按人发钱是最稳健、最有效率、最公平的

6、你说他未必是错的，那你最好去看看“求心”的签名是什么：谁还活着，我希望你是知道的。
本文来自: 人大经济论坛(http://www.pinggu.org) 详细出处参考：https://bbs.pinggu.org/b29i384122s3p.html

倡导按人发钱/基本收入的历史大概有500年了。死人不是用嘴说话，而是用他们的著作。

Economists from across the ideological spec-
trum have reached the same conclusion about the
importance of a minimum income during the
early 20th century. Even those renowned for their
defense of capitalism (together with their critics)
shared this consensus. Friedrich Hayek （哈耶克） wrote The
Road to Serfdom in 1944, criticizing communism
and fascism while defending the market system,
yet still stressed the importance of ensuring every-
one’s subsistence. George Stigler in 1946 observed
that to achieve greater employment opportunities
and to eradicate poverty, the negative income tax
is more effective than the minimum wage.

弗里德曼

Similarly, Milton Friedman argued in
Capitalism and Freedom (1962) that capitalism is the
system most consistent with the freedom of the
human beings. It does not however, completely
solve the problem of poverty. The only instrument
that can assist people that does not distort or
impede the functioning and financing of the mar-
ket is a negative income tax. The idea of a “nega-
tive income tax” was first used in economic liter-
ature by Antoine Augustin Cournot, founder of
mathematical economics, in 1838.

托宾和索罗

When running for re-election in 1972, Nixon
ran against George McGovern, who was assisted
in his campaign by Tobin and Robert Solow, two
Nobel Prize winners in Economics who had pre-
sented a more far-reaching proposal for a social
dividend of US$1,000 per year to every U.S. citi-
zen. McGovern was not elected and did not suc-
ceed in making people understand the advantages
of a non-conditional basic income. Two years
later, U.S. Senator Russell Long (D-LA) proposed
a law that would also partially institute a negative
income tax, the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Confronting the concern expressed during Senate
debates about the provision of a guaranteed
income to those who were not working, Long
proposed a complementary income only to fami-
lies of people who were employed. The families
that did not reach a certain income level with
employment would receive an increase in income
to compensate for the amount discounted as pay-
ment for the social security, and to help with costs
of raising children, thus contributing to individu-
als leaving conditions of poverty. The EITC was
passed into law in March 1975.

米德有两本书，崔之元介绍过。西蒙2000年撰文强挺，我已经翻译给大家了。

此话不得不顶

诺奖得主米德、西蒙、哈耶克、弗里德曼、索罗支持按人发钱，似乎还应当再加上托宾，共六位。

当然，这5位是BIEN国际组织认可的，我不能私自加进一个人。

以下是引用求心在2008-11-17 11:32:00的发言：

6、你说他未必是错的，那你最好去看看“求心”的签名是什么：谁还活着，我希望你是知道的。
本文来自: 人大经济论坛(http://www.pinggu.org) 详细出处参考：https://bbs.pinggu.org/b29i384122s3p.html

倡导按人发钱/基本收入的历史大概有500年了。死人不是用嘴说话，而是用他们的著作。

又开始偷梁换柱？耍这种小伎俩，对我是没什么用哦。

看看下面的话，是哪位高人说的？

以下是引用hwd99在2008-11-15 16:48:00的发言：

第13届全球按人发钱大会定于2010在巴西召开。

目前，获得诺贝尔经济学奖的西蒙、米德、佛里德曼、哈耶克、索罗等5位经济学家完全支持按人发钱。

退一步，假如你确实是因为小学语文没学好，而不是有意识的误导网友的话，

为何在我第一次指出出这个问题的时候，你不敢直接回答，却顾左右而言他，

说一些什么全球按人发钱大会本身如何如何的问题呢？

退一万步，假如你确实想表达“他们的著作表示完全支持”，

那你何须引用某些人的评述呢？

为何不引用他们的文章和讲话呢？

每次说“虽然他们是自由主义市场的支持者”的时候，都有文献可举，

可是到了下面，想说“但是他们都支持按人发钱”的时候，却话锋一转，

变成别的和他们根本无关的作品？

还用英语。（而且还是直接粘过来的）

[em01][em01]

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-11-17 13:15:03编辑过]

以下是引用求心在2008-11-17 12:27:00的发言：

当然，这5位是BIEN国际组织认可的，我不能私自加进一个人。

好庄严的BIEN！！！

让我们看看国际组织的定义吧：

国际组织是指三个或三个以上国家（或其他国际法主体）为实现共同的政治经济目的，

依据其缔结的条约或其他正式法律文件建立的常设性机构。

国际组织的法律人格来源于组成国际组织的基本法律文件。国际组织作为国际私法主体有其自身的特点：

权利能力和行为能力受基本法律文件的严格限制，常常是不完整的；国际组织在其财产限度内直接承担责任。

你的国际组织，是什么样的组织？

顺带一提，我去百度输入×××（填上名词，如僵尸、撒旦）国际组织，大都能找到类似的“组织”。

[em01][em01]

There are signs that the idea of a non-conditionalBasic Income is becoming more and more accepted across the world. Nobel Prize winning economist Robert Solow of MIT wrote a preface for Philippe Van Parijs’ book, What’s Wrong with a Free Lunch?, wherein he defended the concept of a basic income. Van Parijs debated with several economists on the subject of a  basic Income,beginning to develop how such a policy could contribute to the promotion of justice, increase freedom, improve women’s rights, and help in the preservation of the environment. Meanwhile,Solow observed that the arguments in favor of granting this basic right are different from the prevailing mainstream attitudes today regarding employment and remuneration, and though it represents a substantial cost, he feels it should be seriously analyzed inclusive of its advantages as well as its disadvantages.

托宾和索罗在972年一起帮麦戈文助选，倾向于落实每人每年1000美元的社会分红。索罗为范帕瑞斯的书作序，推广基本收入理念。

如今，全世界推动按人发钱的运动如火如荼，不仅欧洲，甚至南非、巴西、委内瑞纳等都在推动。我们今年5月11日在北京召开了一次学术研讨会。10月底，我和和社科院的刘海波博士、武汉大学对蔡恒进教授三人去见了国务院发改委的人，领导希望我们争取更多的学者支持这个方案。目前，崔之元、左大培、仲大军、李昌平、陈志武等都支持这个方案，我也希望您早日出来支持这个方案。

 

索罗2001年给范帕瑞斯的书作了序，支持基本收入。

There are signs that the idea of a non-conditional
Basic Income is becoming more and more accept-
ed across the world. Nobel Prize winning econo-
mist Robert Solow of MIT wrote a preface for
Philippe Van Parijs’ book, What’s Wrong with a Free
Lunch?, wherein he defended the concept of a
basic income. Van Parijs debated with several
economists on the subject of a Basic Income,
beginning to develop how such a policy could
contribute to the promotion of justice, increase
freedom, improve women’s rights, and help in the
preservation of the environment. Meanwhile,
Solow observed that the arguments in favor of
granting this basic right are different from the pre-
vailing mainstream attitudes today regarding
employment and remuneration, and though it
represents a substantial cost, he feels it should be
seriously analyzed inclusive of its advantages as
well as its disadvantages.

黄伟东博士hwd99是科大的教授。他给我打电话说，你们坛子不让讨论这个话题，我感到震惊，于是就来看一下。2000年的时候，我们在北大教育科研网上讨论这个话题，大家热情很高，但后来都被封了帐号，把我们赶走了，我的帐号至今还在冻结。人大的论坛一直以来比较自由，我偶尔到马克思版和宏观版上个帖子，从来没有被封过。学术自由是很重要的。即使你不同意人家的观点，但要让人家讲话嘛！

......你们咋这样欺负人家........干吗锁定人家呢?

虽然我也不支持楼主的观点,但是我还是支持他有在本论坛发贴的权力.

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-11-17 15:43:12编辑过]

目前研究这个问题的有清华大学的崔之元教授、社科院的刘海波研究院、武汉大学的蔡恒进教授及我。我在2004年出了一本专著《过剩经济学》，其中有几章专门讨论按人发钱的问题。