投资 · 西方古典
弗雷德里克·巴斯夏:经济诡辩·摘录 70
弗雷德里克·巴斯夏《经济诡辩》· Economic Sophisms · 投资
Now, I maintain that the _conditions of production_ are in nowise changed. The law has made no change on the heat of the sun of Lisbon, or on the frequency and intensity of the frosts of Paris. The ripening of oranges will continue to go on naturally on the banks of the Tagus, and artificially on the banks of the Seine--that is to say, much more human labour will be required in the one country than in the other. The conditions of sale are what have been equalized. The Portuguese must now sell us their oranges at a shilling, elevenpence of which goes to pay the tax. That tax will be paid, it is evident, by the French consumer. And look at the whimsical result. Upon each Portuguese orange consumed, the country will lose nothing, for the extra elevenpence charged to the consumer will be paid into the treasury. This will cause displacement, but not loss. But upon each French orange consumed there will be a loss of elevenpence, or nearly so, for the purchaser will certainly lose that sum, and the seller as certainly will not gain it, seeing that by the hypothesis he will only have received the cost price. I leave it to the protectionists to draw the inference.
出处:
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44145
定位:Excerpt 70 · 核对日期:2026-10-19 · 核验:短摘录
白话
巴斯夏反驳说,关税根本没有改变生产条件:里斯本的阳光、巴黎的霜冻都没变,橙子该自然熟还是自然熟,该用温室还是用温室。改变的只是销售条件:葡萄牙人现在得卖一先令,其中十一便士交税。这笔税显然由法国消费者承担。结果很古怪:每消费一个葡萄牙橙子,国家没损失,因为多付的钱进了国库,只是转移;但每消费一个法国橙子,消费者多付十一便士,而卖家也没多赚,这十一便士就白白损失了。所以保护主义让消费者为低效生产买单。
上下文
巴斯夏继续用橙子例子说明关税由消费者承担,且造成真实损失,保护主义得不偿失。
今日一问
我们为保护本地产业多付的钱,是否真的换来了等值的利益?
公版作品;原文逐字取自 Project Gutenberg,仅摘录段落并附全书链接。
你的邮箱
只用于发送原典。不发广告,不卖名单。
本文本为公版;底本与原文链接见上。 版权