评论
打印
When the Indian government presented its budget last month, the people were expecting giveaways, subsidies and bribes for votes. But it turned out to be a surprisingly responsible settlement that capped the fiscal deficit at 4.8 per cent of economic output. It was a sensible budget, but it will not get India growing again.
当印度政府上月公布预算案时，人们原本以为预算中会包括为拉拢选民而提供的施舍、补贴和贿赂。但结果是，这份预算案出人意料地可靠，将财政赤字限制在经济产出的4.8%。这是一份合理的预算，但它不会重新推动印度的增长。
Meanwhile, the day before the budget, Sugata Mitra, a researcher at Newcastle University, won the TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design conference) prize of $1m to run Schools in the Cloud from India. The scheme aims to empower teachers and parents towards self-directed learning by children.
与此同时，在预算案公布的前一天，纽卡斯尔大学(Newcastle University)研究员苏加塔??米特拉(Sugata Mitra)获得了100万美元的TED（技术、娱乐和设计大会）奖金，用于运营印度的“云端学校”(Schools in the Cloud)项目。该项目旨在帮助教师和父母引导儿童自主学习。
To Indians, the contrast between the budget and the prize confirms their perception of the country’s “bottom-up” success, driven by people, in contrast to China’s “top-down” success, induced by state investment. Prosperity is spreading, despite appalling governance in the world’s biggest democracy.
对印度人而言，预算和奖金的鲜明对比验证了他们的看法：印度的成功是由人民推动的“自下而上式”成功，与中国由国家投资推动的“自上而下式”成功不同。尽管政府治理糟糕，但这个世界上人口最多的民主国家仍在不断走向繁荣。
Indians despair over the delivery of public services. Where the state is needed – to provide law and order, education, health and water – it performs poorly. Where it is not needed, it is hyperactive, tying people up in red tape. People cynically sum up their country’s story of private success and public failure with the phrase: “India grows at night while the government sleeps.” The country’s recent economic slowdown suggests it may have reached the limits of its ability to grow in the dark.
印度人对公共服务感到绝望。在需要政府推行法律和秩序，提供教育、卫生和自来水时，它的表现总不理想。在不需要政府时，它却太过活跃，用繁文缛节束缚着人们。对于私营部门的成功和公共部门的失败，人们讽刺性地总结为：“印度经济在晚上政府睡觉的时候才会增长。”印度近期的经济增速放缓表明，它可能已经达到了在黑暗中增长的极限。
Two years ago, India was the envy of the world. It had survived the financial crisis and was growing rapidly, creating jobs and lifting millions out of poverty. The country had innovative companies competing brutally at home and starting to stomp on to the global stage. This came on the back of free-market reforms begun in 1991. Since then, governments had kept reforming slowly, making it the world’s second-fastest growing economy.
两年前，印度是全世界羡慕的对象。它成功渡过了金融危机，增长迅速，就业岗位增加，数百万人脱贫。在印度，创新公司在国内展开激烈的竞争，并开始登上全球舞台。这一切发生的背景是1991年开始的自由市场改革。从那以后，政府持续缓步推行改革，使印度成为全球增长第二快的经济体。
But soon after the current government, led by the Congress party, came to power in 2004, it made a disastrous mistake. Under the influence of Sonia Gandhi and her National Advisory Council, it concluded the reforms only helped the rich. It changed its focus to welfare spending. Instead of building roads, it offered cheap food, energy and make-work jobs. This resulted in high inflation, low growth and an unsustainable deficit.
但国大党(Congress party)领导的现任政府2004年上台不久后，铸下大错。在索妮娅??甘地(Sonia Gandhi)及其国家咨询委员会(National Advisory Council)的影响下，该党得出结论：改革只帮助了富人。于是，政府将重心转向福利支出。它的重点不再是修筑公路，而是提供廉价食品、能源和不必要的、人为创造就业的工作岗位。这导致了高通胀、低增长和不可持续的赤字。
Hope for India may well lie with its aspiring young people, those who are in the middle class or about to reach it. They are about a third of the country now, and will be half in a decade. They have no one to vote for because no politician talks the language of public goods or governance. The existing parties treat voters as poor, ignorant masses who need to be appeased at election time with populist giveaways.
那些雄心勃勃、身为中产阶级或即将跻身这一行列的年轻人承载着印度的希望。他们占据该国人口的三分之一左右，十年后将占据总人口的一半。他们的选票无处可投，因为没有政客谈论公共产品或治理。现有的党派将选民视为贫穷、无知的大众，只需在选举时用民粹主义的施舍加以抚慰即可。
They are puzzled why their nation offers astonishing religious and political freedom but not economic freedom. In a country where two out of five people are self-employed, it takes 42 days to start a business. The entrepreneur is a victim of endless red tape and corruption. It has been ranked 132nd in the world for “ease of doing business”.
他们困惑：为何在印度可以享受巨大的宗教和政治自由，却享受不到经济自由。在五分之二人口从事个体经营的印度，开办企业却要花42天。没完没了的官僚作风和腐败，令企业家深受其害。印度的“经商便利指数”全球仅排名第132位。
India ends up reforming furtively because no party has bothered to explain the difference between being “pro-market” and “pro-business”. People are left with the impression that liberal reforms mostly help the rich. They don’t understand that being pro-market is to believe in competition, which helps keep prices low, raises the quality of products and leads to a rules-based capitalism that helps everyone. To be pro-business means allowing politicians and officials to retain authority over economic decisions, leading to crony capitalism. It also explains why India does not perform to potential.
到头来，印度改革进行得偷偷摸摸，因为各党派懒得解释“支持市场”和“支持企业”之间的区别。人们的印象是，自由化改革主要令富人受益。他们不理解，支持市场即相信竞争，从而有助于降低价格，提高产品质量，催生出遵守规则、造福人人的资本主义制度。支持企业意味着让政客和官员保留经济决策大权，从而滋生裙带资本主义。这还能解释印度为何未能发挥出全部潜力。
There is a political space that should be filled by a secular party at the right of centre. None of the existing parties is likely to fill it. The only answer for aspiring India may well be a new liberal party, which trusts markets rather than officials and focuses on the reform of institutions. This party might not win votes quickly but it could bring governance reform to centre stage and gradually prove to voters that open markets and rules-based government are the only civilised ways to lift living standards and achieve shared prosperity. At a time when western economies and their way of doing business are under a cloud, a successful India driven by free markets and democracy can be a real force for good.
印度存在着应由中右翼世俗政党填补的政治空间。现有的政党无法填补这一空间。对于雄心勃勃的印度，唯一的答案恐怕是出现一个相信市场而非官僚、注重制度改革的自由主义新政党。这个政党或许无法迅速赢得选票，但它可以将治理改革推向舞台中央，并逐步向选民证明，开放市场和信奉规则的政府是提高生活水平、实现共同繁荣的唯一文明方式。在西方经济体及其行事方式遭受质疑之时，在自由市场和民主推动下获得成功的印度，将成为一股积极向上的力量。
