024, the percentage had almost tripled, to 31.1 percent, and the percentage of the rich (incomes of 1,500 percent of the poverty line and higher) went from a microscopic 0.3 percent to 3.7 percent, a more than tenfold increase.同期，美国中上阶层和富裕阶层的比例急剧膨胀。1979年，有10.4%的家庭属于中上阶层，其收入在贫困线500%至1500%之间。到2024年，这一比例几乎翻了三倍，达到31.1%，而富裕阶层（收入在贫困线1500%及以上）的比例则从微不足道的0.3%增长到3.7%，增长了十倍以上。To give you a sense for what those numbers mean, the income thresholds that divide the five classes for a family of three, for example, were $40,000, $67,000, $133,000 and $400,000 in 2024 dollars.为了让你理解这些数字的含义，以三口之家为例，划分五个阶层的收入门槛在2024年的美元价值下分别是4万美元、6.7万美元、13.3万美元和40万美元。The result is that immense numbers of Americans live lives that would look extraordinarily prosperous compared with previous generations. For all their justified complaints about housing affordability, Americans on average live in larger and more luxurious homes than Americans in generations past.结果是，与前几代人相比，很大一部分美国人过着看起来异常富足的生活。尽管对住房可负担性有正当的抱怨，但平均而言，美国人住的房子比前几代美国人更大、更豪华。Previous luxuries — things like central air, big-screen televisions, home computers and multiple cars — are now common staples of American life across most, although of course not all, of our social classes.过去的奢侈品——如中央空调、大屏幕电视、家用电脑和多辆汽车——如今已成为美国大多数（当然不是全部）社会阶层生活的标配。America is still the land of opportunity. We can still generate enormous amounts of wealth for tens of millions of people.美国仍然是机遇之地。我们仍然能为数千万人创造巨大的财富。I used to be the annoying person who’d respond to subjective economic malaise by spewing objective economic statistics — all with the goal of arguing that pessimism might be real, but that it’s irrational. After all, aren’t most people satisfied with their own economic conditions, even if they’re concerned about the economy writ large?我过去曾是那个烦人的人，面对主观认为的经济萎靡，我会抛出客观的经济统计数据——所有这些都是为了论证，悲观情绪或许是真实的，但却是不理性的。毕竟，难道不是大多数人都满意自己的经济状况吗，即使他们担心整体的经济大局？Also, isn’t most of this partisan anyway? Economic optimism and pessimism flip depending on who’s in office, with Republicans instantly more optimistic when Republicans win the White House, and Democrats behaving the exact same way when their party controls it.此外，这不也大多是党派之见吗？经济乐观与悲观情绪会根据谁执政而翻转，共和党在赢得白宫时立刻变得更乐观，而民主党在自己的政党主政时也表现出完全一样的行为。A closely divided country will never express broad-based economic optimism.一个分裂为两个均势阵营的国家永远不会表达广泛的经济乐观情绪。But then I read a piece that completely changed my perspective, and once my perspective changed, I saw a reality that I couldn’t unsee — we are miserable in part because we are wealthy.但后来我读到一篇彻底改变我观点的文章，一旦我的观点改变，我就看到了一个无法忽视的现实——我们之所以痛苦，部分原因正是因为我们富有。The piece, which appeared in the Times Opinion section last August, was by Daniel Currell, a management consultant, and it was about the economics of Disney World. It described a park once accessible to most Americans that has become extraordinarily expensive, charging fees that would crush the budgets of countless millions of American families.这篇去年8月发表在《纽约时报》观点版的文章由管理顾问丹尼尔·柯瑞尔撰写，内容是关于迪士尼世界的经济学。文章描述了一个曾经对大多数美国人开放的公园如今变得极其昂贵，其收费足以压垮无数美国家庭的预算。But it’s not just the base-line cost of attendance that has exploded. Disney offers various extra benefits (at extra cost) that create a multitiered experience. Think of the park as creating something like the boarding groups for airline flights. Life is just better if you’re in Group 1.但暴涨的不仅仅是入园的基本费用。迪士尼还提供各种额外付费的特别福利，创造了一种多层次的体验。不妨把这个公园想象成航班的登机组。如果你在第一组，会舒服许多。In one sense, the Disney story is understandable and lamentable, but it’s hardly alarming. Only a small fraction of Americans will go to Disney World in any given year, and if there are many more rich Americans, then it only makes economic sense to create benefits that cater to their tastes (and empty their wallets).从某种意义上说，迪士尼的故事虽然可以理解且令人遗憾，但并不算触目惊心。在任何特定年份，只有一小部分美国人会去迪士尼世界，而且如果富裕的美国人大幅增加，那么从经济角度出发，迎合他们的品味（并掏空他们的钱包）来创造特别福利就顺理成章了。But it’s not just Disney. The examples are all around us. This month, The Wall Street Journal published a fascinating article about the explosive costs of youth sports. The average family’s annual spending on baseball, for example, increased to $1,113 from $660 between 2019 and 2024.但不仅仅是迪士尼。这样的例子在我们身边比比皆是。本月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇非常有意思的文章，讲述了青少年体育运动的爆炸性成本。例如，2019年至2024年间，美国家庭在棒球上的平均年支出从660美元增加到1113美元。That’s partly because the nature of youth sports has changed. When I was young, we all owned a bat, a glove and a few balls. We signed up for Little League at a community table set up outside the entrance of the closest Walmart, and we joined teams with names like Tom’s Oil Change Tigers and Wayne’s Video Wildcats.这部分是因为青少年体育的性质已经改变。在我小时候，我们都有球棒、手套和几个球。我们在最近的沃尔玛超市入口外设立的社区报名桌报名参加小联盟，加入那些名为“汤姆换油店老虎队”或“韦恩录像店野猫队”的球队。And now? Travel sports have taken over, and travel sports are expensive. As The Journal reported, “Teenagers on travel teams are rolling into weekend tournaments wearing a few thousand dollars of apparel, equipment and swag.” Forget the local teams sponsored by local businesses. Now you often find yourself traveling regionally or maybe even nationally for teams called Alliance A or Alliance B, representing different branches of your chosen travel sports company.现在呢？旅行体育已经占据主导，而旅行体育很昂贵。正如《华尔街日报》报道的：“随队外出比赛的青少年穿着价值几千美元的服装、装备和赠品涌入周末锦标赛。”忘记那些由本地企业赞助的本地队伍吧。现在，你常常发现自己要辗转于本地区甚至全美各地，为名为“A联盟”或“B联盟”的队伍打比赛，这些队伍代表着你选择的旅行体育公司的不同分支。If you’re a sports fan, forget about going to see your favorite pro team unless you’ve got a lot of extra cash on hand. As my colleague at The Athletic Henry Bushnell reported in December:如果你是个体育迷，除非手头有大量闲钱，否则就别想去现场看职业队比赛了。正如我的同事亨利·布什内尔去年12月在The Athletic上报道的那样：The price of attending an N.F.L. or M.L.B. game rose, on average, by around 300 percent from 1991 to 2023, according to the Fan Cost Index. The average N.F.L. ticket now costs more than $300.根据“球迷成本指数”，从1991年到2023年，观看一场职业橄榄球大联盟(NFL)或职业棒球大联盟(MLB)比赛的平均价格上涨了约300%。现在，一场NFL比赛的平均票价超过300美元。The cheapest ticket to an average N.F.L. game is around $169, per an Athletic analysis earlier this season — more than every single standard English Premier League ticket except those in the most expensive tier for the most appealing games at Arsenal.根据The Athletic本赛季早些时候的一项分析，一场普通NFL比赛的最便宜门票约为169美元——这超过了英超联赛除阿森纳俱乐部最受关注比赛最高票价之外的所有标准门票价格。And what about flying? To purchase a plane ticket is to open a restaurant menu. You’ve got choice after choice of seating tiers. It’s not just First Class and Coach — boarded back to front — any longer. Nope. We’ve got First Class, Main Cabin Extra, Main and Basic Economy. We’ve got ConciergeKey boarding, preboarding and nine other boarding groups.那坐飞机呢？购买机票就像打开餐厅菜单。你面临着一个又一个的座位等级选择。不再是只有头等舱和经济舱——以从后向前的顺序登机。不，我们现在有头等舱、舒适经济舱、经济舱和基础经济舱。我们有贵宾钥匙登机、预登机和另外九个登机组。The result can be endlessly frustrating. We’re constantly reminded that America is a multitiered society in which a high income buys you a very visible degree of prosperity, and a decent income gives you nothing special at all. There are so many high-income Americans that the entire economy is warping to accommodate the minority at the expense of the majority.结果可能是无尽的烦扰。我们不断被提醒，美国是一个多层次的社会，高收入能为你带来极其明显的富裕享受，而一份体面的收入则什么特殊待遇也带不来。高收入的美国人如此之多，以至于整个经济都在扭曲，牺牲多数人的利益以满足少数人。In other words, we have a Group 1 economy for a Group 9 nation, and it’s no wonder that so many Americans feel economically disadvantaged and insecure.换句话说，我们拥有的是一个为“第一组”设计的经济，但身处的是一个“第九组”的国家，难怪这么多美国人在经济上感到不利和不安全。There is a statistic that backs up this perception. In February of last year, The Wall Street Journal reported that the top 10 percent of earners — households earning about $250,000 or more — now account for 49.7 percent of all spending. That’s a staggering percentage — a percentage that can tilt an entire economy toward the top.有一个统计数据支持这种看法。去年2月，《华尔街日报》报道称，收入最高的10%群体（家庭年收入约25万美元或以上）现在占据了总消费的49.7%。这是一个惊人的比例——一个能让整个经济向顶层倾斜的比例。Extend the analysis to the top 40 percent of earners and that percentage grows to more than 75 percent of all spending. That means that the poorest 60 percent of Americans account for less than a quarter of all spending. Put all this together, and it means that individually rational economic choices are driving the entire economy to cater to the wealthy. And if the top 10 percent are far and away the dominant spenders, that will mean that even members of the upper middle class will strain to feel secure.将分析范围扩大到收入最高的40%人群，这个比例上升到总消费的75%以上。这意味着，最贫穷的60%美国人只占了总消费的不到四分之一。把这些汇总起来，就意味着个体的理性经济选择正在推动整个经济迎合富裕阶层。而且，如果收入最高的10%群体是占绝对主导地位的消费者，那将意味着即使是中上阶层的人也会感到维持体面生活的压力。If you’re a car manufacturer, do you want to build low-margin entry-level cars? Or do you reap much greater rewards by selling the high-margin S.U.V.? If you’re a developer, luxury housing is typically much more profitable.如果你是汽车制造商，你会想生产低利润的入门级汽车吗？还是通过销售高利润的SUV来获得大得多的回报？如果你是开发商，豪华住宅通常利润要高得多。Yes, used cars can still be very nice cars, and there is evidence that building more high-end housing can lower prices by increasing overall supply, but middle-class America is used-car America. The shiny new thing? That’s for someone else.是的，二手车仍然可以是很不错的车，而有证据表明，通过增加整体供应，建造更多高端住宅可以降低房价，但中产阶级的美国是二手车的美国。那闪闪发光的新玩意？那是给别人准备的。The result can be a constant sense that you’re a second-class citizen. You check into hotels eyeing the shorter Gold check-in line. You ride in the rental shuttle past the Preferred kiosk, where the frequent travelers just grab their keys and go.结果可能就是，你不断感觉自己是个二等公民。你在酒店前台登记时，会瞄着那条更短的黄金会员队列。你乘坐租车公司班车经过贵宾服务亭，那里的常旅客拿了钥匙就可以走。Or, much more consequentially, you move to a new city and find that the wait to get established with a new doctor can stretch for months — unless you are able to pay the high monthly fee for concierge medicine. Then you can be seen right away, perhaps with a bonus offer of Botox for the middle-aged patient.或者，更严重的是，你搬到一个新城市，发现要看新医生可能需要等上好几个月——除非你能支付高昂的月费享受“特约医疗”。那样你就能马上得到诊治，也许中年患者还能获得肉毒杆菌的优惠。And what if you live in a city that the top 10 percent love? Well, then even being upper middle class doesn’t feel affluent at all. Six-figure salaries purchase shoe-box apartments, and everything from groceries to gas costs an absurd amount. Soon enough, you’re googling the real estate prices in Chattanooga or Des Moines — surely it’s cheaper there — whether or not you intend to ever leave.如果你住在一个高收入10%群体钟爱的城市呢？那么，即使是中上阶层也根本感觉不到富裕。六位数的薪水只能买得起“鞋盒”公寓，从食品杂货到汽油，一切都贵得离谱。很快，你就会在谷歌上搜索查塔努加或得梅因的房价——心想那里肯定更便宜——无论你是否真的打算离开。In this context, “affordability” doesn’t just refer to the cost of a specific good (or even necessarily the rate of inflation at any given time) but rather to the price of entry into what should feel like a normal American life — one that includes baseball games with the kids, a doctor on call, a home you like, and, at the very least, a basic sense that you haven’t been left behind.在此背景下，“可负担性”不仅仅指特定商品的价格（甚至不一定指特定时期的通胀率），更是指获得那种本应感觉是正常美国生活所需支付的成本——这种生活包括与孩子一起看棒球赛、有随时可以看的医生、一个你喜欢的家，以及至少一种还没有被时代抛弃的整体感觉。Wealth always tempts us to be discontent. We’re cursed with that insatiable desire for more. We’re prone to envy. There is a reason we talk about keeping up with the Joneses.财富总是诱惑我们永不满足。我们被那永不餍足的欲望所诅咒。我们容易嫉妒。这就是为什么我们会谈论“与邻居攀比”。But what if the Joneses inadvertently also make it hard to keep up? What if their sheer economic power changes our communities so much that we’re priced out of our doctors, our homes, our sports and many, many other things we need or want?但如果“邻居”在无意中也让攀比变得困难呢？如果他们强大的经济实力改变了我们的社区，使我们无力支付医疗、住房、体育以及许多其他我们需求或想要的东西呢？In this story, maybe the problem isn’t oligarchy. Elon Musk’s billions don’t tangibly change my life. But all the doctors, lawyers, engineers and accountants in my city do. They’ve bought the houses in the gated community. Their kids are playing travel ball. Because of all their money, the next restaurant is more likely to be a farm-to-table bistro than a Waffle House.在这个故事里，问题也许不在于寡头统治。埃隆·马斯克的亿万财富并没有对我的生活造成直观的改变。但我所在城市的所有医生、律师、工程师和会计师有。他们买下了封闭式社区的房子。他们的孩子在打旅行体育比赛。因为他们手中的钱，新开的餐馆更可能是“从农场到餐桌”的小馆，而不是华夫饼屋。No one is the clear villain in this story, and that’s one thing that makes the problem difficult to solve. We can’t target and defeat a specific set of bad actors who are immiserating America. Everyone is acting in rational self-interest. Why not be a lawyer or an engineer if you can? Why make less money selling food to kindergarten teachers when you can charge architects more? Why not pay for concierge services if they make your life easier? Why not be a concierge physician if the pay and lifestyle are better?在这个故事里，没有谁是明确的坏人，这也正是问题难以解决的原因之一。我们无法找出并击溃一群特定的、正在使美国陷入困境的“坏人”。每个人都在按照理性的自利行事。如果可以，为什么不做律师或工程师呢？既然能向建筑师收取更高费用，为什么要向幼儿园老师卖食品赚更少的钱？如果贵宾服务能让你的生活更轻松，为什么不买呢？如果“特约医疗”医生待遇和生活方式更好，为什么不做呢？It’s these choices, made millions of times by millions of Americans, that are both spurring our growth and — perversely enough — increasing our misery. We can’t have what we can’t afford, and we can’t have what we used to afford, and that combination can make even a middle-class American who may be well-off by historical standards feel very poor indeed.正是这些被数百万美国人重复了数百万次的选择，既刺激了我们的经济增长，也——荒谬地——加剧了我们的痛苦。我们买不起我们得不到的，我们也买不起我们过去能负担的，这种组合甚至可以让一个按历史标准可能已相当富裕的美国中产阶级感到自己确实很穷。David French是观点版面专栏作家，撰写有关法律、文化、宗教和武装冲突的文章。他曾参加过伊拉克自由行动，也是一名宪法诉讼律师。他的最新著作是《分裂必败：美国的分裂威胁以及如何重建我们的国家》(Divided We Fall: America’s Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation)。欢迎在Threads上关注他 (@davidfrenchjag)。翻译：纽约时报中文网点击查看本文英文版。