蒲地蓝消炎片:弗里德曼访谈录

                                                                                       弗里德曼访谈录

自由至上：米尔顿·弗里德曼论自由意志论

Taped on February 10, 1999 

1999年2月10日录音

What are the elements of the libertarian movement and how does one of its most illustrious proponents, Milton Friedman, apply its tenets to issues facing the United States today? Milton Friedman, Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences discusses how he balances the libertarians' desire for a small, less intrusive government with environmental, public safety, food and drug administration, and other issues.  

自由意志运动的基本要义是什么？它最为知名的守护人米尔顿·弗里德曼，如何应用这些信条回应当今美国面临的现实问题？在下面的访谈中，胡佛研究院的高级研究员和诺贝尔经济学奖的获得者米尔顿·弗里德曼谈到，作为自由意志论者，如何在“期望政府规模更小、更少管制”与环境、公共安全、食品和药品管理及其他问题之间寻求平衡。

Guests:

嘉宾：

Milton Friedman

米尔顿·弗里德曼

Milton Friedman, recipient of the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize for economic science, was a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution from 1977 to 2006. He passed away on Nov. 16, 2006. He was also the Paul Snowden Russell Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Chicago, where he taught from 1946 to 1976, and a member of the research staff of the National Bureau of Economic Research from 1937 to 1981.

米尔顿·弗里德曼，1976年诺贝尔经济学奖的获得者，1977年至2006年间曾任胡佛研究院高级研究员。弗里德曼于2006年11月16日逝世。1946年至1976年间他执教于芝加哥大学，获得保罗·斯诺登·拉塞尔杰出经济学名誉教授的称号。1937年至1981年，曾任美国国家经济研究局的研究员。

Transcript:

脚本：

ROBINSON Welcome to Uncommon Knowledge, I'm Peter Robinson. Our show today, libertarianism. Our guest, the Nobel prize winning economist, Milton Friedman. For millions of Americans motorcycles represent freedom, rugged individualism. The pleasures of roaring along the open road while the wind streams through your hair, well it would stream your hair if you didn't have a helmet on. When he gets on his bike every motorcyclist has a choice to make, wear the helmet and achieve greater safety, take the helmet off and have more fun. Every motorcyclist has a choice to make that is except in the more than 20 states, including this state of California, that require the use of the helmet by law. And that's just the kind of issue we'll be talking about with Milton Friedman today. As a libertarian, Dr. Friedman believes in the maximum possible freedom for the individual. Yet he also recognizes the need for certain government functions. Which functions? How does he decide when it is legitimate for the government to take some of our freedom away? Dr. Friedman and I won't be talking about motorcycle helmets, but we will be discussing the larger issues of how a libertarian looks at public safety, protecting the environment, or deciding the right size of government itself. We begin by asking Dr. Friedman just what is a libertarian.

罗宾逊（以下简称罗）：欢迎各位收看“非同寻常的知识”（Uncommon Knowledge）节目，我是主持人彼得·罗宾逊。今天我们要谈的话题是自由意志论。我们的嘉宾，是诺贝尔经济学奖的得主米尔顿·弗里德曼。对于数百万美国人而言，摩托车象征着自由，这是一种粗陋的个人主义精神。在宽敞的公路上呼啸而过，大风吹拂着你的长发，如果不戴头盔的话。每位摩托车手跨上座骑时都会面对以下两种选择：戴上头盔保障安全，丢掉头盔享受快感。这种情况在包括加州在内的20个州属于例外，因为这些地区的法律明文规定，摩托车手驾驶时必须带上头盔。而这正是我们今天要与弗里德曼博士讨论的问题。作为一名自由意志论者，弗里德曼博士认为个体应获得最大程度的自由。不过，他也认为确实需要保留某些政府职能。他说的到底是哪些政府职能呢？他如何界定政府在何时可以合法地剥夺我们的个人自由？弗里德曼博士和我要探讨的不是摩托车头盔的问题，而是一些更为重大的问题，如一名自由意志主义者如何看待公众安全、保护环境，以及应如何确定政府自身的规模等问题。让我们开始先来问弗里德曼博士这样一个问题：什么是自由意志论者？

ROBINSON The typical definition of libertarianism in my mind is that a libertarian wants the smallest, least intrusive government consistent with...

罗：在我看来，自由意志论者的典型定义可以是这样的，他希望获得规模最小、干预最少的政府，同时......

FRIEDMAN Consistent with the maximum freedom for each individual to follow his own ways, his own values, as long as he doesn't interfere with anybody else who's doing the same.

弗里德曼（以下简称弗）：对，同时希望，只要不干预其他个体追逐自由的权利，每个个体获得最大程度的自由。

ROBINSON Ok, consistent with the maximum freedom of each individual as long as he doesn't interfere with other individuals pursuing their own freedom.

罗：好的，只要不干预其他个体追逐自由的权利，每个个体都可以获得最大程度的自由。

FRIEDMAN But as a matter of fact there are two really different versions of libertarianism. The more extreme version of libertarianism has one central principle- it is immoral to initiate force on anyone else. That's the prime view, that's the Ayn Rand type of libertarianism.

弗：但事实上，自由意志论出现了两个不同的流派。更为极端的自由意志论只有一个中心原则，即不作恶。这是它的首要观点，也是安·兰德（Ayn Rand）式的自由意志主义。

ROBINSON So the coercive power of the state is immoral in and of itself...

罗：因此，国家的强制力是不道德的，其自身......

FRIEDMAN Immoral in and of itself..and all you need to know to know that something of the state is immoral is whether it involves the initiation of force. That's one brand, now there's another brand which is one I would be favorable to which you could call consequentialist libertarianism. And it's the one you've just defined.

弗：不道德的，其自身......你要清楚的是，无论是否动用武力，国家都是邪恶的。这是一类，现在我们讨论另外一类，也是我所支持的，你可以称之为因果自由意志论（consequentialist libertarianism），也就是你刚才所定义过的自由意志论。

ROBINSON Well you've just defined it, but thank you, I'll take the credit. I see the way you work with graduate students...Now, if I may, let me take you through a series questions that are floating around in the modern mind and ask how a libertarian addresses them. Question number one, the environment. Now, it would strike a lot of people living in Manhattan that Central Park is very important to their lives and that if Milton Friedman had his way, it would be turned over to the market and buried under skyscrapers and parking lots within 18 months or however long it takes Donald Trump to put the structures up.

罗：噢，这是你给出的定义，谢谢你，我只是借花献佛而已。我了解你和学生们一起合作的方式…… 现在，如果可以的话，请允许我来问你几个问题，这些问题是现代人非常关注的，也需要得到自由意志主义者的回应。第一个问题，环境。现在，对于生活在曼哈顿的人们来说，中央公园对他们的生活非常重要。如果按照米尔顿·弗里德曼的说法，可以把公园交给市场，那么，18个月内这里将摩天大厦林立，遍布停车场。至于唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）需要多久才能将地基打好，我们且不去管他。

FRIEDMAN It doesn\'t take a governmental agency to maintain the theaters in New York. It doesn\'t take a government agency to maintain the museums, the art museums in New York, the Museum of Modern Art is not a government museum, it's a private. It happens to be there two kinds, there are private-for-profit enterprises and not-for-profit enterprises like the museum, like the opera house and so on. In the same way, if Central Park were not owned by the government, it never would've become the filthy place it became. You forget, what happened to Central Park. We for years, for some years, a long long time ago, lived on Central Park West when we were in New York. [ROBINSON Pretty good address] This was during the war. [ROBINSON Even then it was a very good address.] It wasn't a bad address but it wasn't particularly good. But we were able to take our children down to the park when they were babies and leave them with a teenage sitter and no one was worried about safety. But in more recent years, until the very recent years, Central Park came to be a place where you wouldn't dare to do that, it wasn't safe. That was because it was a government park. The central principle is that nobody takes care of somebody else's property as well as he takes care of his own. If Central Park were privately owned it would be advantageous to provide recreational spaces.

弗：在纽约，根本不需要政府机构出面维持歌剧院的营运。纽约的博物馆、艺术博物馆同样如此，现代艺术博物馆就不归政府所有，而是私人机构。有两种形式的机构，即私有营利性机构和公益性机构，例如博物馆、歌剧院等等。按照同样的方式，如果中央公园不归政府所有的话，就永远不会变成眼前的垃圾场。你们忘记了中央公园曾经的遭遇。许多年前，很久很久以前，当时我们还住在纽约，我们曾在中央公园以西住了一些年。[罗：真是不错的地点。] 那是在战争期间里。[罗：即便在那时，也是一处非常宜人的所在。]那里不算差，但也不是特别好。不过，那时候我们带孩子去公园，把他们交给十几岁大的少年看管，完全不必担心孩子的安全。但这些年里，尤其是近几年，中央公园变成了令人不敢停留的场所，它不再安全了。因为它是由政府管理的公园。关键原因在于没人会在意其他人的财产情况，人们只关心自己的财产。如果中央公园划归私有，就有可能变成人们娱乐消遣的场所。

ROBINSON Now you just touched on something very important because one of the things I\'m trying to distinguish here is the extent to which your libertarianism is effectively a moral position, you do it because it's right and just, it creates the greatest conditions of justice and the extent to which you do it because it works. And it sounds to me as though you have both reasons pretty well wrapped up.

罗：你刚好触及到了非常重要的话题，因为我想要区分的一点是，在某种程度上，你所谓的自由意志论实际上是一种道德境界，你这样做是因为它是正确且公平的，它创造了最大的公平，而且某种程度上，你这样做也是因为它切实可行。对我而言，你有上述两个很好的理由。

FRIEDMAN Absolutely, if it didn't work...the main thing is, if it didn't work, it would be an impossible goal. The only reason there's any chance of keeping government limited is because government is so inefficient and does so poorly.

弗：绝对如此。重点在于，如果不可行的话…… 那就是一个无法实现的目标。我们有机会将政府的职责限制在一定范围之内的唯一理由便是，政府的工作效率太低，而且又无能为力。

ROBINSON During the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century, government in Britain was very limited and economic enterprise went all but unregulated yet that wasn't exactly a golden age now was it?

罗：19世纪工业革命期间，英国政府的职责极为有限，那时，所有的商业企业均不受管制，那不正是你所说的黄金时代吗？

GHOST OF CAPITALISM PAST

资金主义幽灵已逝

ROBINSON Again and again you will hear that we've tried, the Western world has already tried laissez-faire, let her rip economics and it ended up with the London that Charles Dickens portrayed "dirty, filthy, child-labor" just a terrible mess. What do you do..how did that come to be?

罗：你不只一次地听到人类所作的各种尝试，西方世界尝试过“放任政策”（laissez-faire），任经济自行发展，最终使伦敦陷入狄更斯笔下“肮脏、丑陋、童工”的困境。你做了事 …… 会有怎样的结果呢？

FRIEDMAN It was a terrible mess but what cleaned it up?

弗：那的确是一场可怕的灾难，但为了收拾这个烂摊子，他们做了些什么呢？

ROBINSON Disraeli and his social...the child labor laws...

罗：迪斯累利和他的社会......童工法......

FRIEDMAN No, no what cleaned it up was the progress of private enterprise because you had a...the reason it was so messy was because you had to burn coal and the kind of coal that was available in Britain was very smokey and messy. And once you were able to use oil, natural gas, better furnaces, all of those things is what it made it possible to clean London up. Now so far as child labor is concerned..what happens is, what happens in the picture that's drawn of Britain in the 19th century is that there's no image of what went before. Of why is it that all these people from the farming, from the rural areas came to the city. Did they come to the city because they thought it would be worse? Or because they thought it would be better? And was it worse or was it better? In the early days, you know there are very few things that are 100% black or 100% white, there are various shades of grey. And what we aim for is the least shade of grey that's possible. I'm not going to say that all was rosy in Britain at the time, it wasn't. But look around the world today. Where is it least rosy? -In those countries where things that are run by the government not in those countries where private enterprises are. And the same thing was true in Britain, the conditions in the rural areas, on the farms, were far worse than conditions in the city, but they were not visible, they were hidden, nobody saw them. [ROBINSON Dickens didn't stroll around the countryside..] Right..  

弗里德曼：不，私有企业的发展才使这一切结束，因为你有…… 烧煤或者类似的燃料，使英国变得烟气缭绕、脏乱不堪。一旦人们用上石油、天然气以及更好的炉子，伦敦才重新变得干净整洁起来。说到童工问题…… 19世纪是英国的衰落事情，当时发生的，所发生的事前所未有。为什么农村人会从乡下来到城市？难道他们来到城市是因为这里的生活更差？还是因为这里的生活更好呢？这里的生活实际上是更好还是更差呢？早些时候，很少有非黑即白的情况，很多事情都是不好不坏。而我们的目标则是让事情尽可能不那么糟糕。我并不是在说那时候的英国一切都很美好，事实上也并非如此。但看看当今世界，哪里的情况最糟？是那些政府掌管的国家，而非私营企业主导的国家。正如当时的英国，乡下、农场的条件远远不如城市。但这些都是不可见的，被隐藏起来了，没人注意到。[罗：狄更斯也没到乡下去走一圈儿......]没错。

ROBINSON So what you're saying then is that this mental image that drives even to this day so much of the environmental debate is simply, it may be true as far it goes, but you\'d advise greater historical understanding.  

罗：你的见解是：这种精神意象推动世界平衡地发展至今，大多数环境争议看来很简单，至少到目前为止是这样。但你建议人们更深刻地理解历史。

FRIEDMAN But not only historical, present. Where are the most polluted areas in the world? [ROBINSON Today.] Today. In Russia! [ROBINSON Russia? Right.] Why? Because everything in Russia was controlled by the government. There were no, and I keep emphasizing, nobody's going to take care of somebody else's property as well as they'll take care of his own.

弗：不仅仅是历史，还包括现在。世界上污染最严重的地区在哪里？[罗：现在]。对，就是现在。是俄罗斯！[罗：俄罗斯？对。]为什么呢？因为俄罗斯的政府控制着一切事物。正如我一直在强调的，没有人会像在意自己的财产那样照看他人的财产。

ROBINSON But who should take care of the resources that we all share, such as the air we breath?

罗：但谁应该看护我们所有人的共有资源？比如说我们呼吸着的空气？

BREATHING LESSONS

空气的例子

ROBINSON I want to push you one more time on the environment- air. Here in California it turns out there are 30 million people who like to breath. And we have, particularly in the L.A. basin, smog beginning in the 1970's that the environmental movement begins to...

罗：我想再一次追问环境的问题，即空气这个话题。在加州共有3000万人口呼吸空气，尤其是在洛杉矶盆地，从1970年代开始冒出了一些烟雾，于是开始出现环保运动......

FRIEDMAN Oh no, the smog went back 200 years. There are stories of the Indians describing that as a smoggy area.

弗：不对，烟雾的历史可以追溯到200年前。印地安人曾讲述过关于烟雾的故事。

ROBINSON So part of what's going on is it's natural.

罗：因此，这种事情部分而言是很自然的。

FRIEDMAN But no doubt, the thing about that is there is an argument for government requiring those who impose costs on third parties to pay for them. And the point is with respect to smog, the efficient way to do it is to use the market.

弗：但无疑，关于政府是否要求第三方赔付，人们存在着争议。事情的关键在于烟雾，有效的解决途径仍然是通过市场。

ROBINSON How do you create property rights in the air, say?

罗：你怎么可以创造出空气的产权呢？

FRIEDMAN When you do it now, by selling the right to emit a certain amount of pollutants into the air. You now have a market in effluent rights.

弗：在具体实施上，可以向人们向空气中排出污染物的权利。现在就有出售排泄污染物权利的市场。

ROBINSON For large manufacturing concerns..

罗：那是大型制造业应关注的问题。

FRIEDMAN For manufacturing concerns, which is where most of it comes from. And you do the same by charging essentially making it requirement that automobiles have to have [ROBINSON The catalytic convertors] Catalytic convertors and that's effectively making individuals be responsible for costs they impose others. Remember what I said is- the key feature of a libertarian view is that you should be free to do what you want provided you don't prevent other people from doing the same thing. And so the only case for government is when it is not feasible for market arrangements to make individuals pay, to compensate others for any harm they impose on them. If you and I enter into an agreement to buy or sell something, well that's our business. You may lose, I may lose , or more likely we're both going to win. We\'re not going to enter into it unless both of us think it's better for us. But there are cases like the power plant that emits smoke that dirties my shirt in which the company is imposing a cost on me for which I'm not being compensated. Those are the only cases, but you have to qualify that by noting that when government enters in, it also is emitting smoke, it\'s also imposing cost on third parties because it's always a very imperfect arrangement and moreover it always has to collect taxes and the process of collecting taxes is, as I always say, there's a smokestack on the back of every government program.

弗：大型制造业是污染物的重要来源。可以像上面说的那样如法炮制，向汽车排放这类行为收费，形成一种需求。[罗：催化转化器]催化转化器，就是有效地让个体对其强加给别人的成本负责。还记得我说过的吗？自由意志论者的主要特征是自由地做你想做的事，前提是不要妨碍其他人做同样的事。政府的唯一职责便是，当市场无法顺利要求个人支付对他人的伤害时，政府可强制实施。如果你我达成了一个买卖协议，那是我们之间的交易。你我都有可能蒙受损失，当然也有可能双赢。如果买卖双方不认为对自己有利，就不会展开合作。但还有其他的情况，例如发电厂排出的烟雾弄脏了我的衬衫，这种情况下，该公司将被强制赔偿我的损失。这是唯一的情况，但必须注意到，当政府介入此事，政府必须发对排放，并强制第三方赔付，因为情况总是不好的。此外，政府还必须征税，就像我一直所讲的，在每项政府计划背后都有一个大烟囱。

ROBINSON A smoke stack on the back of every government program- by that you mean, a distortion in the marketplace..

罗：你的意思是，政府计划背后的大烟囱导致了市场的扭曲？

FRIEDMAN Right, imposing a cost on third parties for which the third parties are not compensated.

弗：没错，将成本强加给第三方，而他们并未因此得到补偿。

ROBINSON And so the key characteristic in which you find a circumstance where it's legitimate for the government to intervene would typically be where property rights are vague or diffuse, is that correct?

罗：因此，关键之处在于，你发现了这样一种境况，在政府得以合法介入的领域，产权是模糊或者分散的，我说得对吗？

FRIEDMAN And where it's almost impossible to make them precise. That is a problem in the case of the power plant is that there is no way in which you can say you have to get the agreement of each of the persons whose shirt your going to dirty and pay him for the privilege of dirtying their shirt before you can do it.

弗：并且在这个领域中几乎不可能求得精确的计算。这产生了一个问题，即发电厂无法与每一个衬衫被弄脏的人都签定协议，而且，在出现事情之前发电厂也不能为此付钱，从而获得弄脏别人衬衫的特权。罗：因此，涉及到环境问题时，环保主义者的工作确实是有意义的，如果在这一领域出现极端事件……弗：但只要你观察一番，在实际中的大多数情况下，一些世界和平研究中心（PERC）的专家，例如特里·安德森(Terry Anderson)（我想他肯定在你的采访计划中），已经证明，很多情况下，市场规划远比命令和控制管理有效得多。

罗：但在一些特定领域，如食品和药物等涉及公众安全的领域，只有通过政府才能获得保证，不是吗？

DRUG-STALL COWBOYS ROBINSON The Food and Drug Administration which regulates everything from the drugs that pharmaceutical companies may put on the market to the ingredients in items we purchase off the grocery store shelves. Let me give you an example- Thalidomide [FRIEDMAN Everybody's favorite example...] Well I may be leading with my chin on this one but I'm going to lead with it anyway. 50's and 60's it is marketed in Europe as a drug to help women get through the nausea that they sometimes experience during pregnancy. The Food and Drug Administration said it had been inadequately tested in the United States and forbade it to be marketed in this country with the result that thousands of children were born with horrible birth defects in Europe to mothers who had used Thalidomide but that didn't happen to American children, because the FDA had intervened and kept that drug off the market. Thank god for the FDA, right? 

药房失速牛仔

罗：从制药公司可能投放市场的药品，到杂货店货架上商品的成分，食品和药品管理局无所不管。举个例子，镇静剂萨立多胺（Thalidomide）[弗：每个人都感兴趣的例子……]好吧，或许我举这个例子不太恰当，但不管怎么说我还是打算说这个例子了。50年代和60年代，萨立多胺在欧洲被标榜为抑制妇女怀孕期恶心的药物。食品和药品管理局认为，该药在美国未能通过所有测试，禁止其在美国出售，而在欧洲，由于母亲服用萨立多胺，导致数千名新生儿出现可怕的先天缺陷。因为食品和药品管理局阻止了该药销售，这种事情没有发生在美国儿童身上。感谢上帝，感谢食品和药品管理局，对吧？ 

FRIEDMAN Wrong [ROBINSON Alright, why?] this is a case in which they did save lives, this was a good case, but suppose they are equally slow in adopting a drug which turns out to be very good and beneficial. How would you ever see the lives that are lost because of that? You're an FDA official, you have a question of whether to approve or disapprove a new drug. If you approve it and it turns out to be a bad drug like Thalidomide, you're in the soup, your name is going to be on every front page [ROBINSON cost me my job, I get hauled up to Congress to testify..] right. On the other hand if you disapprove it, but it turns out to be good, well then later on you approve it four or five years later, nobody's going to complain about the fact that you didn't approve it earlier except those greedy pharmaceutical companies that want make profits at the expense of the public, as everybody will say. So the result is that the pressure on the FDA is always to be late in approving. And there's enormous evidence that they have caused more deaths by late approvals than they have saved by early approval. 

弗：错！[罗：好吧，那是为什么呢？]在这个事件中，食品和药品管理局拯救了生命，是正面的案例。但设想一下，如果有一种药非常好，食品和药品管理局批准的速度与这件事的处理速度一样慢，那怎么办？你曾看到过因此而丢掉性命的事情吧。假设你是一名食品和药品管理局的官员，你负责批准一种新药是否能够销售。如果你批准了，结果该药像萨立多胺一样是一种不好的药，那你就惹大麻烦了，你的名字将出现在所有报纸头条。[罗：我会丢了工作，并被传召到国会听证……]没错。另一种可能是你没有批准一种好药上市，直到四五年后你才批准，除了那些想从公众身上获取利润的贪婪的制药公司（每个人都这么说）之外，没人会因为你批准晚了而抱怨。结果是迫使食品和药品管理局总是批准的很迟。有足够证据显示，食品和药品管理局因迟缓批准而导致死亡的人数比因此获救的人数要多得多。 

ROBINSON So your view is abolish the FDA.. 

罗：所以你认为应该撤销食品和药品管理局了…… 

FRIEDMAN Absolutely [ROBINSON And what comes up in its place?] what comes up? It's in the self-interest of pharmaceutical companies not to have these bad things. Do you think the manufacturer of Thalidomide made a profit out of Thalidomide or lost? [ROBINSON I see, ok.] And you have to have..people should be responsible for harm that they do. It should've been possible...[ROBINSON So tort law takes care of a lot of this.] Absolutely, absolutely.. 

弗：当然。[罗：此后由谁来代替呢？]能有什么事发生？不做坏事符合制药公司的自身利益。你觉得制造萨立多胺的厂商是从中受益了，还是受损了？[罗：好的，我明白了。]做坏事的人必须为他的所作所为承担后果。这可能已经发生了……[罗：这种行为大多会受到侵权法的惩治]当然，绝对没错。  

ROBINSON Alright, if Lilly or Merck comes up with a drug that does me harm, I go after them, I join a class action with everybody else who's taken that pill and we sue them for billions of dollars and wipe out their share holders equity. Seeing that, they have every interest to be extremely rigorous in testing that drug before they make it available. 

罗：好，如果礼来和默克公司生产的药物损害到我，我就同其他受到伤害的人一起提出集体诉讼，控告制药厂商，让他们赔付数十亿美元，并毁掉他们股东持有的公司股票。有鉴于此，在把药品投放市场以前，要对药品进行严格的测试，制药厂商无不对此非常关心。 

FRIEDMAN Let me give you a different example. The rules imposed on airlines, for safety. Who has the most interest in preventing airline accidents. 

 弗：我给你一个不同的例子。航空公司的安全强制规定。谁与防止飞行意外关系最大？ 协作

罗：除了乘客自身，就是航空公司了。

弗：乘客不见得要比航空公司承担更大的责任，因为乘客中也包括飞行员。[罗：是的，当然了。] 政府为什么要提高航空安全？他们要怎么做呢？他们如何能为所有人增加补贴，以改善航空安全呢？

罗：米尔顿·弗里德曼真的反对所有健康和安全监管吗？让我来试探他一下：公众有权了解自己购买的食物的营养成分吗？ 私有标签

罗：在我们国家肥胖是个很大的问题。[弗：的确如此……] 但直到近几年，减肥者在杂货店拿起一包食品，想要弄清成分、碳水化合物含量、热量、脂肪等等，都很难做到。所以，政府制定了一些相当温和的规定，要求在杂货店出售的产品包装上提供营养成分表。现在你能知道这个的脂肪含量高，那个脂肪少，我买这个。这难道不是温和的、完全被公众接受的政府干预吗？

弗：现在，让我们继续…… 政府还可以阻止有用信息的传播。我来给你举个最简单的例子 —— 阿司匹林，你我都知道，每隔一天服用一片阿司匹林，可减少心脏病发作的危险。但是，这一条不允许出现在阿司匹林的包装上。[罗：是因为……] 食品和药品管理局（FDA）禁止这样做，标签内容信息由他们控制。目前，一些有自由派倾向的药品制造商提议，试图推动FDA同意他们将这个信息放在产品上，FDA的答复跟我们的回答一样：你可以选择。FDA不允许他们这样做。因此，如果顾客确实想知道产品成分，他们可以自主决定把它印在包装上。包装上印有成分表的产品可能比没有成分表的更能吸引顾客。但现在，我始终觉得困惑，那些华盛顿办公室里的专家们既不认识你、不认识我，也不认识我们的孩子，为什么他们却比你我更清楚我们想要怎样的包装，以及我们的孩子想知道什么信息。

罗：再一次，权衡一下，撤销FDA。撤销政府监管吗？

弗：当然。最初对FDA的要求是保证被批准药物的安全性，而非疗效。借助萨立多胺丑闻通过了凯弗维尔（Keith Elver）修正案，将FDA的权限扩大，必须同时确保药品的安全和疗效，这就使得药品批准成本大大增加。如果你想折中一下，可以采用之前的标准，那么，FDA只保证药物是安全的，而不对药效做出判断。

 罗：食品及药物管理局只是确保医药公司达到旧声明的标准，首先是不造成伤害。这种药也许不能改变你的生活，但也不会伤害你，那么，它就是可以上市销售的。好吧，现在我来谈谈另一个案例，这个案例我认为对于米尔顿的自由意志论极具挑战性。好吗？如果你愿意的话，可以在我给你一击之前做个深呼吸：公民权。

弗：你所说的公民权是指……？

罗：我所谓的公民权，举例来说，是指20世纪50年代南部的杰姆·克劳法案。

弗：但那是一个政府干预过多的例子。[罗：是吗？但我认为那一时期的南部，税率相对较低，政府管制也相对较少……]不，并非如此，但政府的确实行了隔离。政府强制隔离出白人区与黑人区，同时，法令强制黑人只能坐在公交车的后座。这些都是政府法令！

罗：你的意思是，如果没有政府的法令，这些情况就不会发生了？

弗：如果没有政府的法令，也许这些将会是个循序渐进的过程。而且，只会发生在一些地方，而不是随处可见。看一下没有这些法律的北部就知道了。别误会我，那里也有歧视，这是毫无疑问的，对不同人种无疑也会有些负面影响，但是，没有南部的法令，这一切会瓦解得更迅速、更容易。如果非要为自由意志论引证举例的话，这就是最好的例子。

罗：米尔顿·弗里德曼告诉我们，为什么要对政府在我们生活中的作用加以限制，那么，如何限制呢？现在，我们就来探讨联邦政府本身的结构。

       内阁重组

ROBINSON I have a list here of the 14 cabinet departments, now 14 is a lot for television so I want to just to go right down the list quickly and have you give me a thumbs up or thumbs down, keep them or abolish them? Department of Agriculture?

罗：我这里有14个政府部门的列表，14个部门一一详述过于繁多，所以我只简述它们的名字，你来投赞成或反对票，来表示是保留还是撤消这些部门好吗？农业部？

FRIEDMAN Abolish.

弗：撤消。

ROBINSON Gone. Department of Commerce?

罗：商务部？

FRIEDMAN Abolish.

弗：撤消。

ROBINSON Gone. Department of Defense?

罗：国防部？

FRIEDMAN Keep.

弗：保留。

ROBINSON Keep it? Department of Education?

罗：保留国防部？那教育部呢？

FRIEDMAN Abolish.

弗： 撤消。

ROBINSON Gone. Energy?

罗： 能源部？

FRIEDMAN Abolish. Except that energy ties in with military.

弗：撤消。除了与军事职能相关的部门。

ROBINSON Well then we shove it under defense, the little bit that handles the nuclear, plutonium and so forth goes under Defense but we abolish the rest of it. Health and Human Services?

罗：那么，我们出于防御目的对此进行精简，保留与核能、 钚等相关部份，并移交国防部，其余全部撤销。那卫生与公共服务部门呢？

FRIEDMAN There is room for some public health activities to prevent contagion, such a thing as for example..

弗：应当为预防传染等公共卫生活动预留空间，例如……

ROBINSON So you keep the National Institute of Health say and Center for Disease Control..

罗： 所以，你认为应当保留国家卫生研究所，以及疾病预防控制中心？

FRIEDMAN No, no, no those are mostly research agencies..No, no that's a question of whether the government should be involved in financing research.

弗： 不，不，不是保留那些研究机构。国家是否应当参与金融研究是一个值得探讨的问题。

ROBINSON And the answer is no? 

FRIEDMAN Well that's a very complicated issue and it's not an easy answer with respect to that.

罗：那答案是否定的？

弗：这个问题非常复杂，难以简单作答。

ROBINSON We'll eliminate half of the Department of Health and Human Services?

罗： 我们要把卫生与公众服务部砍掉一半吗？

FRIEDMAN Yes, something like that..

弗：是的，差不多。

ROBINSON OK one half. Housing and Urban Development?

罗：好，问到一半了。住房和城市发展部？

FRIEDMAN No.

弗： 不保留。

ROBINSON Didn't even pause over that one..Department of the Interior?

罗：甚至都不考虑一下就……内政部？

FRIEDMAN Oh but Housing and Urban Development has done a enormous amount of harm. My god, if you think of the way in which they've destroyed parts of cities under the rubric of eliminating slums. You remember Martin Anderson wrote a book on the federal bulldozer describing the effect of the urban development. There've been many more dwelling units torn down in the name of public housing than have been built.

弗： 哦，但是住房和城市发展部已经做了一大堆错事了。我的天哪，只要想想他们为消除贫民窟、破坏城市的做法吧。你记得马丁·安德森在那本关于联邦推土机的书 中，如何描述城市发展效应的吗？以建造公共住房为名，他们拆迁的房屋远远多于建造的房屋。

ROBINSON Jack Kemp has proposed selling to the current inhabitants of public housing their unit- their townhouse, their apartment for a dollar apiece and just shifting the ownership to the people who live..

罗：杰克·坎普 （Jack  Kemp）建议将现有居民所住的公共住房屋单元，包括联体别墅及公寓，以象征性的一美元价格卖给当下的住户，并将产权从供应房屋的名义过渡到所有人名下。

FRIEDMAN If you got rid of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it would be worth doing that.

弗： 如果撤掉住房和城市发展部，这么做是值得的。

ROBINSON Alright, done. That's gone. Department of the Interior, your beloved national park service?

罗：好吧，回答完 毕。继续。内政部，你所钟爱的国家公园管理局呢？

FRIEDMAN Well, given the problem there is you first have to sell off all the land that the government owns but that's what you should do.. [ROBINSON But it could be done pretty quickly..] It could be done, you should do that, there's no reason for the government to own...the government now owns something like 1/3 of all the land in the country.

弗：如果你的问题是将政府的土地全部卖掉，那么，理当如此……[罗：应 该很快就能卖掉……] 可以这么做，也应该这么做，政府拥有国家三分之一的土地，本来就毫无道理。

ROBINSON And that's too much, should go down to zero.

罗：的确很过分， 应该统统还地于民。

FRIEDMAN Should go down, well not entirely zero. They ought to own the land on which government buildings are on.

弗：应该还，不过不是全部，政府应该保有政府建筑物所在土地的所有权。

ROBINSON Ok, terrific. Department of Justice?

罗：好，棒极了。那司法部呢？

FRIEDMAN Oh yes, keep that one.

弗：哦，这个可以有。

ROBINSON Labor?

罗： 劳工部

FRIEDMAN No.

弗：不需要。

ROBINSON Gone. State?

FRIEDMAN Keep.

罗：州政府？

弗： 保留

ROBINSON Keep it. Transportation?

罗：保留州政府。那交通部呢？

FRIEDMAN Gone.

弗： 撤销。

ROBINSON Gone. The Treasury?

罗：撤销。财政部？

FRIEDMAN You have to keep it to collect taxes.

弗： 为了收税，你不得不保留它。

ROBINSON Alright collect taxes through the Treasury. Veteran's Affairs?

罗：通过财政部收税，好。退伍军人事务部？

FRIEDMAN You can regard the Veteran Affairs as a way of paying essentially salaries for services of those who've been in the armed forces but you ought to be able to get rid of it. [ROBINSON Pay it off?] Pay it off.

弗：你可以将退伍军人事务部看做为退伍军人支付基本工资的服务部门， 但你应该不需要它。[罗：算是补偿？]算是补偿。

ROBINSON Pay off lump sums perhaps, and just get rid of it. OK Milton Friedman, if you are made dictator for one day, the next day..

罗：或许应该一次性补偿，然后撤销这个机构。好吧，米尔顿·弗里德曼， 如果有朝一日你做了独裁者，接下来……

FRIEDMAN No, no I don't want to be made dictator. I don't believe in dictators. I believe we want to bring about change by the agreement for the citizens, I don't believe in...If we can't persuade the public that it's desirable to do these things, we have no right to impose them even if we have the power to do it.

弗：不，不，我不要做独裁者。我不主张独裁。我认为我们需要在公民们的支 持下改变，我不主张……如果我们无法说服公众去做这些值得做的事情，那我们即便能够武力胁迫，也无权强制他们去做。

ROBINSON From 14 departments down to 4 ½ .

罗： 把14个政府部门精简到4个半。

FRIEDMAN Basic fundamental functions, what are its fundamental functions? To preserve the peace, defend the country, provide a mechanism whereby individuals can adjudicate their disputes, that's the Justice Department, protect individuals from being coerced by other individuals, the policing function, and now this is both the central government and the state and local government. The police function is primarily local and central. And those are the fundamental functions of government in my opinion.

弗： 保持最基本的职能，什么是政府的基本职能？为维护和平、保卫国家，提供一套允许个人体处理争端的机制，这是司法部的职能；保护个人免受他人胁迫，维护治安，这是中央政府、州政府、地方政府的作用。警察治安职能是地方和中央首要的职能。在我看来，这些才是政府的基本职能。

ROBINSON Milton Friedman, thank you very much.

罗：米尔顿·弗里德曼，非常感谢您。

Dr. Friedman believes in limited government, very limited government. If I understand his principles correctly, he'd say that the choice whether to wear motorcycle helmet shouldn't be between me and the State government in Sacramento but between me and if anyone and my insurance company. Better keep those premiums down...I'm Peter Robinson, thanks for joining us.

弗里德曼博士主张限制政府，而且要严格限制。如果我对他的信条理解正确的话，他认为，骑摩托车要不要带头盔与位于萨克拉门所的州立政府毫无关系，只与我的保险公司有关。保费最好能下降……我是彼得·罗宾逊，谢谢观看。