随着美国经济以健康的速度增长、失业率低迷，许多人会问：工人是否获得了适当的报酬？股市的活跃、高房价以及人工智能创新者财富的飙升，使这一问题更加迫切。在公平和生活水平如此核心的话题上，使用精确衡量和评估薪酬的数据尤为重要。特别是我们所参考的基准需要考虑通胀，并反映工人生产率。
With the U.S. economy growing at a healthy clip and unemployment low, many people ask: Are workers paid appropriately? The buoyancy of the stock market, high home prices and the soaring wealth of artificial-intelligence innovators make the question even more urgent. On a topic so central to fairness and living standards, it’s important to use data that carefully measure and evaluate compensation. In particular, the benchmarks we look to need to account for inflation and reflect worker productivity.
在新冠疫情前的数据中，经过通胀调整后，工资补偿——包括总工资和薪金以及雇主对养老金和储蓄计划的供款——与生产率提升高度一致。2020 年代则是另一番景象。工资显著上涨，但持续高企的通胀削弱了这些收益，导致实际工资未能跟上工人生产率的步伐。难怪调查显示美国人对经济失去信心。
Pre-Covid data, when adjusted for inflation, show that wage compensation—total wages and salaries plus supplements such as employer contributions to pensions and savings plans—closely tracked productivity gains. The 2020s have been a different story. Wages have increased significantly, but persistently high inflation has undercut those gains, so real wages haven’t kept pace with worker productivity. No wonder surveys show Americans losing confidence in the economy.
另一项受到广泛关注但高度误导性的指标是劳动补偿占国内生产总值的份额。它显示工资相对于 GDP 的下降幅度。批评者将劳动补偿份额与利润和资本回报占 GDP 的比例进行比较，而后者正在上升。但这种比较混合了不同的概念。
Another measure that is getting a lot of attention but is highly misleading is the labor-compensation share of gross domestic product. It shows how much wages have fallen relative to GDP. Critics compare the labor-compensation share with the ratios of profits and returns to capital to GDP, which are rising. But such comparisons mix apples and oranges.
劳动补偿份额下降而利润和资本回报上升是自然且不意外的。仔细思考数据，尤其是 GDP 衡量什么以及不衡量什么，有助于解释利润和资本回报的上升如何与工人补偿互补，并提升经济福祉。然而，这一工资补偿占 GDP 的指标被广泛用于暗示公司和资本家正在以工人为代价获得优势。
It’s natural and unsurprising that the labor-compensation share of GDP is falling while profits and returns to capital are rising. Thinking through the data, particularly what GDP measures and what it doesn’t, helps to explain how rising profits and returns to capital are complements to worker compensation and enhance economic well-being. Yet this measure of wage compensation to GDP is widely used to suggest that companies and capitalists are getting ahead at the expense of workers.
国内生产总值（GDP）衡量的是美国国内外企业所生产的产出。它最常见的形式包括消费、企业和住宅投资（主要是新建和改造的支出）以及政府采购（不包括像社会保障这样的转移支付），再加上出口减去进口。当企业增加这类投资时，它会增加GDP，并降低工资占GDP的比例，但显然对经济是积极的，并提升了工人的生产能力。
GDP measures what is produced in the U.S. by both domestic and foreign companies. In its most familiar form, GDP covers spending, including consumption and business and residential investment (largely spending on new construction and improvements) and government purchases (not transfer payments like Social Security) plus exports minus imports. When businesses increase such investment, it adds to GDP and lowers the ratio of wages to GDP but is clearly a positive for the economy and enhances workers’ productive capacity.
重要的是要记住GDP不包括什么。虽然美国工人因其对国内生产的贡献而获得报酬，但美国企业在海外的活动——涉及海外雇员和产生利润、提升资本回报的生产——在很大程度上未计入美国GDP。在标准普尔500指数公司中，估计有三分之一的员工在国外工作，三分之一的收入以及更高比例的利润在海外产生。规模较小的公司国际活动较少。
It’s important to keep in mind what GDP doesn’t include. While U.S. workers are compensated for their contributions to domestic production, U.S. businesses’ activities overseas, involving overseas employees and production that generate profits and boost returns on capital, are largely uncounted in U.S. GDP. Among S&P 500 companies, an estimated one-third of employees work abroad and one-third of revenues and an even higher share of profits are generated overseas. Smaller firms have less international activity.
美国企业子公司在海外生产的商品计入国民生产总值（GNP），但不计入GDP。非美国公司在海外生产的商品也大多不计入美国GDP，但它们也可能显著提升美国消费者的福祉，并为美国工人带来净收益。
Goods produced overseas by subsidiaries of U.S. businesses are counted in GNP (gross national product) but not GDP. Goods produced overseas by non-U.S. firms also largely fall outside of U.S. GDP, but they too may add significantly to the well-being of U.S. consumers and provide net benefits to U.S. workers.
苹果公司是一个典型的美国公司例子，它高度依赖海外生产和全球供应链。几乎所有苹果的 iPhone、笔记本电脑和其他硬件都是由非苹果子公司在海外制造和组装的。国际市场上销售的苹果产品（占 60% 至 65%）不计入美国国内生产总值。美国国内购买的苹果商品占 35% 至 40%，对国内生产总值的影响很小，因为进口大部分抵消了国内消费。但它们提升了苹果的利润，市值已超过 5 万亿美元。对美国消费者、苹果的 8 万名国内员工以及许多其他美国工人而言，其经济效益显而易见。
Apple Inc. is a good modern example of a U.S.-based company that relies heavily on overseas production and global supply chains. Nearly all of Apple’s iPhones, laptops and other hardware are made and assembled overseas by companies that aren’t subsidiaries of Apple. Those Apple products sold internationally (60% to 65%) don’t show up in U.S. GDP. The 35% to 40% of Apple goods that are purchased in the U.S. have little impact on GDP, as imports largely offset domestic consumption. But they have boosted Apple’s profits, and its capitalization now exceeds $5 trillion. The economic benefits to U.S. consumers and Apple’s 80,000 domestic employees and many other U.S. workers are obvious.
美国工人更为关切的是持续的通胀，自 2019 年底以来，消费者物价指数已上涨超过 30%。对许多劳动家庭而言，必需品价格上涨更快。食品价格上涨超过 34%，托儿所和学前教育费用上涨超过 31%。汽油价格上涨 54%，汽车保险和维护费用合计上涨约 50%。对于 34% 的非自有住房家庭，租金上涨 34%。税收也削减了可支配收入。工资可能会跟上，但持续的通胀使得这成为一场艰难的斗争。
U.S. workers’ far larger concern is the persistent inflation that has raised the consumer-price index more than 30% since late 2019. For many working households, prices of necessities have risen even faster. Food prices are up more than 34%, and the cost of child care and preschool more than 31%. Gasoline prices are up 54%, and automobile insurance and maintenance combined are up about 50%. For the 34% of households that don’t own their dwellings, rental costs are up 34%. Taxes, too, cut into take-home pay. Wages may catch up, but the persistent inflation makes it an uphill struggle.
就业增长和低失业率有一定帮助，但美联储的过度宽松货币政策导致了持续高通胀和长期资产价格的上涨，受益于房主和股东。美联储在 2020‑21 年连续实行零利率并大规模购买抵押贷款支持证券，帮助住房价值上涨超过 50%，但这提高了租户成本，并使许多潜在买家望尘莫及。需要注意的是，美联储的 2% 通胀目标意味着价格仍会上涨，但速度会放慢。美联储应实现其 2% 目标。然而，之后它应认真重新考虑将 2% 通胀视为价格稳定的观念。
Employment gains and low unemployment help, but the Fed’s excessive monetary easing has contributed to persistent high inflation and the increased value of long-lived asset prices, benefitting homeowners and stockholders. The Federal Reserve’s consecutive zero rates and extensive purchases of mortgage-backed securities in 2020-21 helped boost housing values more than 50%, but that raised costs for renters and put home prices out of reach for many potential buyers. Note that the Fed’s target of 2% inflation means prices will still rise but at a slower pace. The Fed should achieve its 2% target. After that, however, it should seriously reconsider its notion that 2% inflation amounts to price stability.
勒维先生是胡佛研究所的访问研究员，也是影子公开市场委员会成员。
Mr. Levy is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and member of the Shadow Open Market Committee.
[视频] 《华尔街日报》评论：这就是经济，笨蛋——但到底有多笨？
[video] WSJ Opinion: It’s the Economy, Stupid—but How Stupid?