David Rubenstein on Private Equity, Public Art, and Philanthropy (Ep. 136)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Conversations with Tyler.
大家好，欢迎回到《与泰勒对话》。
I’m here today with David M.
今天我和 David M 一起来到这里。
Rubenstein.
鲁宾斯坦.
David has a new book out, The American Experiment: Dialogues on a Dream.
大卫出版了一本新书，《美国实验：梦想的对话》。
But David, of course, has done so much more.
但大卫当然做了更多的事情。
He is a founding figure in private equity, and he is co-chairman and co-founder of The Carlyle Group.
他是私募股权领域的创始人，也是凯雷投资集团的联席董事长兼联合创始人。
Also, in philanthropy, David’s ventures are almost too numerous to mention.
此外，在慈善事业方面，大卫的冒险几乎不胜枚举。
He is chairman of the Kennedy Center, has been chairman of the Smithsonian, has contributed to the renovation of the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, the breeding of pandas.
他是肯尼迪中心的主席，曾担任史密森学会主席，曾为华盛顿纪念碑的翻修、林肯纪念堂、熊猫的繁育做出过贡献。
He purchased a copy of the Magna Carta for $21.3 million, then lent it out to the United States government.
他花费 2130 万美元购买了一份《大宪章》，然后将其借给了美国政府。
He’s from Baltimore.
他来自巴尔的摩。
That is but the beginning.
那只是开始。
David has done much more, but let’s start talking.
大卫做了更多的事情，但让我们开始谈谈吧。
Thank you for inviting me.
谢谢你邀请我。
Pleasure to be here.
很高兴来到这里。
In private equity, for those who do it well, the returns that accrue — they’re being paid to what scarce factor?
在私募股权领域，对于那些做得好的人来说，他们所获得的回报是被支付给什么稀缺要素的？
What is the thing that’s hard to have, that’s scarce, that makes you good at private equity?
什么东西是很难拥有、稀缺的，却让你擅长私募股权？
Private equity is a business of adding value to a company.
私募股权是一项为公司增值的业务。
The theory of private equity — and I’m talking about buyouts as opposed to venture capital for the moment — in buyouts, you’re taking a company that isn’t performing that well, and you’re adding better management or incenting the current employees to do a better job.
私募股权理论 ——我现在谈论的是收购，而不是风险投资 ——在收购中，你收购了一家表现不佳的公司，并且你正在增加更好的管理或激励现有员工做得更好。
Then ultimately, after three to five years, you tend to sell the company, and you typically make a return — if you’re good — at 20-some percent per annum.
然后最终，三到五年后，你倾向于出售公司，并且你通常会获得每年 20% 左右的回报（如果你表现出色的话）。
And 21 percent, or 20 percent, or 25 percent per annum is a pretty good rate of return when you compare it to other kinds of things you can do with your money.
与你可以用钱做的其他事情相比，每年 21%、20% 或 25% 的回报率是相当不错的。
Venture capital is a little different.
风险投资有点不同。
You’re making bets on entrepreneurs, helping them but probably not quite the same way you would do in a buyout.
你在企业家身上下注，帮助他们，但可能与你在收购中所做的方式不太一样。
If that boosts the value of the company, what is it the private equity firm has that the company doesn’t?
如果这能够提升公司的价值，那么私募股权公司有什么是公司所没有的呢？
What’s the differential capacity?
差动容量是多少？
Well, you have expertise.
嗯，你有专业知识。
You have people that have been doing, let’s say, buyouts for 10, 15, 20 years.
比如说，有些人已经进行了 10、15、20 年的收购。
They know what makes a buyout work.
他们知道什么能让收购发挥作用。
They know what doesn’t make it work, for example, and how to finance it, how to add value, how to make acquisitions, how to make certain that you sell things that are probably not really doing well, or you make acquisitions of things you think will help the company that you already own.
例如，他们知道什么不能让它发挥作用，以及如何为其融资、如何增加价值、如何进行收购、如何确保你出售可能表现不佳的东西，或者你收购你认为会对你已经拥有的公司有所帮助的东西。
It’s a mystery to some people outside the industry, what private equity people do.
对于业内外的一些人来说，私募股权投资人的工作是一个谜。
Private equity is one of these industries where you can make jokes about the people in it.
私募股权就是你可以拿里面的人开玩笑的行业之一。
Very rarely in this environment can you make jokes about almost anybody anymore without getting in trouble.
在这种环境下，你很少能再开几乎任何人的玩笑而不惹上麻烦。
You can make jokes about members of Congress.
你可以拿国会议员开玩笑。
You can make jokes about lawyers.
你可以拿律师开玩笑。
And I and others make jokes about private equity people, but the truth is, they do add value, or they wouldn’t be as well compensated as they are.
我和其他人拿私募股权人士开玩笑，但事实是，他们确实增加了价值，否则他们不会得到像现在这样好的报酬。
Private equity has been growing for quite a while now, more so than most kinds of finance have been growing.
私募股权已经增长相当长一段时间了，其增长速度超过了大多数金融类型的增长速度。
And the fee structure of 2 and 20 — where does the 20 come from?
还有2和20 的费用结构—— 20从哪里来？
And why isn’t the 20 declining more rapidly?
为什么 20 人的下降速度没有更快呢？
Well, it is in some respects.
嗯，从某些方面来说是这样。
Let me explain.
让我解释一下。
First of all, the market — and you are a market economist — people are getting 2 and 20 because that’s what the market will say is appropriate.
首先，市场 — 你是市场经济学家 — 人们会得到2和20，因为市场认为这是合适的。
It’s not as if people are being pushed or forced into paying people 2 and 20.
人们并不是被迫向 2 号和 20 号的人付钱。
Nobody’s being forced to go into these funds.
没有人被迫投入这些基金。
Where does the 20 percent come from?
这20%从哪里来？
I’ll give you two examples of where it may have come from.
我将举两个例子来说明它的来源。
When Venetian ship owners would send their ships to Asia to get spices, the spices would be brought back in the ships, and those who brought them back, who carried them back, had an interest in the profitability of the spices when they were sold back in Venice.
当威尼斯船主派船去亚洲获取香料时，香料会随船带回，而那些带回香料的人，他们对香料在威尼斯卖回时的利润感兴趣。
They had a carried interest, in effect, and that was roughly 20 percent.
实际上，他们有附带权益，大约为 20%。
That may be where that came from.
这可能就是它的来源。
But also, when the first hedge fund was set up in the late 1940s, the person who set it up actually said, “I’m going to add value.
而且，当第一个对冲基金在 20 世纪 40 年代末成立时，成立者实际上说：“我要增加价值。
I’m going to do more than just manage it.
我要做的不仅仅是管理它。
I want a percentage of profits.
我想要一定比例的利润。
I want 20 percent.” When the first venture firms were set up in the ’50s and ’60s in Silicon Valley, they also had professionals who said, “I’m going to add value.
我想要百分之二十。”当第一批风险投资公司于 20 世纪 50 年代和 60 年代在硅谷成立时，他们也有专业人士说：“我要增加价值。
I want 20 percent of the profits.”
我想要百分之二十的利润。”
It’s amazing that, for all these 50, 60 years later, 20 percent has still stood the test of time.
令人惊讶的是，50、60 年后，20% 的内容仍然经受住了时间的考验。
Obviously, some people have higher venture capital, sometimes will have 30 percent, and some people, to get in the business, may have 15 percent, but by and large, 20 percent is still more or less the rule.
显然，有些人有较高的风险资本，有时会有30%，而有些人，为了进入这个行业，可能有15%，但总的来说，20%仍然是或多或少的规则。
I would say 2 percent is probably not as common as it used to be, unless it’s a small fund.
我想说 2% 可能不像以前那么常见了，除非是小基金。
For a large fund, it would probably be 1 percent or 1.25 percent or maybe 1.5 percent and 20 percent.
对于大型基金来说，可能是 1% 或 1.25%，或者可能是 1.5% 和 20%。
If we look, say, at mutual funds, there’s a lot of entry, and the cost of intermediation falls, through Vanguard, Fidelity — lower cost than what there used to be.
例如，如果我们看看共同基金，就会发现有很多进入者，中介成本也下降了，通过先锋、富达 ——成本比以前更低。
What’s the barrier to entry in private equity that keeps that number at 20 percent?
私募股权的进入壁垒是什么，使得这一数字保持在 20%？
Well, one, you have to raise money.
嗯，第一，你必须筹集资金。
You have to have some track record to be able to convince people to give you money.
您必须有一些记录才能说服人们给您钱。
It’s a lot of money.
这是很多钱。
Remember, you’re asking people to give you money not for a day or two or three, like in a mutual fund, but for 10 years.
请记住，你要求人们给你的钱不是一天、两天或三天，就像共同基金那样，而是十年。
Theoretically, these are 10-year funds.
理论上，这些是10年期基金。
You probably get most of your money back before 10 years, but they’re 10-year funds.
你可能会在 10 年前收回大部分资金，但它们是 10 年期基金。
The barrier entry is not that significant.
进入壁垒并不那么重要。
When I started Carlyle, there were maybe 250 private equity firms in the entire world.
当我创立凯雷时，全世界大约有 250 家私募股权公司。
Now there are more than 10,000, so the barrier entry is there but not that significant to keep people from coming in if they want to.
现在已经超过10,000人，所以障碍入口是存在的，但并没有那么大，无法阻止人们如果想进来的话。
You just have to come in smaller and prove your track record before you get the big funds.
在获得大笔资金之前，您只需要投入较小的资金并证明您的业绩记录即可。
Why did private equity take so long to globalize?
为什么私募股权花了这么长时间才全球化？
Well, why did anything take a long time to globalize?
那么，为什么任何事物都需要很长时间才能全球化呢？
As globalizations move forward, most private equity today is still done in Western Europe and the United States.
随着全球化的推进，今天大多数私募股权投资仍然是在西欧和美国进行。
Probably two-thirds of all dollars invested in private equity are in Western Europe and the United States, the so-called developed markets.
私募股权投资总额中的三分之二可能集中在西欧和美国，即所谓的发达市场。
It’s now moving into the so-called emerging markets, but it’s going to take awhile because the environment is not quite as susceptible to private equity as it is in the United States.
它现在正在进入所谓的新兴市场，但这需要一段时间，因为该环境不像美国那样容易受到私募股权的影响。
There’s not — the infrastructure, the talent, the financing markets, the exit markets are not quite as developed as they are in the developed markets.
没有——基础设施、人才、融资市场、退出市场并不像发达市场那么发达。
How would you contrast the skills of someone in private equity with the skills of someone in venture capital?
您如何将私募股权领域人士的技能与风险投资领域人士的技能进行对比？
Venture capital people are taking bets on entrepreneurs.
风险投资人正在把赌注押在企业家身上。
You don’t really know.
你真的不知道。
When Facebook showed up, everybody passed on it except Accel.
当 Facebook 出现时，除了 Accel 之外，所有人都放弃了它。
It’s obvious now that Facebook was a great company, but why did everybody pass?
现在很明显 Facebook 是一家伟大的公司，但为什么每个人都通过了呢？
Because they weren’t sure the concept worked.
因为他们不确定这个概念是否有效。
They weren’t sure that Mark Zuckerberg — dropped out of Harvard — was really appropriate to do this.
他们不确定马克·扎克伯格——从哈佛退学——是否真的适合这样做。
I think venture capital is more of a bet on a concept, more of a bet on an entrepreneur, whereas private equity, you have six months, typically, to do the due diligence.
我认为风险投资更多的是对一个概念的押注，更多的是对一个企业家的押注，而私募股权，你通常有六个月的时间进行尽职调查。
You can project cash flows pretty readily because you have previous cash flows from which you can base your future cash flow projections.
您可以很容易地预测现金流量，因为您可以根据之前的现金流量来预测未来的现金流量。
I would say it’s a little bit more scientific, in some respects, less of a crapshoot than venture capital is.
我想说，在某些方面，它比风险投资更科学，也更安全。
Why did you decide not to meet with Mark Zuckerberg way back when?
您当初为什么决定不与马克·扎克伯格会面？
When my now son-in-law told me about his classmate from Phillips Exeter and his then classmate from Harvard starting a company, I remembered the dating services that had been prevalent in the 1960s, and they all went bankrupt.
当我现在的女婿告诉我他在菲利普斯埃克塞特大学的同学和他当时在哈佛的同学创办了一家公司时，我想起了 20 世纪 60 年代盛行的约会服务，但它们都破产了。
This was described to me as a dating service, more or less — a way for people at Harvard to get to know people at other colleges, and so forth, for dating purposes — and that’s actually what Facebook was.
有人向我描述这是一种约会服务，或多或少是“哈佛的人们结识其他大学的人的一种方式，等等，以达到约会的目的”——而这实际上就是 Facebook 的本质。
People forget it now, but it was only for college kids.
人们现在忘记了它，但它只适用于大学生。
When they expanded to non–college kids, that was an epic change, but it wasn’t really part of the original plan, as far as I know.
当他们扩展到非大学生时，这是一个史诗般的变化，但据我所知，这并不是最初计划的一部分。
So, I didn’t meet with them because, in those days, I didn’t really think of somebody who was a Harvard student as somebody that was going to be the next Bill Gates.
所以，我没有与他们见面，因为在那些日子里，我并没有真正认为哈佛学生会成为下一个比尔·盖茨。
I just thought it was not likely to be successful.
我只是觉得这件事不太可能成功。
I was wrong.
我错了。
As you know, investment banks were once, quite often, limited partnerships, but now they’re not.
如您所知，投资银行曾经常常是有限合伙企业，但现在不是了。
Is private equity going to undergo the same kind of evolution?
私募股权会经历同样的演变吗？
And why are they limited partnerships now?
为什么他们现在是有限合伙企业？
You say limited partnerships.
你说的是有限合伙企业。
You mean the way people invest in the funds or —
你指的是人们投资基金的方式或者 ——
Well, there would be partners of a smaller investment bank, say, the way Goldman was a long time ago, but now it’s just a publicly traded company.
嗯，会有一家规模较小的投资银行的合作伙伴，比如很久以前的高盛，但现在它只是一家上市公司。
Okay.
好的。
When you’re talking about that concept, yes, there were firms that were private, and they were all privately traded: Morgan Stanley, First Boston, Goldman Sachs.
当你谈论这个概念时，是的，有一些公司是私人的，而且它们都是私人交易的：摩根士丹利、第一波士顿、高盛。
Now there are very few that are just privately owned.
现在私人拥有的已经很少了。
There’s Brown Brothers Harriman and a few others that are still private.
布朗兄弟哈里曼 (Brown Brothers Harriman) 和其他一些公司仍处于私有状态。
In the private equity world, most of the private equity firms are private partnerships.
在私募股权领域，大多数私募股权公司都是私人合伙企业。
There are a few that are publicly traded: Carlyle, Blackstone, KKR, Apollo, maybe TPG will come public, and so forth.
有一些是公开交易的：凯雷、黑石、KKR、阿波罗，也许 TPG 会上市，等等。
I think CBC is another one that’s public.
我认为 CBC 是另一家公开的机构。
But generally, they are privately owned because they’re too small to be publicly traded companies.
但一般来说，它们是私营公司，因为它们太小而无法成为上市公司。
If you manage a fund of $1 billion or $2 billion, that’s not likely to produce the cash flow that will make a public company seem really warranted for that status.
如果你管理着 10 亿或 20 亿美元的基金，那不太可能产生使上市公司真正有资格获得这一地位的现金流。
Why are they partnerships?
他们为什么是伙伴关系？
There’s a lot of smaller companies that are just privately owned.
有很多规模较小的公司都是私营的。
Law firms are often partnerships.
律师事务所通常是合伙企业。
What’s the transactions cost advantage of having a private equity company be a partnership?
私募股权公司成为合伙企业的交易成本优势是什么？
With private equity firms, you tend to get people who are fairly hardworking, fairly smart, and they also have the ability to move quite quickly and go elsewhere.
在私募股权公司，你往往会找到相当勤奋、相当聪明的人，而且他们也有能力快速行动并去其他地方。
If they were going to be working for one very wealthy person, and that wealthy person wasn’t going to give them a piece of the profits, they might say, “I can take my skills and go elsewhere.” You tend to have partnerships because you want to share the wealth, and that’s how you attract very talented people.
如果他们要为一个非常富有的人工作，而那个富有的人不会给他们一部分利润，他们可能会说，“我可以带着我的技能去其他地方。”你倾向于建立合作伙伴关系，因为你想分享财富，这就是你吸引非常有才华的人的方式。
If you had a very wealthy person — let’s say Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg — they want to set up a private equity firm to invest and they’re the only partner in it.
如果你有一个非常富有的人——比如杰夫·贝索斯或马克·扎克伯格——他们想成立一家私募股权公司进行投资，而且他们是唯一的合伙人。
You can probably get some good people, but in the end, the really good people who have the skill set will want to get a piece of the 20 percent, and usually, these large private family offices don’t give 20 percent of the profits to the people working there.
你可能会找到一些优秀的人才，但最终，真正具备技能的优秀人才会希望分到 20% 的份额，而通常这些大型私人家族办公室不会将 20% 的利润交给在那里工作的人。
That’s one of the reasons.
这是原因之一。
You don’t tend to get so highly talented people willing to work just for a salary and a bonus.
不太可能有如此才华横溢的人愿意仅仅为了薪水和奖金而工作。
Typically, family offices or an organization owned by one person — they don’t usually give a piece of the profits, a very large piece of the profits, to the professionals there.
通常，家族办公室或一个人拥有的组织——他们通常不会将一部分利润，很大一部分利润，交给那里的专业人士。
What do you think is the best criticism of leveraged buyouts?
您认为对杠杆收购最好的批评是什么？
Leverage always has its downsides because leverage implies that you’re borrowing money, and when you’re borrowing money, you have to pay it back.
杠杆总是有其缺点，因为杠杆意味着你在借钱，而当你借钱时，你就必须偿还。
Sometimes, when the economy goes down, it’s difficult to pay these back.
有时，当经济衰退时，很难偿还这些费用。
In the early days of private equity, they typically would borrow — this was hard to believe — 95 percent to 99 percent of the purchase price.
在私募股权的早期，他们通常会借入购买价格的 95% 到 99%——这令人难以置信。
The famous KKR deal is 95 percent debt and 5 percent equity, and some deals used to be 99 percent debt.
著名的 KKR 交易是 95% 债务和 5% 股权，有些交易曾经是 99% 债务。
Now you have a capital structure of maybe 40 percent to 50 percent debt, and therefore, it’s not as likely you’ll have a default, so the risk is not as great, but there’s always risk in leverage.
现在你的资本结构可能有 40% 到 50% 的债务，因此，你发生违约的可能性不大，所以风险没那么大，但杠杆风险总是存在的。
Whenever you have a meltdown in an economy, whenever there’s leverage, then there’s going to be a problem because when the economy slows down, the leverage typically works against you.
每当经济崩溃时，每当有杠杆时，就会出现问题，因为当经济放缓时，杠杆通常会对你不利。
If you take, in combined form, the tax advantage given to debt and what is sometimes considered to be a tax advantage given to carried interest, does that mean our tax system is encouraging too much private equity?
如果您综合考虑给予债务的税收优惠和有时被认为给予附带权益的税收优惠，这是否意味着我们的税收制度鼓励过多的私募股权？
Well, some people would say you can’t have too much private equity.
好吧，有些人会说你不能拥有太多的私募股权。
I guess somebody in the private equity world would say that.
我想私募股权界的某个人会这么说。
There’s no doubt that there’s been a favorable tax treatment on carried interest.
毫无疑问，附带权益享有优惠的税收待遇。
Congress is debating that again, and it’s been debating it for some time.
国会再次对此进行辩论，并且已经辩论了一段时间。
The reason it probably hasn’t changed yet is that carried interest is applied to not just the buyout people in private equity, but it’s also applied to real estate.
它可能尚未改变的原因是附带权益不仅适用于私募股权的收购者，还适用于房地产。
Real estate is probably where 55 percent to 60 percent of all the so-called carried-interest dollars are actually paid, and there’s a real estate developer and developers in every congressional district.
房地产可能是所有所谓附带利息美元的 55% 到 60% 实际支付的地方，每个国会选区都有一个房地产开发商和开发商。
We’ll see whether it changes or not.
我们将看看它是否会改变。
If it does, it does.
如果是的话，那就是。
Congress has looked at it for a dozen years plus and hasn’t changed it yet, but it might well this time.
国会已经研究了十几年，但还没有改变，但这一次很可能会改变。
Are private equity firms now using insurance companies as a way of getting very cheap financing?
私募股权公司现在是否利用保险公司作为获得非常便宜的融资的一种方式？
There’s a lot of float.
有很多浮动。
It’s like with checking accounts — people just give them money.
就像支票账户一样——人们只是给他们钱。
They don’t expect very high returns.
他们并不期望很高的回报。
Well, a number of private equity firms have bought insurance businesses or are operating where they have, in effect, annuity contracts, where they are, in effect, managing the money to get a higher rate of return than the regular insurance company would get.
嗯，许多私募股权公司已经购买了保险业务，或者在实际上拥有年金合同的地方开展业务，实际上，他们管理资金以获得比普通保险公司更高的回报率。
If an annuity is supposed to pay out 5 percent or 6 percent a year, but you can manage that money at 10 percent or 15 percent or 20 percent, you have a big spread.
如果年金每年应支付 5% 或 6%，但您可以将这笔钱管理在 10%、15% 或 20%，那么您的利差就很大。
And therefore, a lot of the private equity firms are now trying to get some of this money so they can earn higher returns on it, and they don’t have to pay out as high a return as they would to somebody who’s in the regular funds.
因此，许多私募股权公司现在正试图获得其中的一些资金，以便他们能够获得更高的回报，而且他们不必向常规基金的人支付那么高的回报。
Therefore, it can be an attractive business if you know what you’re doing, but also the insurance regulators have to be comfortable with making sure that you know what you’re doing.
因此，如果你知道自己在做什么，那么它可能是一项有吸引力的业务，但保险监管机构也必须确保你知道自己在做什么。
Now, if you’re with your friends or peers in private equity, and you’re debating the future of private equity, what’s the most interesting question where you might disagree with them?
现在，如果您与私募股权领域的朋友或同行一起讨论私募股权的未来，那么您可能不同意他们的最有趣的问题是什么？
What is it you all debate and are not sure about?
你们都在争论和不确定的是什么？
Well, people are always debating what’s the future of private equity.
人们总是在争论私募股权的未来是什么。
Is it going to grow as exponentially as it has over the last 20 or 30 years?
它会像过去 20 年或 30 年那样呈指数级增长吗？
Secondly, the carried interest of 20 percent — will that survive or not?
其次，20%的附带权益——到底能不能存下来？
Or because of competition, as one of your earlier questions suggested, maybe that will go down.
或者由于竞争，正如您之前的问题之一所暗示的那样，也许这种情况会下降。
You don’t know.
你不知道。
Will the rates of return that private equity people can achieve be as attractive as they have been?
私募股权投资人可以获得的回报率还会像以前一样有吸引力吗？
Private equity didn’t grow to this large size because of the charming good looks of the founders, as you obviously can see.
私募股权公司之所以没有发展到如此大的规模，是因为创始人迷人的英俊外表，正如你显然可以看到的那样。
They grew to this large level because we’ve outperformed, as a whole, every other asset class over the last 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years by anywhere from 300 to 500 basis points on average.
它们之所以增长到如此之大的水平，是因为我们在过去 5 年、10 年、15 年、20 年、25 年中的整体表现优于其他所有资产类别，平均高出 300 到 500 个基点。
The top-quartile funds outperformed by a larger amount.
排名前四分之一的基金表现优于大盘。
As long as the returns are probably somewhere between 300 and 500 basis points on average — better than you can get in a public market index — probably, private equity will do pretty well.
只要平均回报率可能在 300 到 500 个基点之间 ——“比公开市场指数更好”—— 私募股权基金可能会表现得很好。
If private equity doesn’t outperform, then probably, private equity won’t survive.
如果私募股权不能跑赢大盘，那么私募股权很可能无法生存。
When you started Carlyle way back when, did you see that private equity would outperform the market for this long?
很久以前，当您创办凯雷时，您是否认为私募股权会在这么长时间内跑赢大盘？
Well, at the time, no. In 1987, the phrase “private equity” didn’t even exist.
嗯，当时，没有。 1987年，“私募股权”这个词还不存在。
They were called leveraged buyouts, and it was a different world.
它们被称为杠杆收购，这是一个不同的世界。
The biggest phenomenon in that time was junk bonds, and that was what was enabling a lot of people to buy companies.
当时最大的现象是垃圾债券，这使得很多人能够购买公司。
There was heavy use of the so-called junk bonds at the time, and equity was not really that big a factor.
当时大量使用所谓的垃圾债券，而股权并不是真正的重要因素。
You didn’t have big equity funds the way you do today.
你并没有像今天这样拥有大量的股票基金。
At that time, I didn’t foresee anything like this.
当时我并没有预见到会有这样的事情发生。
Most business people — if you go back and look at their original business plan, you’ll find that it bears no relationship to what they actually became.
大多数商人 ——如果你回头看看他们最初的商业计划，你会发现它与他们实际的样子没有任何关系。
If you go back and look at what Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos were going to do at the beginning — what they ultimately turned out to do was completely different.
如果你回头看看比尔·盖茨、史蒂夫·乔布斯、马克·扎克伯格、杰夫·贝佐斯一开始打算做什么——他们最终做的事情却完全不同。
For example, Jeff Bezos — and I knew him at the beginning — he was just going to sell books over the internet, and that was it, nothing else.
例如，杰夫·贝索斯（Jeff Bezos）——“我一开始就认识他”——“他只是想在互联网上卖书，仅此而已。”
And then later he evolved to doing everything over the internet.
后来他发展到通过互联网做所有事情。
Everybody changes their ideas, and I changed my ideas.
每个人都改变了他们的想法，我也改变了我的想法。
Initially, I thought it would be a small firm focused on Washington, but then we ultimately became a global organization.
最初，我以为这将是一家专注于华盛顿的小公司，但后来我们最终成为一家全球性组织。
Are SPACs a good way to bypass what is now an overregulated IPO process?
SPAC 是绕过目前过度监管的 IPO 流程的好方法吗？
Or is it a passing fancy?
或者只是一时的幻想？
I think SPACs have come down in terms of their inflated values over the last couple of weeks, and maybe the last couple of months.
我认为，在过去几周，也许在过去几个月里，SPAC 的虚高价值已经有所下降。
I think they won’t go away, but I don’t think they’re going to transform the IPO process to such an extent that IPOs will go away.
我认为它们不会消失，但我不认为它们会将 IPO 流程转变到让 IPO 消失的程度。
IPOs are heavily regulated and very carefully reviewed by the SEC.
首次公开募股受到严格监管，并受到美国证券交易委员会 (SEC) 的仔细审查。
Also, very expensive to get one done.
而且，完成一项工作非常昂贵。
It takes a lot of time.
这需要很多时间。
SPACs have replaced that by making it easier to get things done much more cheaply.
SPAC 取代了这一点，让事情变得更容易、更便宜。
But in the end, like anything in life, when you take a shortcut, there are penalties for it sometimes.
但最终，就像生活中的任何事情一样，当你走捷径时，有时会受到惩罚。
Right now, we’re seeing that people are nervous about the SPAC valuations, and therefore, I’d say some of the air has come out of the SPAC valuations.
现在，我们看到人们对 SPAC 的估值感到紧张，因此，我想说 SPAC 的估值已经产生了一些不确定性。
If we look at an IPO, it seems there’s very often a price pop, which might suggest there was money left on the table.
如果我们看一下首次公开募股，似乎经常会出现价格上涨，这可能表明还有钱在手上。
There’s an underwriter taking a fairly large fee.
有一个承销商收取相当大的费用。
Why don’t the companies just auction off the stock, say, the way Google did, or sometimes happens in Israel?
为什么这些公司不像谷歌那样直接拍卖股票，或者有时在以色列这样做？
What’s the value-added of the intermediary in an IPO?
IPO中中介的增值是多少？
Well, when you say, “Why do 95 percent of the people that go public or more do this process?
好吧，当你说：“为什么 95% 或更多的上市公司都会这样做？
Or are they all stupid?” You’ll have to say, “Well, there must be some reason.” The reason is that when you go through this process, by the time somebody gets to buy the stock, they know it’s been vetted by reasonably impressive organizations.
还是他们都是傻子？”你必须说：“好吧，一定有某种原因。”原因是，当你经历这个过程时，当有人购买股票时，他们知道它已经过相当令人印象深刻的组织的审查。
It’s been reviewed by the SEC, and while there are a fair number of fees associated with it, the fees are not so high as to discourage people from going this way.
它已经过美国证券交易委员会的审查，虽然与之相关的费用相当多，但费用并没有高到阻止人们这样做的程度。
When you price an IPO, you typically want to have about a 15 percent bounce the first day because you want people who buy it the first day to feel that they made a good decision, and you want people to buy the stock at the opening.
当你对 IPO 进行定价时，你通常希望第一天有 15% 左右的反弹，因为你希望第一天购买的人感觉他们做出了正确的决定，并且你希望人们在开盘时购买股票。
That’s not uncommon to have a 15 percent bounce, but they price them for that.
15% 的反弹并不罕见，但他们为此定价。
If you have a 50 percent bounce, that probably means the underwriter made a mistake and underpriced it.
如果反弹率为 50%，则可能意味着承销商犯了一个错误，定价过低。
And if it goes down, then obviously the underwriter made a big mistake because you’re going to have a lot of unhappy investors who bought it, and stock went down the first day.
如果它下跌，那么显然承销商犯了一个大错误，因为会有很多不满意的投资者购买了它，而股票第一天就下跌了。
That should never happen, but it does.
这种事本不应该发生，但它确实发生了。
But is the future simply more direct offerings?
但未来只是更直接的产品吗？
Because when Google went on the market, we had all heard of Google.
因为当谷歌上市时，我们都听说过谷歌。
Google was as credible as anyone who might have been underwriting the stock of a Google IPO, so they just sold the stock.
谷歌与任何可能承销谷歌首次公开募股股票的人一样可信，所以他们只是卖掉了股票。
Captured whatever price pop there might be for themselves.
为自己捕捉到可能出现的任何价格流行趋势。
Right.
正确的。
Well, Google went public through a direct process, I think at $85 a share, and now it’s trading at $2,000 or $3,000 a share.
嗯，谷歌是通过直接程序上市的，我想每股价格是 85 美元，现在它的交易价格是每股 2,000 美元或 3,000 美元。
Obviously, it’s been a great stock, but from the beginning, there was great demand, and people knew that Google had a search process that was better than any of the other search processes out there.
显然，这是一只很棒的股票，但从一开始就有很大的需求，人们知道谷歌的搜索流程比任何其他搜索流程都要好。
Remember, when Google started, people said, “Who wants to give Google money as a venture capitalist?
还记得吗，当谷歌成立时，人们说：“谁愿意作为风险投资家给谷歌提供资金？
Because there are already a lot of search engines out there.” Google actually had so much trouble with their venture capitalists at the beginning.
因为已经有很多搜索引擎了。”事实上，谷歌一开始就与他们的风险投资家遇到了很多麻烦。
Their venture capitalists talked about taking their money back because Google wasn’t actually performing what they said they were going to do.
他们的风险投资家谈到要收回他们的资金，因为谷歌实际上并没有按照他们所说的去做。
When Google was ready to go public, people knew there was so much demand for this that you didn’t need an underwriter, probably, to take off the fees that they would probably take off because their underwriting fees might be anywhere from 4 percent to 6 percent.
当谷歌准备上市时，人们知道对此的需求如此之大，以至于你可能不需要承销商来扣除他们可能会收取的费用，因为他们的承销费可能在 4% 到 6% 之间。
I think the Google founders said, “There’s so much demand.
我认为谷歌创始人说过：“需求如此之大。
We don’t really need to have the underwriter and take that spread.”
我们真的不需要承销商并承担这种利差。”
But there are very few Googles that are out there.
但谷歌的数量很少。
The average company that goes public does not have the demand that Google had when it was going public.
一般的上市公司没有谷歌上市时的需求。
Does the financial sector draw too much talent away from the rest of the real economy?
金融行业是否从实体经济的其他领域吸走了太多人才？
Well, I’d say the financial sector is part of the real economy.
嗯，我想说金融业是实体经济的一部分。
It’s a large part of the United States economy, so there’s nothing wrong with the financial sector getting very talented people.
它是美国经济的重要组成部分，因此金融行业拥有非常有才华的人才并没有什么问题。
But there are plenty of talented people in lots of places.
但很多地方都有很多有才华的人。
The academic world has talented people.
学术界人才济济。
The sports world has talented people.
体育界人才济济。
Lots of talented people in many different areas, so I don’t think the financial service world is getting too many talented people.
许多不同领域都有很多人才，所以我认为金融服务界并没有太多人才。
I think that most talented people right now — probably a lot of those people are going into entrepreneurial startups, which you could argue that’s financial, but basically, they’re entrepreneurs.
我认为现在大多数有才华的人 ——可能很多人都进入了创业公司，你可能会说这是财务方面的，但基本上，他们是企业家。
It used to be, people wanted to go to Goldman Sachs or Blackstone or Carlyle or McKinsey.
过去，人们想去高盛、黑石、凯雷或麦肯锡。
Now a lot of people coming out of the best colleges — they want to do a startup.
现在，很多人从最好的大学毕业，他们想要创业。
What fraction of the financial sector do you think is zero-sum?
您认为金融业的哪一部分是零和的？
You mean doesn’t produce any value?
你的意思是没有产生任何价值？
Right, but it’s just a race to get there first.
是的，但这只是一场先到达那里的竞赛。
Like some people would say high-frequency trading — that’s zero-sum.
就像有些人会说高频交易 ——这是零和游戏。
May or may not be true, but what do you think is zero-sum?
可能是真的，也可能不是，但你认为什么是零和？
I’m not sure I would know exactly what is zero-sum in terms of the way you’re phrasing the question.
我不确定我是否确切地知道什么是零和，就你提出问题的方式而言。
Do you mean that —
你的意思是 ——
No value added, but you get profit.
没有增加任何价值，但你会获得利润。
Someone else takes a loss.
别人吃亏了。
You have talent diverted into seeking of rents, not producing anything that a consumer ever uses.
你的人才被用来寻求租金，而不是生产消费者曾经使用过的任何东西。
Well, of course, those people that don’t like private equity would say, “Well, private equity people are a zero-sum.
嗯，当然，那些不喜欢私募股权的人会说：“嗯，私募股权人士是零和游戏。
They’re not adding any value.” I don’t agree with that.
他们没有增加任何价值。”我不同意这一点。
I think they do add value.
我认为它们确实增加了价值。
But you lower costs, and you boost share prices, at least on average.
但你降低了成本，并提高了股价，至少平均而言是这样。
Right.
对。
Well, I don’t think anything that’s zero-sum will survive very long.
嗯，我认为任何零和游戏都不会长久存在。
You could argue that cryptocurrencies — are they a zero-sum or not?
你可能会说加密货币 ——它们是否是零和游戏？
Some people think that they’re complete zeros, and they’re worth nothing, and people are buying these things at their great peril.
有些人认为它们完全是零，一文不值，人们购买这些东西是冒着巨大的危险的。
Other people think that they actually provide a service where people don’t want to have US currency or other foreign currencies.
其他人则认为他们实际上提供了一种人们不想拥有美元或其他外币的服务。
They have something on the side that’s a different kind of currency.
他们有一些不同种类的货币。
You can argue that for some time.
你可以争论一段时间。
Right now, we don’t know whether it’s a zero-sum game or not.
目前，我们不知道这是否是一场零和游戏。
What do you think of crypto?
您对加密货币有何看法？
What’s your best guess?
你最好的猜测是什么？
My view is that the genie is out the bottle, and it’s too late for the US government to say, “Don’t do this anymore.” Remember we went through Prohibition, and we said, “People, don’t drink alcohol.
我的观点是，魔鬼已经从瓶子里出来了，美国政府现在说“不要再这样做了”已经太晚了。请记住，我们经历了禁酒令，我们说：“人们，不要喝酒。
It’s bad for you.” It didn’t really work out.
这对你不好。”这并没有真正奏效。
If we were to ban cryptocurrencies, people will find a way to create cryptocurrencies offshore or some illegal way to do it.
如果我们要禁止加密货币，人们就会找到一种在海外创建加密货币的方法，或者一些非法的方法来做到这一点。
People don’t trust the government as much as they used to.
人们不再像以前那样信任政府。
And secondly, I think that there is money to be made in the cryptocurrency world if you’re careful and you know what you’re doing.
其次，我认为如果你小心并且知道自己在做什么，那么在加密货币世界中是可以赚钱的。
But I’ve not bought any cryptocurrencies.
但我没有购买任何加密货币。
I have invested in some companies that service the industry.
我投资了一些为该行业服务的公司。
What I say to people is that I analogize it to gambling.
我对人们说的是，我将其比作赌博。
If you are a gambler, and you go to Las Vegas, you know you’re going to lose money if you spend a lot of time there.
如果你是一个赌徒，你去拉斯维加斯，你知道如果你在那里呆了很多时间你就会输钱。
You don’t care because you’re having fun.
你不在乎，因为你很开心。
You really like the setting, and it’s your pleasure.
您真的很喜欢这个环境，这是您的荣幸。
The same thing is true with crypto.
加密货币也是如此。
A lot of people like to be seeing the oscillation of the cryptocurrencies.
很多人喜欢看到加密货币的波动。
They like to hear about it.
他们喜欢听这个。
They think they’re the new wave of what’s going on, so they buy it.
他们认为自己是正在发生的新浪潮，所以他们购买了它。
I’d say if, you want to do that, just make it like you do if you go to Las Vegas.
我想说，如果你想这么做，那就像你去拉斯维加斯那样吧。
Put 1 percent or 2 percent or 3 percent of your net worth in, have fun watching the stocks go up or the currencies go up and down, but don’t put in 50 percent of your money because I think that’s — it’s likely to be a fool’s errand.
投入净资产的 1%、2% 或 3%，享受观看股票上涨或货币涨跌的乐趣，但不要投入 50% 的钱，因为我认为这很可能是愚蠢的差事。
If you look at the payroll of the New Jersey Nets in the NBA as a private equity guy —
如果你把 NBA 新泽西网队作为私募股权投资人的工资单看一下 ——
The Brooklyn Nets.
布鲁克林篮网队。
Sorry.
抱歉。
Now it’s the Brooklyn Nets.
现在是布鲁克林篮网队。
Apologies.
抱歉。
I see you have a New Jersey bias.
我发现你对新泽西有偏见。
Correct, I do, I still do.
正确，我愿意，我仍然这样做。
But what do you think?
但你觉得呢？
Do you think the team’s overrated?
你认为球队被高估了吗？
Their costs are too high?
他们的成本太高了？
They need a leveraged buyout?
他们需要杠杆收购吗？
Or do you think it’s fine?
或者你觉得这样就可以了？
I’m about to go interview Joe Tsai soon, so I don’t know if I will ask him whether his team is overrated.
我马上就要去采访蔡崇信了，所以我不知道我是否会问他他的团队是否被高估了。
In that business, unlike many other businesses, it only takes one or two or three players to make a championship team.
在这个行业，与许多其他行业不同，只需要一两个或三名球员就可以组成一支冠军球队。
In baseball or football, you probably can’t win a championship with just one or two really great players.
在棒球或橄榄球中，你可能无法仅靠一两个真正伟大的球员赢得冠军。
In basketball, you can, and so you probably can’t pay these people too much.
在篮球领域，你可以，所以你可能不能付给这些人太多的钱。
As you know, there’s caps on how much you’re allowed to pay people in basketball, and they have these maximum contracts.
如你所知，篮球运动员的工资是有上限的，而且他们有这些最高合同。
I would say very few people I have known — and I know a lot of people who have bought sports teams — very few people who have bought sports teams have lost money owning those teams.
我想说的是，我认识的人很少——而且我认识很多买过运动队的人——很少有买过运动队的人因为拥有这些球队而赔钱。
You typically make the money when you sell them.
当你出售它们时，你通常会赚钱。
Now, are the players overrated or overpaid?
现在，球员们是否被高估或被高估了？
Man, it’s hard for me to say that anybody’s overpaid if they’re filling the arenas and so forth and they have unique talents.
伙计，我很难说任何人的薪水过高，如果他们占据了竞技场等等并且拥有独特的才能。
In Kevin Durant’s case, he’s a unique talent, a very unique talent, one of the best basketball players in the last 20 or 30 years.
就凯文·杜兰特而言，他是一个独特的天才，非常独特的天才，是过去 20 或 30 年来最好的篮球运动员之一。
I don’t know if you can overpay him.
我不知道你是否可以多付他钱。
Kyrie Irving — he went to Duke, so you can never overpay anybody that went to Duke, is my view.
凯里·欧文——我认为他去了杜克大学，所以你永远不能为任何去杜克大学的人支付过高的费用。
If he gets vaccinated.
如果他接种了疫苗。
Well, we’ll see whether he gets vaccinated or not.
好吧，我们会看看他是否接种了疫苗。
James Harden is obviously an incredible triple threat.
詹姆斯·哈登显然是一个令人难以置信的三重威胁。
So I don’t know that they’re overpaid, but right now, I think the owner is pretty happy with the team that he has.
所以我不知道他们的薪水过高，但现在，我认为老板对他拥有的团队非常满意。
He wishes he’d won a championship last year, but he thinks he will win this year.
他希望去年能赢得冠军，但他认为今年他会夺冠。
How has learning to be a great interviewer made you a better investor?
学习成为一名优秀的面试官如何让你成为一名更好的投资者？
I’m not saying that it has.
我并不是说确实如此。
It may not have.
可能没有。
If you want to be great at something, you’ve got to spend a lot of time at it.
如果你想在某件事上表现出色，你就必须花很多时间。
I’m spending a lot of time doing interviewing, so probably not a great investor so much.
我花了很多时间进行面试，所以可能不是一个伟大的投资者。
Now, what I’ve done in the investing world — I was never the investor at Carlyle.
现在，我在投资界所做的事情 —— 我从来都不是凯雷的投资者。
I was always the fundraiser, the strategist, the face of the firm, and the recruiter.
我一直是筹款人、战略家、公司的代言人和招聘人员。
Other people actually knew how to invest better, so I would sit on the investment committees and give my points of view, but they weren’t really relying on me.
其他人实际上知道如何更好地投资，所以我会坐在投资委员会中并发表我的观点，但他们并不是真正依赖我。
I’ve set up a family office, and I’ve hired some pretty good people to invest my money outside of Carlyle without being in conflict with Carlyle.
我设立了一个家族办公室，并聘请了一些非常优秀的人将我的资金投资到凯雷之外，而不会与凯雷发生冲突。
I look at what they’re doing, and they tell me about what they’re doing, but I’m not the day-to-day investor.
我观察他们在做什么，他们告诉我他们在做什么，但我不是日常投资者。
I’m not sure interviewing has made me a better investor, but you’re doing a lot of interviewing, it might make you a better investor, I don’t know.
我不确定面试是否让我成为了更好的投资者，但你做了很多面试，这可能会让你成为更好的投资者，我不知道。
What is it you think you know about recruiting of talent that is not obvious and other people might not know?
关于人才招聘，您认为您了解哪些不明显且其他人可能不知道的信息？
When I recruit people — and now I’ve been doing this for many years — I generally have certain biases, and my biases are ones that have generally proven to be right, but sometimes I’m wrong.
当我招聘人员时 ——现在我已经这样做很多年了—— 我通常会有一定的偏见，而且我的偏见通常被证明是正确的，但有时我是错的。
I’ve made a mistake in hiring some people, and I made a mistake in not hiring some people.
我在雇用一些人方面犯了错误，在不雇用某些人方面也犯了错误。
Generally, I look for people who are hardworking, reasonably intelligent, have some vision of what they want to do with their life.
一般来说，我寻找勤奋、相当聪明、对自己的人生目标有一定愿景的人。
They’re not difficult to deal with.
他们并不难对付。
They have some humility about themselves.
他们对自己有一些谦虚。
They know how to get along with other people, and they know how to share the credit.
他们懂得如何与他人相处，也懂得如何分享功劳。
There’s always going to be an outlier, a genius who can’t work with other people who might be a good investor, or a person who is not all that smart but just very, very hardworking.
总会有一个离群者，一个无法与其他可能成为优秀投资者的人合作的天才，或者一个不太聪明但非常非常勤奋的人。
You just can’t really know who’s going to be a great investor.
你只是无法真正知道谁会成为伟大的投资者。
I’m doing a book now on great investors, and it’ll come out next year, and I have a TV show now on investing.
我现在正在写一本关于伟大投资者的书，将于明年出版，我现在还有一个关于投资的电视节目。
Basically, I found that the great investors all have in common a pretty high degree of IQ, but it’s focus.
基本上，我发现伟大的投资者都有一个共同点：智商相当高，但最重要的是专注。
It’s a desire to prove that they’re right about something as opposed to making money.
他们渴望证明自己在某件事上是正确的，而不是赚钱。
In the end, once they’ve become a great investor, they’ve got enough money for their real purposes.
最终，一旦他们成为一名伟大的投资者，他们就有足够的钱来实现他们的真正目的。
They just like the game of investing the way you might like the game of betting or some other game.
他们只是喜欢投资游戏，就像您喜欢博彩游戏或其他游戏一样。
There are many different qualities that great investors have.
伟大的投资者拥有许多不同的品质。
I wouldn’t say that I have them, but I observed other people having them.
我不会说我有它们，但我观察到其他人有它们。
What does Wall Street least understand about Washington?
华尔街对华盛顿最不了解的是什么？
Washington is relying on Wall Street and Wall Street is relying on Washington.
华盛顿依赖华尔街，华尔街也依赖华盛顿。
It’s a bizarre symbiotic relationship.
这是一种奇怪的共生关系。
People on Wall Street say, “Well, the debt’s not so bad because people in Washington keep passing these bills, and they must know what they’re doing down there, or the Fed wouldn’t allow this to happen, or the Treasury wouldn’t allow this happen.”
华尔街人士表示，“嗯，债务并没有那么糟糕，因为华盛顿的人们不断通过这些法案，他们必须知道自己在做什么，否则美联储不会允许这种情况发生，或者财政部也不会允许这种情况发生。”
People down here are saying, “Well, the Wall Street markets — these people are good investors.
这里的人们说：“嗯，华尔街市场 ——这些人都是优秀的投资者。
If we were borrowing too much money, the markets would collapse.” And they’re each relying on the other.
如果我们借太多钱，市场就会崩溃。”他们彼此依赖。
At this point, I think what Wall Street doesn’t really understand about Washington is that Washington basically isn’t all that sensitive to what’s going on in the markets unless there’s a gigantic collapse.
在这一点上，我认为华尔街对华盛顿的真正了解是，华盛顿基本上对市场发生的事情并不那么敏感，除非出现巨大的崩溃。
Then they pay a lot of attention, but generally, day to day, people on Capitol Hill and the White House are not focused on the markets the way that a professional investor might be.
然后他们会给予很多关注，但一般来说，国会山和白宫的人们日常并不像专业投资者那样关注市场。
The ups and downs and oscillations don’t bother them as much, unless there’s a gigantic collapse, of course.
当然，大起大落和波动并不会太困扰他们，除非发生巨大的崩溃。
What does Silicon Valley understand least about Washington?
硅谷对华盛顿最不了解的是什么？
Silicon Valley historically didn’t pay much attention to Washington, and therefore, they had very few lobbyists here.
硅谷历来不太关注华盛顿，因此这里的说客很少。
They had very few people to tell their story.
他们的故事很少有人讲述。
Now I think the biggest lobbyists here are the technology companies.
现在我认为这里最大的游说者是科技公司。
Google, Facebook, Microsoft have gigantic lobbying operations now because they realize that the government of the United States can impact their businesses in a way that they didn’t probably realize when they first started these companies.
谷歌、Facebook、微软现在进行了大规模的游说活动，因为他们意识到美国政府可以以他们刚创办这些公司时可能没有意识到的方式影响他们的业务。
But what is it they don’t understand now, still?
但他们现在还不明白的是什么呢？
It’s not in their cultural blood, so to speak, so they throw resources at the problem.
可以这么说，这不属于他们的文化血统，所以他们投入资源来解决这个问题。
Do they understand how DC works?
他们了解 DC 的工作原理吗？
I think they don’t understand that, in technology, whoever has the better technology might ultimately prevail.
我认为他们不明白，在技术上，谁拥有更好的技术，谁就可能最终获胜。
Therefore, merit is ultimately thought to be the ultimate important factor.
因此，功绩最终被认为是最终的重要因素。
Who has the best software?
谁有最好的软件？
Who has the best hardware?
谁拥有最好的硬件？
Who has the best process for getting something done?
谁拥有完成某件事的最佳流程？
In Washington, DC, the merits are not necessarily the most important thing.
在华盛顿特区，优点不一定是最重要的。
It’s the politics that are much more important.
更重要的是政治。
Sometimes if somebody from Silicon Valley comes to Washington and says, “I have the best software.
有时，如果来自硅谷的人来到华盛顿说：“我有最好的软件。
Look what it’s doing for America.
看看它为美国做了什么。
It’s great.
这很棒。
We’re selling a lot of services, and people are living better because of it,” that may not mean much to people in Washington if some people are complaining all the time because the prices are too high or something like that over the product.
我们出售很多服务，人们因此生活得更好。”如果有人一直抱怨产品价格太高或类似的问题，这对华盛顿人来说可能没有多大意义。
Should we let members of Congress, or for that matter, regional Fed bank presidents, trade equities and securities?
我们应该让国会议员，或者就此而言，地区联储银行行长，交易股票和证券吗？
There were two Fed bank presidents — one in Boston, one in Dallas — who managed to do that, and they’ve now resigned.
有两位美联储银行行长——一位在波士顿，一位在达拉斯——成功做到了这一点，但他们现在已经辞职了。
But it wasn’t illegal.
但这并不违法。
They were allowed to do it.
他们被允许这样做。
It was not illegal, and it’s not illegal, as far as I know, for the chairman of the Fed to do that.
据我所知，美联储主席这样做并不违法，而且也不违法。
It’s not illegal for the president of the United States to do that.
美国总统这样做并不违法。
It’s not illegal for members of Congress to do it either.
国会议员这样做也不违法。
You have to disclose it, but it’s not illegal.
你必须披露它，但这并不违法。
But should it be illegal?
但这应该是非法的吗？
I’m not sure that in all cases it should be illegal.
我不确定在所有情况下它都应该是非法的。
Remember, we are asking people to work for very, very modest incomes.
请记住，我们要求人们为非常非常微薄的收入而工作。
Are they supposed to put all of their trust into complete Treasury bills, and that’s all they have?
他们是否应该把所有的信任都放在完整的国库券上，而这就是他们所拥有的一切？
You might get fewer people coming to government service if they could only get Treasury-bill rates of return, and that’s all they can do.
如果他们只能获得国库券回报率，那么可能会减少来政府服务的人，而这就是他们所能做的。
Say S&P 500 — they can get a blindly managed mutual fund.
比如说标准普尔 500 指数——他们可以获得盲目管理的共同基金。
I think that would be better rather than doing the stock trading yourself.
我认为这比自己进行股票交易更好。
I do think it’s better if you were to go into a mutual fund or things like that.
我确实认为如果你要进入共同基金或类似的机构会更好。
The chairmen of the Feds — typically they have somebody like a mutual fund, or they might have T-bills or things like that, but I think it’s better to not be trading when you’re in those positions.
美联储主席——通常他们有共同基金之类的人，或者他们可能有国库券或类似的东西，但我认为当你处于这些职位时最好不要进行交易。
Yes, I do think that’s true.
是的，我确实认为这是真的。
Here’s a reader question, and I quote, “Another impolite question.
这是一个读者问题，我引用一下，“另一个不礼貌的问题。
Why is it that so many politicians and their aides and their wives, children, cousins become wealthy in the private sector?”
为什么这么多政客、他们的助手、他们的妻子、孩子、堂兄弟姐妹在私营部门变得富有？”
The private sector is designed, among other things — if you want to go into that area — to make money.
除其他外，私营部门的设计目的是 ——“如果你想进入该领域”—— 赚钱。
It’s not that difficult to be wealthy by the standards of government compensation.
以政府补偿的标准来看，致富并不是那么困难。
If you are a member of Congress, your compensation’s roughly $180,000 a year — hasn’t changed much for about 20 years.
如果您是国会议员，您的薪酬约为每年 180,000 美元——大约 20 年来没有太大变化。
If you go into the private sector, it’s difficult to make less than that if you’re really doing something in the private sector that adds some value.
如果你进入私营部门，如果你真的在私营部门做一些能增加价值的事情，那么你的收入就很难低于这个数字。
Also, obviously, some people who do lobbying and other things are using their contacts and so forth that they got in government service.
此外，显然，一些进行游说和其他活动的人正在利用他们在政府服务中获得的联系方式等。
If you were to say nobody who’s ever served in government can ever lobby anybody again, you’ll probably get fewer talented people to come into government service.
如果你说曾经在政府任职的人都不能再游说任何人，那么进入政府服务的有才华的人可能就会减少。
I think a lot of people won’t go into government service now because you have to sell all your assets if you go into government service, and that’s a barrier to some people.
我认为现在很多人不会进入政府部门，因为如果你进入政府部门就必须出售所有资产，这对某些人来说是一个障碍。
You can have constraints on getting people into the government service, and therefore, you won’t get the best people.
在让人们进入政府服务方面可能会受到限制，因此，你不会得到最好的人才。
For example, when we only had 3 million people in this country, who did we have in government service?
例如，当我们这个国家只有300万人口时，谁在政府部门任职？
We had George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, James Monroe, John Jay.
我们有乔治·华盛顿、托马斯·杰斐逊、约翰·亚当斯、詹姆斯·麦迪逊、詹姆斯·门罗、约翰·杰伊。
Now we have 330 million people, and where are the Thomas Jeffersons?
现在我们有3.3亿人口，托马斯·杰斐逊家族在哪里？
Where are the George Washingtons?
乔治·华盛顿一家在哪里？
They may not be in government service.
他们可能不在政府部门任职。
They may be doing other things.
他们可能正在做其他事情。
I think we often have more barriers to getting good people into government than we should have.
我认为，在让优秀人才进入政府方面，我们常常遇到比我们应有的更多的障碍。
I’m under the anecdotal impression that in the 1960s, the 1970s, the smartest young people were more interested in joining the DC elite than is currently the case.
我的印象是，在 20 世纪 60 年代、1970 年代，最聪明的年轻人比现在更有兴趣加入华盛顿特区的精英阶层。
Do you agree?
你同意吗？
When John Kennedy became president, he had a clarion call to young people to come in and do government service.
当约翰·肯尼迪就任总统时，他号召年轻人参与政府服务。
He was a young man who was 43 years old, and his cabinet was relatively young.
他是一位43岁的年轻人，他的内阁也比较年轻。
And yes, it was a time where it was pre-Vietnam and pre-Watergate, so there was much greater belief that what government could do was good, and there was much less cynicism.
是的，当时正值越南战争和水门事件之前，所以人们更加相信政府能做的事情是好的，而且愤世嫉俗的情绪也少得多。
The government of the United States didn’t have the credibility gap that it developed in Vietnam and Watergate and so forth.
美国政府没有在越南和水门事件等事件中产生的信誉差距。
So I think, yes, it was a time where there was a lot of interest in young people coming to government service.
所以我认为，是的，当时人们对年轻人进入政府部门很感兴趣。
Today, a lot of the best young people — they want to go be entrepreneurs, or they want to create things in Silicon Valley or be a venture capitalist, and so forth.
今天，很多最优秀的年轻人——他们想成为企业家，或者他们想在硅谷创造一些东西，或者成为一名风险投资家，等等。
There’s still a lot of talented people going to government.
仍然有很多有才华的人进入政府。
But I do think that government does make it more difficult than it used to be to go into government service because of the various constraints you might have when you go in, in terms of what you can do with your existing money, or what you can do after you leave government.
但我确实认为，政府确实让进入政府部门变得比以前更加困难，因为当你进入政府部门时可能会受到各种限制，比如你可以用现有的钱做什么，或者你离开政府后可以做什么。
But it’s not lacking that in some good people going into government, but I think the most talented people in the country probably don’t want to go into government as much as they did in the 1960s.
但进入政府的一些优秀人才并不缺乏这一点，但我认为这个国家最有才华的人可能不像 20 世纪 60 年代那样想进入政府。
You once mentioned that you were not a good lawyer.
你曾经提到你不是一个好律师。
Why weren’t you a good lawyer?
你为什么不是一个好律师？
To be a good lawyer, I think you have to have attention to detail as opposed to the big picture sometimes.
要成为一名优秀的律师，我认为有时必须关注细节而不是大局。
Secondly, you have to obsess over the merits of your client’s causes in some cases.
其次，在某些情况下，你必须关注客户的事业的优点。
Third, you can’t be distracted by something you think is more interesting.
第三，你不能被你认为更有趣的事情分散注意力。
I thought government service was more interesting than being a lawyer, and I also thought that what lawyers do and corporate lawyers do was not the best use of my gray matter.
我认为政府服务比当律师更有趣，而且我还认为律师和公司律师所做的事情并不是对我灰质的最佳利用。
I probably didn’t enjoy it, and I didn’t think it was all that attractive a way to spend my life.
我可能不喜欢它，我也不认为这是一种很有吸引力的度过我一生的方式。
Why do so many wealthy people have legal backgrounds, but the very wealthiest people typically do not?
为什么这么多富人有法律背景，但最富有的人通常没有？
Lawyers tend to be very process-oriented and very systematic, and as a result, they tend not to take big leaps of faith because you’re taught in law school to worry about precedent.
律师往往非常注重流程，非常系统化，因此，他们往往不会在信仰上做出大的飞跃，因为法学院教导你要担心先例。
Precedent is not what makes entrepreneurs successful.
先例并不是企业家成功的因素。
You have to ignore precedent, and you’ll break through walls and say you can’t be worried about what the precedent was.
你必须无视先例，你会冲破围墙，说你不能担心先例是什么。
If you’re worried about precedent, you’ll never make a leap of faith to create a company like Apple or a company like Amazon.
如果你担心先例，你永远不会有信心去创建像苹果或亚马逊这样的公司。
Lawyers tend to be more, I would say, tradition-oriented, more process-oriented, and more precedent-oriented than great entrepreneurs are.
我想说，与伟大的企业家相比，律师往往更注重传统、更注重流程、更注重先例。
Within, say, a 25-year time horizon, what do you think is the greatest risk to American prosperity?
比如说，在 25 年的时间范围内，您认为美国繁荣面临的最大风险是什么？
Probably the rise of China.
或许是中国的崛起。
China is a bigger population than we have by three times.
中国的人口比我们多三倍。
Given the fact that they have a different type of capitalist system than we do — but they have a capitalist system, I would say — given their population base and their technology strengths, I think that we will have to recognize at 25 years from now, it’s unlikely we’ll be the biggest economy in the world.
考虑到他们拥有与我们不同类型的资本主义制度，但我想说，他们拥有资本主义制度，考虑到他们的人口基础和技术优势，我认为我们必须认识到，从现在起 25 年后，我们不太可能成为世界上最大的经济体。
If we’re not the biggest economy in the world, it’s unlikely we can support the biggest military in the world and unlikely we’ll be the biggest geopolitical power in the world.
如果我们不是世界上最大的经济体，我们就不可能支持世界上最大的军队，也不太可能成为世界上最大的地缘政治强国。
But how would that harm our prosperity?
但这会如何损害我们的繁荣呢？
I can see it might be bad for smaller Asian nations, bad for Taiwan, obviously, but many others.
我认为这可能对亚洲小国不利，显然对台湾不利，但对许多其他国家也不利。
But why would we be worse off as economic entities?
但作为经济实体，为什么我们的处境会更糟呢？
Generally, the most prosperous countries tend to be ones that are leaders in, let’s say, their given area.
一般来说，最繁荣的国家往往是在特定领域处于领先地位的国家。
If we’re not the leader in technology and we’re not the leader in financial services because those worlds have shifted to China, we probably won’t get the profits and the most talented people coming here, and a lot of other things that you need to be a prosperous country.
如果我们不是技术领域的领导者，也不是金融服务领域的领导者，因为这些世界已经转移到中国，我们可能不会获得利润和最有才华的人才来到这里，以及成为一个繁荣国家所需的许多其他东西。
We’ve been the biggest economy in the world since 1870, and probably, in about 10 years or so, as measured by GDP, we won’t be.
自 1870 年以来，我们一直是世界上最大的经济体，但按 GDP 衡量，在大约 10 年左右的时间里，我们可能不会成为世界上最大的经济体。
By purchase price parity, we’re already not the biggest.
按购买价格平价计算，我们已经不是最大的了。
I do think that more and more people want to deal with the biggest economy in the world, and the biggest economy in the world will have more money to develop new companies and send to entrepreneurs, and so forth.
我确实认为越来越多的人希望与世界上最大的经济体打交道，而世界上最大的经济体将有更多的资金来开发新公司并发送给企业家等等。
I’m still very bullish in America.
我仍然非常看好美国。
Twenty-five years down the road is hard to predict, but I’d say 25 years from now, given our population, we probably won’t be as prosperous as we are now, relatively speaking.
未来 25 年很难预测，但我想说，25 年后，考虑到我们的人口，相对而言，我们可能不会像现在这样繁荣。
Before the pandemic, you were visiting China six to seven times a year.
在疫情爆发之前，您每年会访问中国六到七次。
What’s your favorite part of China?
你最喜欢中国的哪个地方？
Well, I think the most exciting city in the world today, or at least, let’s say, before COVID, was probably Shanghai because Shanghai was the center of the Chinese business world, and China was doing so many exciting things pre-COVID.
嗯，我认为当今世界上最令人兴奋的城市，或者至少在新冠疫情之前，可能是上海，因为上海是中国商业世界的中心，而中国在新冠疫情之前做了很多令人兴奋的事情。
I’ve often said that before Shanghai and China came along, I thought Hong Kong was among the most attractive place for businesspeople to go in terms of pure excitement outside of the United States.
我经常说，在上海和中国出现之前，我认为香港是美国以外最吸引商人前往的纯粹兴奋之地之一。
Now, I think that shifted to Shanghai.
现在，我认为这种情况转移到了上海。
I haven’t been to China now in about two years because of COVID, but I think Shanghai is probably an extremely attractive place as a business center.
由于新冠疫情，我已经大约两年没有去过中国了，但我认为上海作为商业中心可能是一个非常有吸引力的地方。
Let’s consider your role as donor and philanthropist.
让我们考虑一下您作为捐赠者和慈善家的角色。
Let’s say — and maybe you’ve even done this — you had $200 million to allocate to Baltimore to make it a better city.
假设 — 也许你已经做到了 — 你有2亿美元可以分配给巴尔的摩，使其成为一个更好的城市。
It’s not enough money to be transformative, but it’s not a tiny sum.
这些钱虽然不足以实现变革，但也不是一笔小数目。
How would you spend it?
你会怎么花呢？
Baltimore has serious problems.
巴尔的摩有严重的问题。
When I was growing up, it was the eighth-largest city in the United States with a population of 939,000.
在我长大的时候，它是美国第八大城市，拥有 939,000 人口。
Now it’s about half that size, so you’ve had a white flight.
现在它的尺寸大约是原来的一半，所以你的航班是白色的。
The business headquarters have largely moved out of Baltimore.
业务总部大部分已迁出巴尔的摩。
There aren’t that many headquarters there compared to what it used to be.
与以前相比，那里的总部没有那么多。
What would I do with $200 million?
我要用 2 亿美元做什么？
Well, $200 million, as you suggest, is not $2 billion or $20 billion.
好吧，正如您所说，2 亿美元并不是 20 亿美元或 200 亿美元。
With $200 million, I guess I would put some of it into education because Baltimore has a very high dropout rate in high school and also has a very high, I would say, illiteracy rate.
有了 2 亿美元，我想我会把其中的一部分投入到教育中，因为巴尔的摩的高中辍学率非常高，而且文盲率也非常高。
It has a high syphilis rate.
它的梅毒发病率很高。
It has a high STD rate.
它的性病发病率很高。
It has a high murder rate.
它的谋杀率很高。
I don’t know that $200 million would solve all those problems, but if I could do anything to help Baltimore, it would probably be to use some of that money to incent businesses to come back into Baltimore, give them some incentives to come back in because if you get businesses to come back in, they’ll hire people, and ultimately that will help out.
我不知道 2 亿美元能否解决所有这些问题，但如果我能做些什么来帮助巴尔的摩，可能会用其中的一些钱来激励企业重返巴尔的摩，给予他们一些重返的激励，因为如果你让企业回归，他们就会雇用员工，最终这会有所帮助。
But you’ve got to deal with the education system.
但你必须处理教育系统。
If you have a large percentage of your population that’s functionally illiterate, that’s going to produce a lot of crime, and it’s also going to produce a lot of poverty.
如果人口中有很大比例是文盲，就会产生大量犯罪，也会产生大量贫困。
There was a time, I think in the 1990s, when the word was, well, Baltimore has come back — there’s the aquarium, the waterfront has been refurbished — and somehow that all didn’t materialize.
曾经有一段时间，我想是在 20 世纪 90 年代，当时有这样的说法，嗯，巴尔的摩回来了 ——“那里有水族馆，海滨已经翻新了”——但不知何故，这一切都没有成为现实。
The moment looked good for at least five years.
这一刻看上去至少持续了五年。
What actually do you think went wrong?
您认为到底出了什么问题？
Baltimore renamed itself Charm City under Mayor Schaefer.
巴尔的摩在谢弗市长的领导下更名为魅力之城。
Mayor Schaefer was a very dynamic mayor, but he couldn’t control white flight.
谢弗市长是一位非常有活力的市长，但他无法控制白人的逃亡。
And therefore, the city’s wealthiest people moved out, and the biggest companies in Baltimore moved out.
因此，该市最富有的人搬走了，巴尔的摩最大的公司也搬走了。
In the end, I think crime just took over, and the poverty rate just accelerated, and just so many endemic problems.
最后，我认为犯罪开始蔓延，贫困率加速上升，还有很多地方性问题。
Baltimore did not have entrepreneurs coming there, starting new companies, and it didn’t have the revitalization of the entrepreneurial spirit that you saw in some cities which had gone through difficult times.
巴尔的摩没有企业家来到那里创办新公司，也没有你在一些经历过困难时期的城市看到的企业家精神的复兴。
Take Pittsburgh as an example.
以匹兹堡为例。
Pittsburgh used to be a steel center.
匹兹堡曾经是钢铁中心。
Now people see it as an artificial intelligence center or as a computer center, or as a city that’s remade itself in many ways.
现在人们将其视为人工智能中心或计算机中心，或以多种方式重塑自身的城市。
Now, it didn’t have quite the minority population that Baltimore did, but it, in many ways, has revitalized itself.
现在，它的少数族裔人口不像巴尔的摩那样多，但在很多方面，它已经重新焕发了活力。
Some other cities have not been able to revitalize themselves.
其他一些城市未能实现自我振兴。
Take Detroit.
以底特律为例。
Detroit is also like Baltimore — enormous social-economic problems, and despite the best efforts of some pretty talented businesspeople there — like Mr. Gilbert — they just haven’t really been able to revitalize themselves to the point where they were in the 1950s, let’s say, as a leader.
底特律也像巴尔的摩一样——存在巨大的社会经济问题，尽管那里一些非常有才华的商人尽了最大努力——比如吉尔伯特先生——但他们还没有真正能够使自己恢复到 20 世纪 50 年代的水平，比如说，作为一个领导者。
Where do you think your marginal dollar does the most social good?
您认为您的边际资金在哪些方面可以带来最大的社会效益？
Being paid to government in the form of tax, being invested through private equity at a reasonably high return, or in philanthropy?
以税收的形式向政府支付，通过私募股权投资获得相当高的回报，还是慈善事业？
Philanthropy because when I pay taxes — and I do pay a fair amount of taxes — when I pay taxes, it goes for good purpose, I guess.
慈善事业，因为当我纳税时 ——而且我确实缴纳了相当数量的税——我想，当我纳税时，它是有良好目的的。
But it’s hard to know whether I’m paying enough taxes to change the world, and nobody knows exactly what I’m paying.
但很难知道我是否缴纳了足够的税来改变世界，而且没有人确切知道我缴纳的税款是多少。
When I do private equity, lots of people are doing private equity, so I’m not sure I’m changing the world that much there.
当我从事私募股权投资时，很多人都在做私募股权投资，所以我不确定我对世界的改变有多大。
When I make a philanthropic gift that gets attention, it might inspire people to do something.
当我做出一件引起关注的慈善礼物时，它可能会激励人们做某事。
If I fix the Washington Monument, it might encourage other people to do something with the same kind of dollars or the same motive in mind, which is to say, “I’m going to give back to the country in that way,” and it gets more attention than maybe it deserves.
如果我修复华盛顿纪念碑，它可能会鼓励其他人用同样的美元或出于同样的动机做一些事情，也就是说，“我将以这种方式回馈国家”，并且它会得到比应有的更多关注。
The bulk of my money goes to medical research and education and scholarships, but 10 percent goes to what I call patriotic philanthropy.
我的大部分钱都用于医学研究、教育和奖学金，但 10% 则用于我所说的爱国慈善事业。
And so fixing the Washington Monument gets a disproportionate amount of attention, but it might incent a large number of people to really do the same things, and that would probably be good.
因此，修复华盛顿纪念碑得到了不成比例的关注，但它可能会激励很多人真正做同样的事情，这可能是件好事。
You seem to be in good health.
你看起来身体状况很好。
What if someone makes the argument to you, “You would do the world more good by not giving away money now, but investing it through private equity, earning whatever percent you could earn, and when you’re a bit older, give much more away.
如果有人向你提出这样的论点：“如果你现在不捐钱，而是通过私募股权投资，赚取你能赚到的任何百分比，那么你可以为世界带来更多好处，当你年纪大一点时，捐出更多。
You can always give more to philanthropy five years down the road.”
五年后你总是可以为慈善事业做出更多贡献。”
Of course, you never know when you’re going to die, and COVID — we lost 700,000 Americans in COVID.
当然，你永远不知道自己什么时候会死，而新冠病毒 ——我们在新冠病毒中失去了 70 万美国人。
I could have been one of them.
我本可以成为其中之一。
I’m 72 years old.
我今年72岁了。
If you wait too long to give away your money, you might find your executor giving it away.
如果您等待太久才捐出您的钱，您可能会发现您的遗嘱执行人将其捐出。
Secondly —
其次 ——
But you could even write that into your will if you wanted.
但如果您愿意，您甚至可以将其写入您的遗嘱中。
You’d have more to give away, maybe 15 percent a year.
你可以捐出更多，也许每年 15%。
Yes, but if you take the view that happy people live longer, and if giving away money while you’re alive and you’re seeing it being given away makes you happier, you might live longer.
是的，但如果你认为快乐的人会活得更久，如果你在活着的时候捐钱，并且看到别人捐钱会让你更快乐，那么你可能会活得更久。
Grumpy people, my theory is, don’t live as long.
我的理论是，脾气暴躁的人不会活得那么长久。
Happy people live longer.
快乐的人会活得更久。
If giving away money and having people say to me, “You’re doing something good for the country,” makes me feel good, it might make me live longer.
如果捐钱并让人们对我说“你正在为国家做一些好事”让我感觉良好，那可能会让我活得更久。
If I waited till the last moment to give away the money, it might be too late to have that feel-good experience.
如果我等到最后一刻才把钱捐出去，可能就来不及享受那种感觉良好的体验了。
Do you think the foundations of other very wealthy people — after their deaths — have gone well or gone poorly?
你认为其他非常富有的人（在他们死后）的基金会进展顺利还是糟糕？
Like anything in life, there are good cases and there are bad cases.
就像生活中的任何事情一样，有好的例子，也有坏的例子。
Some people have done really good things with their foundations after they died, and some people’s foundations probably haven’t been as productive.
有些人死后用他们的基金会做了很多好事，而有些人的基金会可能没有那么富有成效。
In the end, I encourage people to give away as much money as they can while they’re alive.
最后，我鼓励人们在有生之年捐出尽可能多的钱。
I am amazed that probably 99.9 percent of the population gives away about 95 percent of its money upon their death.
令我惊讶的是，大约 99.9% 的人在去世时捐出了大约 95% 的钱。
You say to yourself, “Why are you waiting so long?”
你对自己说：“你为什么等这么久？”
I remember — I won’t mention his name, but a very famous businessman said when he was 93 years old, “I’m going to give away $400 million to my college upon my death.” You say, “Well, what do you need that $400 million for between the age of 93 and 94 and 95?
我记得 —— 我不会提及他的名字，但一位非常著名的商人在他93岁时说道：“我将在我去世后向我的大学捐赠4亿美元。”你说：“那么，在 93 岁、94 岁、95 岁之间，你需要那 4 亿美元做什么？
Why don’t you just give it away now?” I don’t understand why people wait until they’re dead before their money is given away.
你为什么不现在就把它送出去呢？”我不明白为什么人们要等到死后才把钱捐出去。
You presumably think you’re going to be in heaven to see where it’s going, but that’s a big risk.
你可能认为你会在天堂看到它的发展方向，但这是一个很大的风险。
How do you handle or filter what must be a steady stream of solicitations and requests?
您如何处理或过滤源源不断的招揽和请求？
Money, money, money, everyone wants money.
钱，钱，钱，每个人都想要钱。
How do you actually process the near-infinite demand?
您如何实际处理近乎无限的需求？
I don’t have the money that Bill Gates has.
我没有比尔盖茨有的钱。
I asked Bill the same question now.
我现在问比尔同样的问题。
I said, “Bill, everybody’s coming for money all the time.” He says, “I have a lot of people that are hired to say no.” They don’t really get to him so easily.
我说：“比尔，每个人都是为了钱而来。”他说：“我雇佣了很多人来拒绝。”他们并没有那么容易接近他。
I don’t have a foundation.
我没有基础。
I don’t have anybody doing my philanthropy, so everything comes directly to me.
我没有人做我的慈善事业，所以一切都直接交给我。
I have four standards I use, though.
不过，我有四个使用的标准。
Number one is I want to see something with my money started that wouldn’t otherwise get started; or second, something that wouldn’t otherwise get finished; or third, I have an intellectual interest in it, so I think I will stay involved, and I just won’t write a check and ignore it; and fourth, I’m likely to see progress in my lifetime.
第一，我希望看到用我的钱启动一些原本无法启动的项目；或者第二，一些原本无法完成的事情；第三，我对此有智力上的兴趣，所以我想我会继续参与其中，我只是不会写一张支票而忽略它；第四，我可能会在一生中看到进步。
Those are my standards that I use.
这些是我使用的标准。
I’d like to be involved in the things I’m doing as well.
我也想参与我正在做的事情。
But in the end, I’ve made some mistakes in philanthropy, and some things have worked out well.
但最终，我在慈善事业上犯了一些错误，也有一些事情进展顺利。
Would you agree with the judgment that today, art museums are less culturally central than they used to be, and they need to do something to remedy that?
您是否同意这样的判断：今天的艺术博物馆在文化上的中心地位不如以前，他们需要采取一些措施来弥补这一点？
Well, I was elected, earlier today, the new National Gallery of Art chairman.
嗯，今天早些时候我当选为国家美术馆新任主席。
Tyler Congratulations.
泰勒恭喜你。
So, it would be unlikely for me to say that art museums are not relevant anymore.
所以，我不太可能说艺术博物馆不再重要了。
No, I think art is an important part of society, and from time immemorial, people have been painting and doing other kinds of visual arts.
不，我认为艺术是社会的重要组成部分，自古以来，人们就一直在绘画和从事其他类型的视觉艺术。
And I think people’s brains get improved by seeing what people have done with their creative skills.
我认为人们的大脑可以通过看到人们用他们的创造性技能所做的事情来得到改善。
I think art museums and all museums are good, and this is the reason: The human brain has not yet evolved to the point where, if you see a picture of the Mona Lisa on a computer slide, it’s the same experience as going to the Louvre and seeing it in person because before you go to the Louvre, while you’re there, and afterwards, you’re more likely to read about it.
我认为艺术博物馆和所有博物馆都很好，原因是：人类的大脑还没有进化到这样的程度，如果你在电脑幻灯片上看到蒙娜丽莎的照片，那和去卢浮宫亲眼看到它是一样的体验，因为在你去卢浮宫之前、在那里、之后，你更有可能读到它。
You’re more likely to learn about it, and I think when you do that, you’re more likely to have a better human experience than just looking at a computer slide.
你更有可能了解它，我认为当你这样做时，你更有可能获得比仅仅看电脑幻灯片更好的人类体验。
If you eliminate all museums and everything was on a computer slide, I’m not sure that’d be a good experience for people.
如果你消除所有博物馆并且所有内容都在计算机幻灯片上，我不确定这对人们来说是否是一个很好的体验。
Should the National Gallery have canceled its pending Genoese Baroque exhibit?
国家美术馆是否应该取消即将举行的热那亚巴洛克展览？
Well, we’ve had a lot of issues because of COVID and so forth, so we want to make certain that people can attend.
嗯，由于新冠疫情等原因，我们遇到了很多问题，所以我们希望确保人们可以参加。
But I’ve been going to the National Gallery.
但我去过国家美术馆。
It more or less works.
它或多或少有效。
Other museums are putting on the exhibit.
其他博物馆也在举办展览。
People worked for years on it, and then to —
人们为此付出了多年的努力，然后——
You mean the Guston?
你说的是古斯顿？
Not the Philip Guston.
不是菲利普·加斯顿。
Not that one?
不是那个吗？
That’s been postponed.
那已经被推迟了。
That’s what I thought.
我就是这么想的。
There was an exhibit planned — great Baroque works from Genoa — that was supposed to happen at National Gallery a month ago?
计划举办一场展览——“来自热那亚的伟大巴洛克作品”——一个月前应该在国家美术馆举办吗？
I’m not sure, but basically just said, “No, we’re not going to do this.”
我不确定，但基本上只是说：“不，我们不会这样做。”
Well, there were some considerations for that, but I’d say we put on a lot of exhibitions.
嗯，对此有一些考虑，但我想说我们举办了很多展览。
Everything can’t work out perfectly as originally planned, but we are increasing our exhibition schedule, and I hope that we can be a much bigger leader in exhibitions than we have been in, let’s say, recent decades.
一切不可能按原计划完美进行，但我们正在增加展览日程，我希望我们能够成为展览方面比近几十年来更大的领导者。
What is personally most important or closest to you in the visual arts?
在视觉艺术中，对你个人而言最重要或最接近的是什么？
Well, the most important thing is having people appreciate the arts.
嗯，最重要的是让人们欣赏艺术。
But what artists?
但什么艺术家呢？
What excites you to look at?
什么让你兴奋不已？
Well, there are so many different types of art, but increasingly, I’m collecting artwork done by minority artists.
嗯，艺术有很多不同类型，但我越来越多地收集少数族裔艺术家的艺术作品。
The National Gallery of Art historically has been a Western art museum, but it hasn’t really had very many artists who are women, very many artists who are minorities, very many artists who are African American, very many artists who are Latin American.
国家美术馆历史上一直是西方艺术博物馆，但它并没有真正拥有很多女性艺术家、很多少数民族艺术家、很多非裔美国人艺术家、很多拉丁美洲艺术家。
So we are now trying to increase our ability to show people that great artists don’t have to be white men from Europe.
因此，我们现在正在努力提高我们的能力，向人们展示伟大的艺术家不一定是来自欧洲的白人。
That’s an important focus on what we’re trying to do.
这是我们正在努力做的事情的一个重要关注点。
How would you reform or improve the American system of arts funding?
您将如何改革或改进美国的艺术资助体系？
Well, right now arts funding is dependent, to a large extent, on philanthropy, and governments tend to be cutting back what they’re giving for arts funding.
嗯，目前艺术资助在很大程度上依赖于慈善事业，而政府往往会削减对艺术资助的资助。
And I’m talking about performing arts as well as visual arts.
我说的是表演艺术和视觉艺术。
Right now, you have many different performing arts venues and many different visual arts venues that are really supplicants at the table of the government and begging for scraps, typically for money.
现在，有许多不同的表演艺术场所和许多不同的视觉艺术场所，它们实际上是政府餐桌上的恳求者，乞讨残羹剩饭，通常是为了钱。
And then, they’re very dependent on philanthropy, and I wish we would have more government funding of the arts — as they do in Europe — than we do have now.
然后，他们非常依赖慈善事业，我希望我们能够获得比现在更多的政府对艺术的资助——就像他们在欧洲所做的那样。
Right now, we’re very dependent on philanthropists for a large part of what makes it possible for museums and performing arts organizations to exist.
目前，博物馆和表演艺术组织的存在很大程度上依赖于慈善家。
How would you do that?
你会怎么做？
Would it be federal?
会是联邦制吗？
Would it be state?
会是国家吗？
Would it be through the NEA?
会通过NEA吗？
Would it be a direct congressional allocation to the National Gallery or Smithsonian?
国会会直接拨款给国家美术馆或史密森尼博物馆吗？
Well, the National Gallery does get a great deal of money from the federal government, but other art museums around the country don’t get as much, obviously, from state governments, as much as they might want, or from local governments.
嗯，国家美术馆确实从联邦政府那里得到了大量资金，但全国其他艺术博物馆显然没有从州政府或地方政府那里得到那么多钱，正如他们想要的那样。
I don’t think there’s any one formula for doing it, but I think we have to convince legislators and other government administrators that the arts aren’t an afterthought that’s a nice little thing off to the side, and it’s not going to help little Johnny or little Janie be a better person by seeing good museums, and so forth.
我不认为有任何单一的公式可以做到这一点，但我认为我们必须说服立法者和其他政府管理人员，艺术不是事后的想法，而是一件很好的小事，而且它不会帮助小约翰尼或小珍妮通过参观好的博物馆等成为一个更好的人。
We have to convince people that around the rest of the world, people recognize that if we want to stimulate the brain and create great people, very often stimulating them through the performing arts and the visual arts is a great way to make the brain work better.
我们必须让人们相信，在世界其他地方，人们认识到，如果我们想刺激大脑并创造伟大的人，通常通过表演艺术和视觉艺术来刺激他们是让大脑更好地工作的好方法。
So we should see it as an education tool, not just as a museum.
因此，我们应该将其视为一种教育工具，而不仅仅是一个博物馆。
As you know, most art museums put out a pretty small percentage of their overall collection.
如您所知，大多数艺术博物馆只展出其全部藏品的一小部分。
That’s correct.
这是正确的。
It could be as low as 5 percent.
它可能低至 5%。
As an economist, this worries me.
作为一名经济学家，这让我感到担忧。
Is this an inefficiency?
这是一种低效率吗？
Should there be a more rapid circulation of artistic works?
艺术作品的流通是否应该更加迅速？
Should policy encourage this?
政策应该鼓励这种做法吗？
Well, every art museum and every gallery has more art than they can display.
好吧，每个艺术博物馆和每个画廊都有更多的艺术品无法展示。
We don’t have an infinite amount of space, but if you kept everything and put everything on display all the time, you wouldn’t have enough space, probably, for it.
我们没有无限的空间，但如果你保留所有东西并一直展示所有东西，你可能就没有足够的空间来容纳它。
And you might not attract new people because if people think the same things are going to be there all the time, they’re not going to come back a second time or third time.
你可能不会吸引新人，因为如果人们认为同样的东西会一直存在，他们就不会第二次或第三次回来。
So you’ve got to rotate the collection so people will come back and see some things that are new, and that’s —
所以你必须轮换收藏，这样人们就会回来看到一些新的东西，那就是 -
But there’s plenty of empty space around: other buildings, community centers, the walk to the men’s room.
但周围有很多空地：其他建筑物、社区中心、通往男厕所的步行道。
Well, there’s always cost.
好吧，总是有成本的。
In addition, if you display art all the time, some of it could be degraded or fade because if you expose art to sunlight unduly and it’s not protected, sometimes it could damage the art.
此外，如果您一直展示艺术品，其中一些艺术品可能会退化或褪色，因为如果您将艺术品过度暴露在阳光下并且没有受到保护，有时可能会损坏艺术品。
But I’m glad that the art museums have a lot of things so they can circulate and get people to come back and back.
但我很高兴艺术博物馆有很多东西，这样它们就可以流通并让人们流连忘返。
Yes, there’s always space, but there’s always money to build that space out, so that’s not insignificant.
是的，空间总是存在的，但总有资金来建造这个空间，所以这并不是微不足道的。
In terms of your time management, obviously, you get a lot done.
就你的时间管理而言，显然你已经完成了很多工作。
What is your most unusual time management habit?
你最不寻常的时间管理习惯是什么？
Well, probably I’m the only person in United States who’s still going out and buying newspapers every day and reading all six of them every day.
嗯，可能我是美国唯一一个仍然每天出去买报纸并每天阅读全部六份报纸的人。
That makes two of us.
这就是我们两个人。
Okay, so I still go and buy the newspapers.
好吧，那我还是去买报纸吧。
I don’t read them online.
我不在线阅读它们。
I go drive to the place where I can find the newspapers.
我开车去能找到报纸的地方。
I buy them.
我买它们。
I read them.
我读过它们。
I don’t like to read newspapers online, so that’s probably a use of my time that some people would say is not useful because I could read online, but I don’t enjoy the experience as much.
我不喜欢在网上阅读报纸，所以这可能是对我时间的一种利用，有些人会说这没有用，因为我可以在网上阅读，但我不太喜欢这种体验。
Why don’t you have them delivered, which is what I do?
为什么你们不把它们交付给我，而这正是我所做的？
I travel a lot, and so I’ll be in different places.
我经常旅行，所以我会去不同的地方。
I’m not in my home that much.
我不常呆在家里。
At what level of wealth do you think you were happiest?
您认为在什么财富水平时您最幸福？
Felix Rohatyn used to be a famous investment banker who later became an ambassador to France.
菲利克斯·罗哈廷曾经是一位著名的投资银行家，后来成为驻法国大使。
He was asked once, “How much money does it take to make you feel financially secure?” He said, “It’s exactly twice whatever you actually have.” That’s probably true.
有一次有人问他：“需要多少钱才能让你感到经济上有保障？”他说：“这恰好是你实际拥有的两倍。”这可能是真的。
No matter what wealth you have, you always think you need a bit more to be financially secure.
无论你拥有多少财富，你总是认为你需要更多的财富才能保证财务安全。
I have more money now than I ever thought I would have when I was younger, and more money than I probably need to get through the rest of my life.
我现在拥有的钱比我年轻时想象的要多，而且比我余生可能需要的钱还要多。
I am very fortunate, but I still think that I would like to have more money, so I can give away more money.
我很幸运，但我仍然认为我想要更多的钱，这样我就可以捐出更多的钱。
I’m giving away all my money.
我要捐出我所有的钱。
I just want to give away more.
我只是想放弃更多。
It is my intuition that the billionaires I know are quite different from the multimillionaires.
我的直觉是，我认识的亿万富翁与千万富翁有很大不同。
What do you think actually makes that difference in terms of temperament or character?
您认为在气质或性格方面实际上是什么造成了这种差异？
Well, of course, a billion isn’t what it used to be.
当然，十亿已经不再是过去的样子了。
Now it’s a term of derision.
现在它已成为一个嘲笑的词。
It used to be, if he’s a billionaire, you’d say, “Wow, you’re an accomplished businessperson.” Now it’s a term of derision everywhere because people say, “He’s a billionaire.
过去，如果他是亿万富翁，你会说：“哇，你是一位成功的商人。”现在，这个词到处都是嘲笑的词，因为人们说，“他是亿万富翁。
These are terrible people.
这些都是可怕的人。
These billionaires are doing terrible things to society.”
这些亿万富翁正在对社会做出可怕的事情。”
The multimillionaires probably didn’t have as much luck as the billionaires did, I suspect, if making money is considered a matter of luck, and I guess some people would consider it that.
我怀疑，如果赚钱被认为是运气问题，那么百万富翁可能没有亿万富翁那么幸运，我想有些人会这么认为。
But I don’t think that billionaires are any happier than multimillionaires or any happier than non-millionaires.
但我不认为亿万富翁比千万富翁更幸福，也不比非百万富翁更幸福。
Happiness is the most elusive thing in life.
幸福是人生中最难以捉摸的东西。
I know a lot of billionaires, and I can’t say they’re as happy as some of the people who don’t have any money.
我认识很多亿万富翁，但我不能说他们像一些没有钱的人一样快乐。
But isn’t there some difference in persistence between the billionaires and the multimillionaires that’s not just luck?
但亿万富翁和千万富翁之间的毅力是否存在一些差异，而不仅仅是运气？
Or no?
或者没有？
Well, persistence is necessary if you’re going to be successful on almost anything in life, and some of the billionaires had lucky ideas, and they persisted.
好吧，如果你想在生活中的几乎任何事情上取得成功，坚持是必要的，一些亿万富翁有幸运的想法，他们坚持了下来。
But there are a lot of multimillionaires who said, “Look, I have a good idea, and I’ve made a company work.
但有很多百万富翁说：“看，我有一个好主意，而且我已经让一家公司运转起来了。
I’m now worth $100 million, but I want to spend my time doing other things.” It’s not always the case that people feel they have to make a billion dollars in order to feel successful with their life.
我现在身家一亿美元，但我想把时间花在做其他事情上。”人们并不总是觉得自己必须赚十亿美元才能获得成功的生活。
You’ve been a major donor to a number of very well-known universities.
您是许多知名大学的主要捐助者。
If it were all up to you, how would you fix higher education?
如果这一切都取决于你，你会如何解决高等教育问题？
What would you change?
你会改变什么？
The higher education system in the United States is still the envy of the world.
美国的高等教育体系至今仍令世界羡慕。
Our K-12 system is obviously not the envy of the world.
我们的K-12系统显然并不令世人羡慕。
Higher education systems — certainly, the private universities — are the envy of the world in terms of the way they work, but they can always be better.
高等教育系统——当然，私立大学——就其运作方式而言令全世界羡慕，但它们总是可以做得更好。
It’s not clear that we educate people in all the ways I would like.
目前尚不清楚我们是否以我想要的所有方式教育人们。
For example, you can graduate from almost any college in the United States without having to take an American history course, and so, very few people know much about American history.
例如，你几乎可以从美国任何一所大学毕业，而不必参加美国历史课程，因此，很少有人对美国历史了解很多。
In our country, I think that’s a sad situation.
在我们国家，我认为这是一个可悲的情况。
I wish people would learn a little bit more about our country’s background, and probably having more core courses that would get you to learn certain basic things to be a good citizen would probably be something I would recommend people doing.
我希望人们能够更多地了解我们国家的背景，并且可能有更多的核心课程可以让你学习某些基本知识以成为一个好公民，这可能是我建议人们做的事情。
Well, Harvard and Princeton, Chicago and Duke — they’re all doing great, but if you look at completion rates for the system as a whole, it’s even hard to learn what that number is.
嗯，哈佛和普林斯顿，芝加哥和杜克——他们都做得很好，但如果你看看整个系统的完成率，你甚至很难知道这个数字是多少。
I suspect it’s about 40 percent, from what I can tell.
据我所知，我怀疑这个比例约为 40%。
I think the college dropout rate is about 25 percent, something like that.
我认为大学辍学率大约是 25% 左右。
But those who finish — state schools, everything — it seems to be below half.
但那些完成学业的人——公立学校，一切——似乎还不到一半。
What are we doing wrong?
我们做错了什么？
The returns to college on paper are pretty high.
纸面上的大学回报相当高。
The socioeconomic returns, health returns may be higher yet, but so many Americans are not finishing.
社会经济回报、健康回报可能会更高，但许多美国人还没有完成。
Where are we failing whom, and how?
我们在哪里辜负了谁，又是如何辜负的？
Well, one, we are telling people that the value of a college education is how much money you make, as opposed to what you can learn as a human and actually have a better experience as a human, by getting an education.
嗯，第一，我们告诉人们，大学教育的价值在于你赚了多少钱，而不是你作为一个人可以学到什么，并且通过接受教育实际上可以获得更好的体验。
I think it’s unfortunate that we only worry about whether you can make a certain amount of money by going to college.
我认为不幸的是我们只担心你是否可以通过上大学赚到一定的钱。
And therefore, sometimes people say after one or two years, “I’ll drop out and get a job.
因此，有时人们会在一两年后说：“我会退学并找到一份工作。
I can make a fair amount of money now, or just as much as if I had a college degree.”
我现在可以赚到相当多的钱，或者和我拥有大学学位一样多。”
Whereas I think it’d be better if people actually got a degree and appreciate the value of learning and were learners throughout the rest of their life, but that’s a whole separate subject.
虽然我认为如果人们真正获得学位并欣赏学习的价值并在余生中成为学习者，那就更好了，但这是一个完全独立的主题。
I think people are dropping out in part because of economic pressures.
我认为人们退出的部分原因是经济压力。
COVID has probably increased the dropout rate, and obviously, there’re a lot of family pressures and other things to do to support families in the case of lower-income people.
新冠疫情可能增加了辍学率，显然，对于低收入人群来说，他们面临着很大的家庭压力，需要做其他事情来支持家庭。
It’s unfortunate because I think higher education is really the pathway, in my view, to a happier life and a more successful life.
这很不幸，因为我认为高等教育确实是通向更幸福的生活和更成功的生活的途径。
If you look at data on college professors, or even incoming students at Harvard, it seems they’re very left-wing, and they’re much more left-wing than they were before.
如果你看一下大学教授，甚至哈佛新生的数据，你会发现他们似乎非常左翼，而且比以前更加左翼。
Now, one might even be a Democrat or have left-leaning sympathies, but it seems the system is somehow out of balance.
现在，一个人甚至可能是民主党人或有左倾同情心，但似乎这个体系在某种程度上失去了平衡。
What went wrong?
出了什么问题？
And how do we fix that?
我们该如何解决这个问题？
Your presupposition is that there’s left-wing.
你的预设是有左翼。
Left-wing is a pejorative term.
左翼是一个贬义词。
You could use the term liberal.
你可以使用自由主义这个词。
No, call it what you want, but I don’t know that they are liberal anymore.
不，随你怎么称呼它，但我不知道他们不再是自由主义者了。
Well, also, you have to remember the Ivy League schools often are the ones seen as being too liberal or left-wing.
好吧，你还必须记住，常春藤盟校通常被认为过于自由或左翼。
They are a tiny part of the country’s education system.
它们只是该国教育系统的一小部分。
If you go to Kansas State University or Oklahoma State University or the equivalent in the Midwest, I’m not sure the students are quite as left-leaning as you might think.
如果你去堪萨斯州立大学或俄克拉荷马州立大学或中西部的同等大学，我不确定学生是否像你想象的那样左倾。
On the whole, remember, the country’s kind of split down the middle politically, left and right, and, I suspect, college populations.
总的来说，请记住，这个国家在政治上存在着中间派、左派和右派的分裂，我怀疑还有大学人口。
Throughout the course of history, college students have probably been slightly more liberal than they are when they’re in their 50s or 60s.
纵观历史进程，大学生可能比 50 岁或 60 岁的时候更加自由。
This is the normal course of life.
这是生活的正常过程。
People tend to be a little bit more liberal when they’re younger than when they’re older.
人们年轻时往往比年长时更加自由。
When you interview someone, how do you prepare for that?
当你采访某人时，你会如何准备？
What do you do?
你做什么工作？
Well, if the person has written a book, I read the book.
好吧，如果这个人写了一本书，我就会读这本书。
If a person hasn’t written a book, I will read everything that’s written about the person over the last year or two.
如果一个人没有写过书，我会阅读过去一两年关于这个人的所有文章。
I gather it up.
我把它收集起来。
Then what I do is write up some questions, and then I memorize them a bit and work my brain so that I can have a conversation with the person without referring to the notes so much.
然后我所做的就是写下一些问题，然后我记住它们并开动我的大脑，这样我就可以与对方进行对话，而不必过多地参考笔记。
My style is not to do that.
我的风格是不这样做。
I try to listen to what the person says.
我试着听听这个人说的话。
Remember that being a good interviewer means being a good listener, not just a good questioner.
请记住，成为一名优秀的面试官意味着成为一名优秀的倾听者，而不仅仅是一名优秀的提问者。
I also think you have to engage the person and get the person to loosen up, and make the person feel this is a good experience, and all those kinds of things.
我还认为你必须让人们参与进来，让他们放松下来，让他们觉得这是一次很好的经历，等等。
It takes some time to do that.
这需要一些时间。
I’ve now been doing it for a number of years, so I developed the skill a little bit, and I’ve been surprised at how many people think the way I do it is attractive and unusual, or fun to watch.
我现在已经这样做很多年了，所以我稍微发展了一点技能，令我惊讶的是有这么多人认为我的做法很有吸引力、不寻常，或者看起来很有趣。
It wasn’t something I was trained to do, but something I’ve evolved into.
这不是我被训练要做的事情，而是我逐渐发展成的事情。
What’s your favorite book?
你最喜欢的书是什么？
My favorite book of all, other than the ones I’ve written, I guess I would say is the Bible because if you’re going to be in any one place, and you can only have one book, the Bible is basically the story about humanity, more or less throughout all the book.
除了我写的书之外，我最喜欢的书是《圣经》，因为如果你要去任何一个地方，你只能拥有一本书，《圣经》基本上是关于人类的故事，或多或少贯穿整本书。
If you’re on a deserted island, and you’re only going to have one book, you probably would get the most out of the Bible would be my guess.
如果你在一个荒岛上，而你只有一本书，我猜你可能会从圣经中得到最大的收获。
What is most appealing to you in the Magna Carta?
《大宪章》中最吸引您的是什么？
The Magna Carta that I own is the only one in private hands, and whenever you can have something that’s unique, that’s attractive.
我拥有的《大宪章》是唯一一本在私人手中的大宪章，只要你能拥有一些独一无二的东西，那就很有吸引力。
It was going to leave the country most likely, so I kept it in the country.
它很可能会离开这个国家，所以我把它留在了国内。
But what’s most important about it — it was the inspiration for the Declaration of Independence.
但最重要的是，它是《独立宣言》的灵感来源。
It had bigger influence in this country’s history than, honestly, it did in England.
老实说，它对这个国家历史的影响比对英国的影响更大。
In England, it was ignored for quite some time, but in this country, people — when they got charters from the King of England, the charter said in effect you have the rights of Englishmen, which meant the rights of Magna Carta.
在英国，它被忽视了很长一段时间，但在这个国家，人们——当他们从英国国王那里得到特许状时，特许状实际上说你拥有英国人的权利，这意味着大宪章的权利。
And so, when the Revolution started, people started citing this as the rights of the Magna Carta.
因此，当革命开始时，人们开始将此视为大宪章的权利。
This was often said to be the thing that inspired the Revolution.
这通常被认为是激发革命的原因。
I think it’s the forerunner to the Declaration of Independence.
我认为这是《独立宣言》的先驱。
Are there any changes you would make in our Constitution?
您会对我们的宪法做出任何修改吗？
Yes.
是的。
When you think about it, the Constitution was put together by, more or less, 55 white Christian men who were property owners.
想想看，宪法或多或少是由 55 位身为财产所有者的白人基督徒制定的。
If you had a constitutional convention today that represented today’s population, and they had more gender diversity than they had then, it would obviously be a different kind of thing.
如果今天召开的制宪会议代表了当今的人口，并且他们比以前拥有更多的性别多样性，那么这显然会是一种不同的事情。
If I could do anything, make any one change, I would probably put the Equal Rights Amendment in.
如果我能做任何事情，做出任何一项改变，我可能会把平等权利修正案纳入其中。
While I’m not sure it’s necessary at this point, given the way that law has evolved, I do think it would make many people feel better if they were included.
虽然我不确定目前是否有必要，但考虑到法律的发展方式，我确实认为如果将他们纳入其中，会让很多人感觉更好。
It only came one state short of ratification.
仅差一个州就批准了。
I think I would probably amend that.
我想我可能会修改这一点。
Should we have a larger House of Representatives?
我们应该有一个更大的众议院吗？
I’ve never been asked that question before.
我以前从未被问过这个问题。
I’d have a smaller one.
我想要一个小一点的。
As you know, the first amendment to the Constitution, as proposed in the Bill of Rights, would have actually had a House that would now be 10,000 members — if that first amendment had been passed.
如您所知，根据《权利法案》中提出的宪法第一修正案，如果第一修正案获得通过，众议院实际上将拥有 10,000 名议员。
It wasn’t approved by the states; it wasn’t ratified.
它没有得到各州的批准；它没有被批准。
I think 435 is more than enough.
我觉得435就够了。
You could argue for shrinking it a bit because, right now, it is very large, but I wouldn’t certainly enhance it.
你可能会主张将其缩小一点，因为现在它非常大，但我肯定不会增强它。
I think it’d be too big.
我认为它太大了。
Living or dead, whom would you most like to interview?
生者或死者，你最想采访谁？
It’s an interesting question.
这是一个有趣的问题。
The phenomenon that we’re engaged in now, which is an interview, is a phenomenon that didn’t really exist throughout most of organized history.
我们现在所从事的现象，即采访，是一种在大多数有组织的历史中并不真正存在的现象。
So we don’t have any interviews of Cleopatra, Charlemagne, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, William Shakespeare, or George Washington, or even Abraham Lincoln.
所以我们没有对克利奥帕特拉、查理曼大帝、亚历山大大帝、拿破仑、威廉·莎士比亚、乔治·华盛顿，甚至亚伯拉罕·林肯的任何采访。
If I could interview anybody that’s ever lived, it would be Abraham Lincoln.
如果我可以采访任何一个曾经存在过的人，那就是亚伯拉罕·林肯。
I think he was the greatest American, and I think he was the kind of person that would be an interesting interviewee.
我认为他是最伟大的美国人，我认为他是那种会成为有趣的受访者的人。
He had a good sense of humor.
他很有幽默感。
He had a pretty good perspective on himself, and he did some things that, I think, were pretty impressive.
他对自己有很好的看法，而且他做了一些我认为令人印象深刻的事情。
If I look at your books of interviews, all the different people you’ve interviewed and online, it’s striking to me, there are relatively few what you might call weirdos in the group.
如果我看一下你的采访书，以及你采访过的和网上的所有不同的人，我会惊讶地发现，在这个群体中，你所谓的怪人相对较少。
In your new book, there’s Ken Burns, there’s Madeleine Albright, there’s Wynton Marsalis.
在你的新书中，有肯·伯恩斯、玛德琳·奥尔布赖特、温顿·马萨利斯。
But someone just out there who’s radical or different or not well-known — why not interview more weirdos?
但那里有一些激进的、与众不同的或不知名的人——为什么不采访更多的怪人呢？
I interview people I usually know and I’ve had some relation with.
我采访了我通常认识的人并且与我有过一些关系。
I don’t probably know as many weirdos as maybe I know normal people.
我认识的怪人可能没有普通人那么多。
But they would accept the invite — a lot of weirdos.
但他们会接受邀请——很多怪人。
They will accept my invites if I ask a weirdo.
如果我问一个怪人，他们会接受我的邀请。
We had a homeless guy on this program.
我们这个节目中有一个无家可归的人。
That was a good episode.
那是一个很好的插曲。
Well, it’s a good idea for another book — maybe just weirdos, but I don’t know that book would sell as well.
嗯，再写一本书是个好主意——也许只是怪人，但我不知道那本书也会卖得好。
But you could argue a lot of people I’ve interviewed — they were considered weird by a lot of people when they were growing up.
但你可能会反驳我采访过的很多人——很多人在成长过程中都认为他们很奇怪。
As they got more famous, they weren’t considered quite as weird.
随着他们变得越来越出名，他们不再被认为很奇怪。
Who mentored you?
谁指导了你？
I don’t know that any one person mentored me.
我不知道有没有人指导过我。
I worked for Ted Sorensen briefly when I was practicing law.
当我从事法律工作时，我曾短暂地为泰德·索伦森工作过。
I worked for Stuart Eizenstat when I worked at the White House, but since I left the White House, I haven’t had a boss.
我在白宫工作时为斯图尔特·艾森斯塔特工作，但自从我离开白宫后，我就没有老板了。
I’m now 72, and I left the White House when I was 31, so I haven’t had a boss for 41 years or so.
我现在 72 岁了，31 岁时离开白宫，所以我已经有 41 年左右没有老板了。
But I admired a lot of people, and I brought a lot of people in my firm that I thought were very impressive.
但我钦佩很多人，我在公司里引进了很多我认为令人印象深刻的人。
Two of them that I thought were extremely impressive were Jim Baker, former secretary of state, and George Herbert Walker Bush, a president of the United States.
其中我认为印象深刻的两位是前国务卿吉姆·贝克（Jim Baker）和美国总统乔治·赫伯特·沃克·布什（George Herbert Walker Bush）。
Very impressive people.
非常令人印象深刻的人。
I got to know them, and I learned a lot from them.
我认识了他们，并从他们身上学到了很多东西。
What do you think you understand about mentoring that might not be obvious?
您认为您对指导的理解可能不那么明显？
It takes a lot of time.
这需要很多时间。
I’m not a good mentor myself because I realize that, to be a good mentor to people, you really have to put a lot of time into it.
我自己并不是一个好的导师，因为我意识到，要成为人们的好导师，你真的必须投入很多时间。
Now, a number of people have come to me later in their career and said, “You were a mentor to me.” But I think they’re being polite.
现在，很多人在职业生涯后期来找我说：“你是我的导师。”但我认为他们很有礼貌。
I may have helped them a little bit or given them some advice, but being a mentor really takes a lot of time.
我可能帮助了他们一点，或者给了他们一些建议，但作为导师确实需要很多时间。
Do you think a person should always have mentors, including much younger mentors?
你认为一个人应该总是有导师，包括年轻得多的导师吗？
A lot of people have been successful in life without having mentors.
很多人在没有导师的情况下取得了成功。
I think mentors can be helpful to you, for sure, but I wouldn’t obsess over having a mentor if you can’t find somebody that’s going to be helpful.
我认为导师肯定会对你有帮助，但如果你找不到能提供帮助的人，我不会痴迷于拥有一位导师。
Having a bad mentor can be not helpful.
有一个糟糕的导师可能没有帮助。
I know in your book, you have many different interviews with, of course, different people.
我知道在你的书中，你对不同的人进行了许多不同的采访。
Again, the book is The American Experiment: Dialogues on a Dream.
同样，这本书是《美国实验：梦的对话》。
The process of doing the book — just to close — if you had to sum up what you feel you learned from the entirety of the interviews, maybe at a very meta level.
写这本书的过程————只是为了结束————如果你必须总结一下你觉得你从整个采访中学到了什么，也许是在一个非常元的层面上。
Maybe you just learned about your own learning.
也许你刚刚了解了自己的学习情况。
What’s the main thing you learned doing the book?
通过这本书你学到的主要内容是什么？
Well, the country has evolved, and it is not the country that was anticipated by the Founding Fathers.
嗯，国家已经发展了，它已经不是开国元勋们所期望的国家了。
They came up with some wonderful rhetoric that all men are going to be equal, but the truth is that we have lived in a way where not all people have been treated equal.
他们提出了一些精彩的言辞，说所有人都是平等的，但事实是，我们的生活方式并不是所有人都受到平等对待。
The country’s history and the experiment is whether we can have a representative democracy survive and actually live up to the rhetoric of the Founding Fathers without destroying the country.
这个国家的历史和实验是我们能否让代议制民主得以生存并真正兑现开国元勋的言论而不摧毁这个国家。
We’ve had stress tests that have almost destroyed the country.
我们进行的压力测试几乎摧毁了这个国家。
The Civil War came close to it.
内战已经临近了。
As I point out in the book, we had a couple of stress tests recently, most recently in the election and the January 6 events.
正如我在书中指出的，我们最近进行了几次压力测试，最近一次是在选举和 1 月 6 日的活动中。
We survived that, in part because of what I described in the book as certain genes of America that we have as part of our body politic.
我们幸存下来，部分原因是我在书中所描述的美国的某些基因，它们是我们政治体的一部分。
One of them is the rule of law, and the belief in civilian control of the military, and separation of powers, and so forth.
其中之一是法治、文官控制军队、权力分立等信念。
Those kinds of genes prevailed on January the 6th and subsequently.
这些基因在 1 月 6 日及之后盛行。
I think that was a good thing.
我认为这是一件好事。
David Rubenstein, thank you very much.
大卫·鲁宾斯坦，非常感谢你。
My pleasure.
我的荣幸。
Thank you for inviting me.
谢谢你邀请我。