Jeremy Grantham on Investing in Green Tech (Ep. 165)
Jeremy requested a few edits to the transcript to clarify his comments, those have been marked with an asterisk.
杰里米要求对笔录进行一些编辑以澄清他的评论，这些评论已标有星号。
As usual, the transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.
与往常一样，为了清晰起见，文字记录经过了轻微编辑。
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Conversations with Tyler.
大家好，欢迎回到《与泰勒对话》。
Today I’m chatting with the famous investor and thinker, Jeremy Grantham.
今天我正在与著名的投资者和思想家杰里米·格兰瑟姆聊天。
He is co-founder of Grantham, Mayo & Van Otterloo, also known as GMO, and he has been in the news a great deal lately with his proclamations on the environment and also bubbles.
他是 Grantham, Mayo & Van Otterloo（也称为 GMO）的联合创始人，最近他因有关环境和泡沫的声明而频繁出现在新闻中。
Jeremy, welcome.
杰里米，欢迎。
Hi, nice to be with you.
嗨，很高兴和你在一起。
Can the global mining industry produce sufficient raw materials for the green transition?
全球采矿业能否为绿色转型生产足够的原材料？
Not as currently configured, no. Not a prayer, not even close.
与当前配置不同，否。不是祈祷，甚至不是祈祷。
Which is the most binding constraint?
哪个是最具约束力的约束？
Lithium today, I would say.
我想说的是今天的锂。
Can’t we fix the lithium —
我们不能修复锂吗 ——
If we mined every ounce of lithium that is in the known reserves, it would probably be about 5 percent of what is required to green the entire economy once, forgetting about the fact that every 30 years, it would then need to be replaced.
如果我们开采已知储量中的每一盎司锂，它可能只占整个经济绿色化一次所需资源的 5% 左右，而忘记了每 30 年就需要更换一次的事实。
Can’t we get much more lithium from Australia, from Argentina, develop better ways of mining lithium, cheaper ways?
我们不能从澳大利亚、阿根廷获得更多的锂，开发更好、更便宜的锂开采方法吗？
Why is that harder, say, than developing fracking?
为什么这比开发水力压裂更难？
It’s harder because they’ve been looking for lithium now quite a few decades, and we have a pretty good idea where the best reserves are, and they are totally inadequate to the task.
这更困难，因为他们几十年来一直在寻找锂，我们很清楚最好的储量在哪里，但他们完全不足以完成这项任务。
The lesson we draw from that is, we have to change the task.
我们从中吸取的教训是，我们必须改变任务。
We have to redesign our way around lithium.
我们必须重新设计围绕锂的方式。
The Grantham Foundation, I’m happy to say, has a promising investment in extracting three or four times the lithium from brine, and extracting 50 percent more from the rock of the kind that occurs in Australia.
我很高兴地说，格兰瑟姆基金会进行了一项很有前途的投资，从盐水中提取三到四倍的锂，并从澳大利亚的岩石中提取 50% 以上的锂。
But even with those improvements, we’re not close.
但即使有了这些改进，我们还没有接近目标。
This is not going to be a closely run battle.
这不会是一场势均力敌的战斗。
We’re just going to have to find another way to make lightweight batteries using something other than lithium, and potassium and sodium are very good candidates and will probably do it.
我们必须找到另一种方法来使用锂以外的材料制造轻型电池，而钾和钠是非常好的候选者，并且可能会做到这一点。
There are hundreds of times more sodium and potassium around than lithium.
周围的钠和钾含量比锂多数百倍。
If we take away, say, the last 20 years — the era of explosive Chinese growth — isn’t the long-term trend for commodities prices really pretty modest?
如果我们去掉过去20年 ——“中国爆炸式增长的时代”—— 大宗商品价格的长期趋势不是真的相当温和吗？
I know China is done growing; longer-term elasticities of supply are high; the world will be depopulating, as you’ve pointed out.
我知道中国已经不再增长；长期供给弹性较高；正如您所指出的，世界人口将会减少。
Thus, we should think commodity prices, overall, will be falling for the next 50 years.
因此，我们应该认为未来 50 年大宗商品价格总体上将会下跌。
Well, commodities, unlike a lot of growth aspects — you’re dealing with a store that is completely finite, so even if your growth rate decelerates, your store gets less and less.
嗯，商品，与许多增长方面不同 ——你面对的是一家完全有限的商店，所以即使你的增长率减速，你的商店的数量也会越来越少。
If you’re growing at 10 percent in China, it gets less very rapidly.
如果你在中国的增长率是 10%，那么它会很快下降。
If you’re growing at 2 percent in Europe, it still gets less.
如果欧洲的增长率为 2%，那么增长幅度仍然会更低。
If your growth rate slows, the reserves do not mystically increase.
如果你的增长速度放缓，储备不会神秘地增加。
That’s the difference to almost all aspects of growth and resources.
这就是增长和资源的几乎所有方面的差异。
But we can dematerialize the economy, right?
但我们可以使经济非物质化，对吗？
The finite supply argument has been made for a long time.
有限供应论已经存在很长时间了。
It hasn’t yet turned out to be binding.
它尚未被证明具有约束力。
Wouldn’t it be strange if, all of a sudden, it were now binding, and the last 20 years is more of a China phenomenon?
如果突然间它具有约束力，而过去20年更多的是中国现象，那不是很奇怪吗？
Absolutely not.
绝对不是。
We’re the bacteria in the petri dish.
我们是培养皿中的细菌。
Someone discovered fossil fuels as sugar, and we accelerated into a frenzy.
有人发现化石燃料是糖，我们陷入了疯狂。
We can now see the rim of the petri dish, and you’re saying, “Let’s look back.” We’ve doubled and doubled 32 times from nothing to massive.
我们现在可以看到培养皿的边缘，你会说，“让我们回顾一下。”我们从无到有，已经翻了 32 倍。
We’re down to our last double.
我们已经只剩下最后一个双打了。
We can see the outer rim.
我们可以看到外缘。
Would it be surprising if the growth rate in the petri dish stopped, and stopped fairly abruptly?
如果培养皿中的生长速度停止并且相当突然地停止，会令人惊讶吗？
No, it wouldn’t.
不，不会的。
It would not only not be a surprise, it is inevitable.
这不仅不令人意外，而且是不可避免的。
How effective do you think the Biden climate and taxes act will be in improving the climate situation?
您认为拜登气候和税收法案对改善气候状况有何效果？
I think, for climate, it’s an extremely important message.
我认为，对于气候而言，这是一个极其重要的信息。
For green tech, which we’re invested in — I’m worried that people will suspect that we’ve bribed politicians because this bill could not possibly have been better for the Grantham Foundation that has half its money, half its principal in early-stage green tech, all of which will benefit.
对于我们投资的绿色科技——我担心人们会怀疑我们贿赂了政客，因为这项法案对格兰瑟姆基金会来说再好不过了，因为格兰瑟姆基金会一半的资金、一半的本金都投资于早期绿色科技，所有这些都将受益。
All aspects of green are being encouraged in this bill.
该法案鼓励绿色环保的各个方面。
But more important than that, it sends a message to the rest of the world that dopey US, full of climate deniers and politicians with their heads in the sand, has finally begun to wake up.
但更重要的是，它向世界其他国家传达了一个信息：愚蠢的美国，充满了气候否认者和埋头苦干的政客，终于开始醒来。
Is the long-run equilibrium that we make green energy much cheaper, but dirty energy becomes cheaper also when the world just uses much more energy?
长期均衡是否是我们使绿色能源变得更便宜，但当世界使用更多能源时，肮脏的能源也变得更便宜？
Because as we move away from oil, its price falls, so Vietnam, Africa, Bangladesh, wherever — they’ll just use that oil, and the world will remain dirty in terms of carbon.
因为当我们远离石油时，它的价格就会下跌，所以越南、非洲、孟加拉国，无论在哪里——他们都会只使用石油，而世界在碳排放方面仍将是肮脏的。
The interesting thing about green energy is, on a marginal cost basis, which we economists know is the only thing that really matters, the marginal cost of wind and solar and almost all green energy is nil.
关于绿色能源的有趣之处在于，在边际成本的基础上，我们经济学家知道这是唯一真正重要的事情，风能和太阳能以及几乎所有绿色能源的边际成本为零。
It’s very hard for even a falling price of fossil fuels to get to nil.
即使化石燃料的价格下降，也很难达到零。
It is so cheap to generate wind and solar when you have built the expensive plant, and we will drive fossil fuels out of business.
当你建造了昂贵的工厂时，产生风能和太阳能的成本是如此之低，我们将让化石燃料破产。
To bridge intermittency in, say, Vietnam and Bangladesh, won’t we need gas or something?
为了弥补越南和孟加拉国的间歇性问题，我们不需要天然气之类的东西吗？
In the short term.
短期内。
Greening is a very energy-intensive effort.
绿化是一项非常耗能的工作。
When you build a windmill, you put all your labor and all your materials and all the mining that went into it upfront.
当你建造一座风车时，你需要投入所有的劳动力、所有的材料以及所有的采矿费用。
The same with solar, and the same with battery storage.
太阳能也是如此，电池存储也是如此。
It’s almost weird how incredibly intensive, in terms of energy and resources, it is upfront.
就能源和资源而言，它的前期投入是多么令人难以置信，这几乎是奇怪的。
Then, when it’s built, it runs itself at almost zero cost.
然后，当它建成后，它会以几乎零成本自行运行。
That pulse, if you will, to build at a massive increased rate — wind, solar, and storage — creates an enormous, strange increment in demand for energy, which cannot be met yet, of course, by green energy, so it causes the demand for fossil fuels to go up.
如果你愿意的话，这种以大幅增加的速度增长的脉冲——风能、太阳能和存储——会造成对能源需求的巨大而奇怪的增长，当然，绿色能源还无法满足这一需求，因此它导致对化石燃料的需求上升。
You’ve written about the loss of topsoil in the Midwest and other places and why that’s a serious problem.
您写过有关中西部和其他地方表土流失的文章，以及为什么这是一个严重的问题。
What’s the current status of that issue?
该问题目前的状况如何？
Is anyone paying attention?
有人关注吗？
The ability of Homo sapiens to avoid long-term, slow-burning issues is truly profound, as I noticed 15 years ago with climate change.
正如我 15 年前在气候变化问题上注意到的那样，智人避免长期、缓慢燃烧的问题的能力确实是深远的。
Climate change has now caught fire, but other issues, including soil erosion, water shortages, toxicity, loss of insects — there’s some really profound and dangerous things going on, and the drop of fertility rate in the developed world.
气候变化现在已经引起了关注，但其他问题，包括水土流失、水资源短缺、毒性、昆虫的减少——一些真正深刻和危险的事情正在发生，以及发达国家生育率的下降。
We show no interest in these things at all, even though they may be burning on a fuse that’s only 20 or 30 years out.
我们对这些东西根本不感兴趣，尽管它们可能在 20 或 30 年后就会被点燃。
The reserves of topsoil in the Midwest have gone from at least a foot to an inch or two.
中西部的表土储量已经从至少一英尺减少到一两英寸。
We still have plenty of soil in most of the prime land, but the safety margin has dwindled to next to nothing.
我们的大部分优质土地仍然拥有充足的土壤，但安全裕度已降至几乎为零。
If we do not change Big Ag to be less conducive to erosion, we will start to lose productivity pretty soon.
如果我们不改变大农业以减少侵蚀，我们很快就会开始失去生产力。
In the next decade, it will start.
下一个十年，它将开始。
I understand that global warming takes place in the commons — the Earth’s atmosphere — but topsoil is essentially private property.
我知道全球变暖发生在公地——“地球大气层”——但表土本质上是私有财产。
If a lot of other farms were losing topsoil and you maintained yours, there’d be a high privatized, pecuniary return to doing so.
如果许多其他农场正在失去表土，而您则维护自己的农场，那么这样做会带来很高的私有化金钱回报。
Why does short-term time horizons prove to be a problem there?
为什么短期的时间跨度被证明是一个问题？
Why doesn’t the market internalize the gains and costs?
为什么市场不将收益和成本内部化？
Markets are occasionally quite efficient and, as we see in stock market bubbles, occasionally ludicrously inefficient, and everything in between.
市场有时非常有效，但正如我们在股市泡沫中看到的那样，有时效率低得可笑，以及介于两者之间的一切。
I have, unfortunately, no confidence in capitalism in dealing with the commons.
不幸的是，我对资本主义处理公地问题没有信心。
It’s showed no easy, quick awareness of climate change or soil erosion or anything else.
它没有表现出对气候变化、土壤侵蚀或其他任何事情的简单、快速的认识。
Capitalism waits until you bang it on the nose, and then it responds — sometimes brilliantly, quickly, and effectively — but it does not anticipate problems very well, does it?
资本主义会等到你打它的鼻子，然后它才会做出反应——“有时非常出色、迅速且有效”——但它并不能很好地预测问题，不是吗？
If I look at long-term trends for weather disaster–related deaths and even flooding deaths, they’re both down slightly, but they’re down over time.
如果我观察与天气灾害相关的死亡人数甚至洪水死亡人数的长期趋势，就会发现它们都略有下降，但随着时间的推移，它们会下降。
How worried should we be about climate change, given that mitigation is relatively effective?
鉴于缓解措施相对有效，我们应该对气候变化有多担心？
Mitigation has barely gotten going yet.* I haven’t noticed the great sea walls appearing around the vastness* of the world.
缓解措施还没有开始。*我还没有注意到巨大的海堤出现在广阔*的世界周围。
I think the world is in complete denial about ocean level rise, and one day when Miami gets an incredible flood, it will wake up and do something down in Miami.
我认为世界完全否认海平面上升，有一天，当迈阿密遭遇一场令人难以置信的洪水时，它会醒来并在迈阿密做一些事情。
This is a pay-as-you-go system that we have.
这是我们的现收现付系统。
We respond, as I say, when we get whacked on the nose.
正如我所说，当我们的鼻子受到重击时，我们会做出反应。
We’re not anticipating in mitigation expenditures.
我们预计不会有缓解支出。
We’re spending nothing.
我们什么都不花。
We’re just waiting to see what happens, and what happens is getting obviously very much worse very quickly in the last two years.
我们只是等着看会发生什么，而在过去两年里，情况显然很快变得更糟。
The climate, I hope, is just having a run of bad luck from our point of view.
我希望，从我们的角度来看，气候只是运气不好而已。
I don’t believe this could possibly be typical.
我不认为这可能是典型的。
The fact that we have severe droughts in China, India, Europe, and North America at the same time is completely without parallel in history.
中国、印度、欧洲、北美同时发生严重干旱，这在历史上是史无前例的。
You will notice that even though they are in severe droughts, they are simultaneously having, here and there, floods of a level that we have never seen before, washing away German towns.
你会注意到，尽管他们正处于严重干旱之中，但他们同时到处都遭遇了我们以前从未见过的洪水，冲毁了德国城镇。
Not enough to break the drought.
不足以打破干旱。
The Rhine is unpassable.
莱茵河无法通行。
We have floods in Pakistan, but not enough to break the drought in the Indian subcontinent, et cetera.
巴基斯坦发生了洪水，但不足以缓解印度次大陆等地区的干旱。
Floods in China, floods in North America, down in Mississippi, Kansas, Louisiana.
中国发生洪水，北美发生洪水，密西西比州、堪萨斯州、路易斯安那州发生洪水。
If you could easily short coastal property, would you do so?
如果你可以轻松做空沿海房产，你会这样做吗？
Shorting is a complete mug’s game in almost any area, because once you’re short, you can lose 10 times your money, and you can only make a decent return if you’re right.
做空几乎在任何领域都是一场彻头彻尾的赌博游戏，因为一旦你做空，你可能会损失 10 倍的钱，而且只有在你做对的情况下才能获得可观的回报。
This is an asymmetry —
这是一种不对称 ——
But you’re pretty liquid, right?
但你的流动性很强，对吧？
You could short without leverage?
没有杠杆可以做空吗？
You don’t need leverage to do badly when you short.* When you go short, even though you have a simple unleveraged position, it can multiply.
当你做空时，你不需要杠杆来表现糟糕。*当你做空时，即使你有一个简单的无杠杆头寸，它也可以成倍增加。
The stock can go up 10 times and cost you 10 times your initial short position.
该股票可能会上涨 10 倍，而您的损失将是您初始空头头寸的 10 倍。
You don’t need leverage.
你不需要杠杆。
If you do leverage, you just die even quicker.
如果你使用杠杆，你只会死得更快。
Now, you mentioned major flooding in Jackson, Mississippi.
现在，您提到了密西西比州杰克逊市的严重洪水。
That’s a problem.
这是一个问题。
Right now, as we speak on September 1st, 2022, how much do you think real estate values will decline there as a result of the flooding?
现在，正如我们在 2022 年 9 月 1 日所说的那样，您认为洪水导致那里的房地产价值会下降多少？
What would your prediction be?
你的预测是什么？
The history so far on early flooding is that it has little or almost no effect.
迄今为止，早期洪水的影响很小或几乎没有影响。
It’s a bit like going bankrupt: very, very slowly at first and then quite sudden.
这有点像破产：一开始非常非常缓慢，然后非常突然。
When you need to buy insurance one day, you will not be able to get it except from government subsidy, and on that day, the house prices will start to decline.
当有一天你需要买保险的时候，除了政府补贴你就买不到了，而从那一天起，房价就开始下跌。
Then quite possibly, there’ll be some sort of panic — we do panics pretty well — and the prices will drop like a stone, more than they should.
然后很可能会出现某种恐慌——“我们应对恐慌做得很好”——而且价格会像石头一样下跌，跌幅超出应有的水平。
And then, of course, they will rally, and so on and so forth.
然后，当然，他们会集会，等等。
Business as usual.
一切如常。
If I try to seek out the most serious efforts to estimate the costs of global warming, say, by 2200, I end up at the papers of Esteban Rossi-Hansberg.
如果我试图寻找最认真的努力来估算全球变暖的成本，比如说到 2200 年，我最终会看到埃斯特万·罗西-汉斯伯格 (Esteban Rossi-Hansberg) 的论文。
He comes up with figures somewhere between 5 percent and 10 percent of global GDP, which, as you know, is an enormous amount of money, especially come 2200.
他提出的数字占全球 GDP 的 5% 到 10% 之间，正如你所知，这是一笔巨款，尤其是在 2200 年。
Now, does that strike you as a fair estimate or an underestimate?
现在，您认为这是一个合理的估计还是低估了？
It strikes me as utterly trivial and only producible by economists.
在我看来，它完全是微不足道的，只有经济学家才能提出。
When economists try, they can be absolutely nitwitted.
当经济学家尝试时，他们可能绝对是傻子。
The guy who got the Nobel Prize for it , for his work on climate change — actually he spelled it out.
这位因其在气候变化方面的工作而获得诺贝尔奖的人——实际上他已经阐明了这一点。
He said, “Even if there was 10 degrees centigrade, it would only cost something in the range of 10 percent of GDP.”
他说，“即使气温上升10摄氏度，成本也只占GDP的10%左右。”
To which I say, “Dudes, we will be long gone as a species at 10 degrees centigrade.” It is quite obvious at 1.1 that we are already having trouble.
对此我想说的是，“伙计们，在 10 摄氏度的温度下，我们作为一个物种将早已消失。”很明显，在 1.1 版本中我们已经遇到了麻烦。
At 2, we will be struggling and societies will fail here, there, and everywhere.
到了 2 岁，我们将陷入困境，社会到处都会失败。
At 3, in a sense, forget about it, and we may have to deal with it, but it will be grievous.
在3点，从某种意义上说，忘记它，我们可能不得不处理它，但它会很严重。
At 10 degrees .
10 度。
.
。
.
。
It takes real imagination to come up with a little number of GDP loss.
GDP损失的数字需要真正的想象力才能想出来。
No, they’re complete jokes.
不，它们完全是笑话。
You cannot find a serious climate scientist who would bet that society, as we know it on a global basis, will still be around at 5 degrees centigrade.
你找不到一位认真的气候科学家会打赌，正如我们在全球范围内所知道的那样，社会的温度仍将保持在 5 摄氏度左右。
I have met a lot of them, and I ask them this question.
我见过很多人，我问他们这个问题。
Not one thinks we have any material chance of a stable society at 5 degrees centigrade.
没有人认为我们有任何实质性机会在 5 摄氏度下建立一个稳定的社会。
The idea that you can bandy around 10 is reserved for Nobel Prize winners.
可以玩 10 左右的游戏的想法是诺贝尔奖获得者的专利。
Sure, but we probably won’t see a 5-degree or 10-degree hike in the temperature.
当然可以，但我们可能不会看到气温上升 5 度或 10 度。
If we look at what is most likely — it’s not just economists who say this, but these are papers co-authored with climate scientists, and markets seem to agree with them — that costs of global warming, climate change will be highly significant but not existential, not a complete disaster for civilization if you look, say, at prices for coastal property, prices in Florida, prices in the Hamptons.
如果我们看看最有可能发生的情况——不仅是经济学家这么说，而且这些都是与气候科学家合着的论文，而且市场似乎也同意他们的观点——全球变暖和气候变化的成本将是非常重大的，但不是存在的，如果你看看沿海房产的价格、佛罗里达州的价格、汉普顿的价格，这对文明来说并不是一场彻底的灾难。
So, it’s the market and economists broadly agreeing, and you just think they’re wrong?
那么，市场和经济学家普遍同意这一点，而你只是认为他们错了？
Absolutely.
绝对地。
I think it’s par for the course for markets to be wrong.
我认为市场出错是很正常的。
On a horizon that’s over two years, I count on the markets being wrong.
从两年多的时间来看，我认为市场是错误的。
As for economists, I typically count on them being wrong for anything that is long-term, anything to do with the commons, anything that requires a lot of common sense.
至于经济学家，我通常认为他们在任何长期的事情、任何与公地有关的事情、任何需要大量常识的事情上都是错误的。
Economists have an ability to build models and get off into abstractions and assumptions so profound that after a while, they need to pinch themselves and remind themselves where they live in the real world.
经济学家有能力建立模型并进入如此深刻的抽象和假设，以至于过了一段时间，他们需要掐自己一下并提醒自己自己生活在现实世界中。
I think the economics profession on the topic of resource limitations — energy in particular, but metals and climate change — has been extravagantly poor, I mean remarkably lacking, with the one or two notable exceptions here and there, where economists have actually made a big point of resource and energy as key to the long term, but they’re all marginalized.
我认为经济学界在资源限制——尤其是能源，但金属和气候变化——方面的研究非常匮乏，我的意思是非常缺乏，除了一两个明显的例外，经济学家实际上强调资源和能源是长期的关键，但它们都被边缘化了。
James Galbraith.
詹姆斯·加尔布雷斯。
These are not pillars of the establishment, the people who see energy for what it is.
这些人不是当权派的支柱，也不是看到能源本质的人。
Energy, obviously, is the driver of civilization.
显然，能源是文明的驱动力。
Now, just yesterday, you published a piece called “Entering the Superbubble’s Final Act,” where you described our current situation as being a 2.5- to 3-sigma event in terms of being an overextended bubble.
就在昨天，您发表了一篇名为“进入超级泡沫的最后一幕”的文章，其中您将我们目前的情况描述为一个 2.5 至 3 西格玛事件，即泡沫过度扩张。
When I think of other 2.5- to 3-sigma events, say, 9/11, I feel I’m very poorly placed to predict how they will evolve in the future.
当我想到其他 2.5 到 3 西格玛事件时，例如 9/11，我觉得我很难预测它们未来将如何演变。
If our current situation is something like a 3-sigma event, why should we be so confident that we know how it will evolve?
如果我们当前的情况类似于 3-sigma 事件，我们为什么要如此自信地知道它会如何演变？
Why think we’re so good at spotting bubbles at those margins?
为什么我们认为我们如此擅长发现这些边缘的泡沫？
I think 9/11 — you bring up an interesting point.
我认为 9/11 — 你提出了一个有趣的观点。
My quarterly letter after 9/11, I made exactly that point, that dealing with sudden shocks are impossibly difficult to predict, that after the ’87 crash, a lot of us thought that it would have consequences going deep into the future.
我在 9/11 之后的季度信中明确指出了这一点，应对突发冲击是极其难以预测的，在 87 年崩盘之后，我们很多人都认为这会对未来产生深远的影响。
It turned out that the ’87 crash was a unique outlier event that was not to be replayed in the next 25 years.
事实证明，87 年的事故是一次独特的异常事件，在未来 25 年内不会重演。
I use that as an analogy.
我用它作为类比。
It seemed to me that 9/11 was an outlier event unlikely to be repeated* and bearing utterly no resemblance to a nice stock market bubble like 1929 or 2000 or, indeed, 2022.
在我看来，9/11 是一个不太可能重复的异常事件*，并且与 1929 年或 2000 年甚至 2022 年等美好的股市泡沫完全没有相似之处。
But I think you also say there might be three or four previous bubbles in history as big as this one.
但我想你也说过，历史上以前可能有三四个像这次这样大的泡沫。
So, if we have three or four data points, why should we be very confident that right now is such a superbubble?
那么，如果我们有三四个数据点，为什么我们应该非常有信心现在是一个超级泡沫呢？
What’s the magic elixir that you’re drawing from?
你所汲取的灵丹妙药是什么？
Is it just three or four data points?
只是三个或四个数据点吗？
Or do you know something, in theory, that other people don’t?
或者从理论上讲，你知道一些其他人不知道的事情吗？
No, this is precisely the point.
不，这正是重点。
There are not many data points, and you have to live with that.
数据点并不多，你必须忍受这一点。
You can make the assumption that you would need 30 before you could do any sensible prediction.
您可以假设您需要 30 个才能进行任何合理的预测。
I believe that markets are a function of human behavior.
我相信市场是人类行为的函数。
I believe that human behavior has these flashpoints.
我相信人类的行为有这些闪点。
That is normally quite reasonable.
这通常是相当合理的。
We’re relatively efficient, and stock prices are close enough for government work to what they should be.
我们的效率相对较高，而且股价也足够接近政府工作的水平。
Then once in a blue moon, circumstances conspire to get us into an irrational fever.
然后，千载难逢的环境会让我们陷入非理性的狂热。
It takes an extended number of good economic years, extended profit margins at or close to a peak, nearly perfect economic conditions, and it takes a slow, steady build-up of euphoria.
这需要较长的经济良好年份、扩大的利润率达到或接近峰值、近乎完美的经济条件，并且需要缓慢、稳定地建立乐观情绪。
Then it hits a flashpoint, where people start to buy stocks without any regard to the fundamentals, as we’ve seen in the meme stocks recently.
然后它就达到了一个爆发点，人们开始购买股票而不考虑基本面，正如我们最近在模因股票中看到的那样。
They buy them because they think someone else may pay more.
他们购买它们是因为他们认为其他人可能会支付更多费用。
These are pretty rare events, and we’ve had three, and they have some unique characteristics in common with each other and in common with nothing else.
这些都是非常罕见的事件，我们已经发生过三个，它们之间有一些共同的独特特征，但没有其他共同点。
Now we’re in number four.
现在我们排名第四。
That impresses the pants off me, I can tell you.
我可以告诉你，这让我印象深刻。
I think the fourth one is so similar to the other three, and the outcomes from the other three are so unique and interesting, that I am willing to bet that this one is going to be the same or similar.
我认为第四个与其他三个非常相似，并且其他三个的结果非常独特和有趣，因此我愿意打赌这一个将是相同或相似的。
Here’s a very direct question.
这是一个非常直接的问题。
If spotting bubbles is relatively feasible, why aren’t you much richer than you are, noting that you’re already quite well-to-do?
如果发现泡沫相对可行，为什么你不比现在更富有，因为你已经很富裕了？
Oh, Tyler, I have to admit I needed a partner, from day one, who was one of the world’s great hedge fund guys, because I have been much better at long-term ideas — getting them right — than I have been at turning those ideas into making money.
哦，泰勒，我不得不承认，从第一天起，我就需要一个合伙人，他是世界上最伟大的对冲基金人士之一，因为我更擅长于长期想法 ——“让它们正确”——而不是把这些想法转化为赚钱。
Yes, I have a lousy 1.5 billion in my foundation, but the point is it should be 10.
是的，我的基金会里有 15 亿，但重点是它应该是 10 亿。
The quality of the ideas was much better than my execution, which has always sucked.
想法的质量比我的执行力要好得多，而我的执行力一直很糟糕。
I just have not had enough interest in implementing the ideas.
我只是对实施这些想法没有足够的兴趣。
It’s another life.
这是另一种生活。
It takes different talents.
需要不同的天赋。
I’m interested in ideas, like I believe you are, and that doesn’t leave as much time for working out the 17th derivative of the options market that would get the job done best.
我对想法很感兴趣，就像我相信你一样，但这并没有留下足够的时间来计算期权市场的 17 阶导数，从而最好地完成工作。
That’s a separate skill, which I admire greatly.
这是一项单独的技能，我非常钦佩。
I envy, I wish I had it as well, but I don’t.
我很羡慕，我希望我也能拥有它，但我没有。
If we look at the UK only, how would you describe the current bubble in the UK?
如果我们只看英国，您如何描述英国当前的泡沫？
What’s the overvaluation?
什么是高估？
The UK is not spectacularly overpriced.
英国的物价并没有高得惊人。
The odd thing about this event is that the overpricing, rather like 2000, is concentrated in the US in the stock market.
这次事件的奇怪之处在于，与2000年类似，这次的定价过高主要集中在美国股市。
Plenty of places around the world are merely in a bull market — ho-hum, ordinary stuff.
世界上很多地方都只是处于牛市之中——平淡无奇，平淡无奇。
The real estate world is completely different.
房地产世界则完全不同。
We’re way up at the top of the range.
我们已经处于该范围的顶部。
As a multiple of family income, we’ve just beaten the so-called housing bubble of ’06, but we’re pikers compared to Canada, Australia, and Europe and China.
作为家庭收入的倍数，我们刚刚击败了06年所谓的房地产泡沫，但与加拿大、澳大利亚、欧洲和中国相比，我们还处于领先地位。
They all went to multiples of family income that were, by historical standards, preposterous.
他们的资金都是家庭收入的数倍，按照历史标准来看，这是荒谬的。
And housing, of course, is a more dangerous thing to mess with in economics.
当然，在经济学中，住房问题是更危险的事情。
I believe the housing markets around the world will spend the next big chunk of time unraveling and causing all manner of, perhaps, unexpected problems.
我相信，世界各地的房地产市场将在接下来的很长一段时间内崩溃，并引发各种可能是意想不到的问题。
Of course, the interest rate bond market overvaluation was universal too.
当然，利率债市场估值过高也是普遍现象。
So, we had, of the three bubbles, bonds was everywhere, and real estate almost everywhere, and the stock market curiously confined principally to the US.
因此，在三个泡沫中，债券无处不在，房地产几乎无处不在，而股票市场奇怪地主要局限于美国。
Why does there seem to be such a major current productivity crisis in the UK?
为什么英国目前似乎存在如此严重的生产力危机？
Maybe stretching back 20 years.
也许可以追溯到20年前。
There’s a lot of science in south England, a lot of talent in the country, a democratic government.
英格兰南部有很多科学，这个国家有很多人才，有一个民主政府。
What’s the fundamental thing going wrong there?
最根本的问题是什么？
Yes, I don’t know.
是的，我不知道。
Of course, I believe Brexit was one of the worst self-inflicted wounds in modern times that any economy could pull, so that anyone who’s building .
当然，我认为英国脱欧是现代任何经济体都可能造成的最严重的自伤之一，因此任何正在建设的人都会如此。
.
。
.
。
Any Toyota building a plant in Europe, who might have built it in Scotland or the north of England, will of course now be paid, in a way, to build it in Europe.
任何在欧洲建造工厂的丰田汽车，原本可能在苏格兰或英格兰北部建造工厂，现在当然会在某种程度上获得在欧洲建造工厂的报酬。
That isn’t immediate.
这不是立竿见影的。
Some of it is pretty quick, but it goes on and on for decades.
其中一些发生得很快，但它会持续数十年。
That has just lowered the growth rate of the UK.
这刚刚降低了英国的增长率。
Then, of course, a lot of industrious Europeans, who were settling happily in England and the UK, because of the combination of Brexit and COVID went home and stayed home.
当然，由于英国脱欧和新冠疫情的双重影响，许多勤劳的欧洲人在英格兰和英国幸福地定居下来，回到了家乡并待在家里。
That’s taken a lot of blood out of the system, and they were some of the most industrious people that were there.
这让系统失去了大量的血液，而他们是那里最勤奋的人之一。
Yes, they tried very hard, in terms of venture capital, to gear up, and they will have, by the look of it, some success, but it’s a bit like the tail trying to wag the dog.
是的，他们在风险投资方面非常努力地做好准备，从表面上看，他们会取得一些成功，但这有点像尾巴试图摇狗。
Much better than nothing, but the truthful answer is, I don’t know why they’re quite so bad.
总比没有好得多，但真实的答案是，我不知道为什么它们这么糟糕。
What do you view as the fundamental mistake of postwar British history?
您认为战后英国历史的根本错误是什么？
Brexit.
英国脱欧。
Well, but before that.
好吧，但在那之前。
Brexit happened for some set of reasons.
英国脱欧是出于某些原因而发生的。
It’s not a complete accident.
这并非完全是意外。
I thought it was a bad idea, but that one even got to that point .
我认为这是一个坏主意，但这个主意甚至达到了这一点。
.
。
.
。
The Netherlands didn’t vote for their version of Brexit.
荷兰没有投票支持他们版本的英国脱欧。
How did things get so screwed up that people would press that button?
事情怎么会变得如此糟糕，以至于人们会按下那个按钮？
Actually, it was really bad luck because if you had taken a poll on — and they did.
事实上，这真是运气不好，因为如果你对 —— 进行了民意调查，他们就这么做了。
When you took a poll in England — do you approve of immigration?
当您在英国进行民意调查时，您支持移民吗？
— and you did it in 1947, 90 percent of the people disapproved.
— 你在 1947 年就这么做了，90% 的人都不赞成。
If you did it in 1957, it was 82 percent.
如果你在 1957 年做的话，这个比例是 82%。
Gradually, people became accustomed to the idea of immigration, and it worked down into the 60s and finally to about 55 percent.
渐渐地，人们已经习惯了移民的想法，到了20世纪60年代，这一比例最终下降到了55%左右。
And they decided to have Brexit, which became a vote on immigration.
他们决定脱欧，这变成了对移民的投票。
They could never have picked a point with as favorable a vote on immigration.
他们永远不可能选择在移民问题上获得如此有利的投票的观点。
Indeed, the whole of London is pro-immigration and pro-Remain.
事实上，整个伦敦都是支持移民和支持留欧的。
Had they waited another 20 years, it would’ve been down to 42 percent, and Brexit would’ve failed.
如果他们再等 20 年，这一比例就会下降到 42%，英国脱欧也会失败。
Any time after World War II, you had had a Brexit vote equivalent on immigration, it would’ve failed in England.
二战后的任何时候，如果你在移民问题上进行类似脱欧公投，在英国都会失败。
Was Margaret Thatcher a successful prime minister?
玛格丽特·撒切尔是一位成功的首相吗？
Yes, I think you have to say that she was amazingly successful because England was in one of its several periods of economic malaise and social malaise, in a way.
Yes, I think you have to say that she was amazingly successful because England was in one of its several periods of economic malaise and social malaise, in a way.
We were really stuck in the class system — one of the reasons I left England — and Thatcher did an unbelievable job on that.
我们确实被困在阶级制度中——这是我离开英国的原因之一——而撒切尔在这方面做了令人难以置信的工作。
She would grab Brits who’d been 30 years in America at McKinsey and stick them to run the steel company.
她会招募在美国麦肯锡工作了 30 年的英国人，让他们来经营这家钢铁公司。
She picked people entirely on merit.
她完全根据优点选人。
It was a kind of shocking introduction of meritocracy into the old establishment based on class and land and so on.
这是一种令人震惊的将精英政治引入基于阶级和土地等的旧体制的做法。
At the end of her era, it was a different Britain, much more competitive.
在她的时代结束时，英国已经不同了，竞争更加激烈。
London felt like New York, and things happened a lot faster and better.
伦敦感觉就像纽约，事情发生得更快更好。
Now, you grew up near where?
现在，你在哪里长大？
South England — is that correct?
南英格兰 — 正确吗？
No, I was born there.
不，我出生在那里。
I grew up in a coal mining town, Doncaster.
我在唐卡斯特的一个煤矿小镇长大。
Where is that?
哪里是？
In Yorkshire.
In Yorkshire.
How has that influenced your subsequent thought — that background?
这对你后来的想法 ——那个背景有何影响？
Mainly the fact that I was brought up by my grandparents, who left school at 13 and opened a little shop, and eventually turned it into 17 shops and sold it, and turned that into a big restaurant on the main road from London to Edinburgh.
主要是我是由我的祖父母带大的，他们13岁就离开了学校，开了一家小店，最后把它变成了17家商店并卖掉了，然后把它变成了伦敦到爱丁堡主干道上的一家大餐馆。
He was himself brought up a Quaker and then became an apostate, but he remained a Quaker in his behavior, so we lived in a world of waste not, want not.
He was himself brought up a Quaker and then became an apostate, but he remained a Quaker in his behavior, so we lived in a world of waste not, want not.
Of course, it was wartime, so that was double jeopardy.
当然，当时是战时，所以这是双重危险。
Everything was recycled, waste of any kind was thought to be disgusting, you reused everything.
所有东西都被回收，任何形式的浪费都被认为是令人厌恶的，你重复使用所有东西。
So, you grew up thinking about scarcity and natural resources and coal —
所以，你从小就思考稀缺性、自然资源和煤炭 ——
And recycling and all those good things, yes.
还有回收和所有这些好东西，是的。
— at a very early age before other people were thinking about it.
——在很小的时候，其他人就开始思考这个问题了。
It’s in my cortex.
它在我的皮质中。
There’s nothing I can do about it.
我对此无能为力。
When I see waste, I twitch.
当我看到浪费时，我会抽搐。
When the relatively extreme optimism of the 1980s came along, were you already a skeptic at that point?
当 20 世纪 80 年代相对极端的乐观主义出现时，您当时是否已经持怀疑态度？
Or that popped up a bit later?
还是稍后才出现？
I’m a great optimist — I suspect along with you — about technology.
对于技术，我是一个伟大的乐观主义者 ——我和你一样怀疑。
I think whatever success we’re going to have will be on new technology.
我认为无论我们取得什么成功都将依赖于新技术。
And I am a great fan of American venture capital.
我是美国风险投资的忠实粉丝。
It is, I think, the last, best American exceptionalism.
我认为这是最后也是最好的美国例外论。
We’re not very exceptional at many things.
我们在很多事情上并不是很出色。
We’re exceptionally bad at plenty of things in America.
在美国，我们在很多事情上都表现得非常糟糕。
But VC, we have the best and the biggest — always have, and will for a considerable amount of time.
但是 VC，我们拥有最好和最大的——一直如此，而且在相当长的一段时间内都会如此。
It’s very vigorous, and it attracts the very best foreigners too.
它非常有活力，也吸引了最优秀的外国人。
They are a shockingly, encouragingly large fraction of the VC leadership, as you see.
正如你所看到的，他们在风险投资领导层中所占的比例令人震惊、令人鼓舞。
We also have a lion’s share of the great research universities that go hand-in-hand with VC.
我们还有很大一部分与风险投资齐头并进的优秀研究型大学。
If we save our bacon, that is the sector that will do the heavy lifting for everybody, including the US.
如果我们拯救我们的培根，这个行业将为包括美国在内的所有人带来重担。
I am optimistic, incidentally, that we will have a plentiful supply of green energy and that we will green the entire system.
顺便说一句，我很乐观地认为，我们将拥有充足的绿色能源供应，并且我们将实现整个系统的绿色化。
My worry has always been — and still is — timing.
我的担忧一直是 — ，现在仍然是 — 时机。
We don’t have a lot of time to spare.
我们没有太多空闲时间。
The damage we do is already pretty obvious, and it’s getting worse rapidly.
我们造成的损害已经相当明显，而且还在迅速恶化。
There are many flashpoints that the serious climate scientists will tell you about.
严肃的气候科学家会告诉你许多热点问题。
We could pass them any time, where the temperature in the far north releases methane and CO2 from tundra and from offshore frozen methane — clathrates, they call them — and that could spiral the temperature out of control.
We could pass them any time, where the temperature in the far north releases methane and CO2 from tundra and from offshore frozen methane — clathrates, they call them — and that could spiral the temperature out of control.
The jet stream could shift; the equivalent ocean currents could shift.
急流可能会发生变化；等效洋流可能会发生变化。
There are several of these potential self-reinforcing cycles.
有几个潜在的自我强化循环。
Of course, the classic one is, you melt the ice.
当然，最经典的就是，你把冰融化了。
The ice reflected the sun, and now the dark ocean absorbs it, and the temperature goes up faster, and more ice melts, et cetera.
冰反射了阳光，现在黑暗的海洋吸收了阳光，温度上升得更快，更多的冰融化，等等。
We are really playing with fire, and we just don’t know how long we’ve got, how high the temperature can go without triggering these points.
我们真的是在玩火，我们只是不知道我们还有多长时间，温度能达到多高而不触发这些点。
You cannot find a serious climate scientist who would give you a guarantee that that will not happen.
你找不到一位严肃的气候科学家可以向你保证这种情况不会发生。
Some of them think it’s very likely, some of them think it’s unlikely, but all of them agree it can happen when you play with another degree or two centigrade.
Some of them think it’s very likely, some of them think it’s unlikely, but all of them agree it can happen when you play with another degree or two centigrade.
Who or what else would you describe as your major intellectual influences?
您认为谁或什么其他事物对您的思想影响最大？
I was a great fan of Jack Bogle.
我是杰克·博格尔的忠实粉丝。
Hardworking, driven, honest man wanting to do the right thing by investors, brilliant.
勤奋、有动力、诚实的人，希望为投资者做正确的事，才华横溢。
Why has Boston been so central and so big in asset management?
为什么波士顿在资产管理领域如此重要且规模如此之大？
Is that an accident or you think there’s a good reason?
这是一次意外还是您认为有充分的理由？
It has a good cluster of universities.
它拥有良好的大学集群。
With any luck, that should be associated with producing people who think.
运气好的话，这应该与培养善于思考的人有关。
And if you think, pretty soon you’re likely to come up with good ideas, and then you need to implement them.
如果你思考，很快你就会想出好主意，然后你需要实施它们。
Good engineering, MIT, and so on.
好的工程学，MIT等等。
No, Boston has been blessed with an unfair advantage for a long time.
不，波士顿长期以来一直享有不公平的优势。
The highest incidence of students of any major city.
所有大城市中学生的发病率最高。
What is Ray Dalio most wrong about?
雷·达里奥 (Ray Dalio) 最错误的是什么？
I know you did a dialogue with him.
我知道你和他有过对话。
You agree with him on many points, but how would you describe your main difference with him?
您在很多方面都同意他的观点，但是您如何描述您与他的主要区别？
In my next life, I’m going to be an expert in fixed income, but in this one, I am a beginner.
下辈子，我将成为固定收益专家，但这一辈，我是初学者。
I’ve spent my time on equities and, to some extent, on real estate, and I’ve left the highly competitive business of fixed income to others, and he has not.
I’ve spent my time on equities and, to some extent, on real estate, and I’ve left the highly competitive business of fixed income to others, and he has not.
But in terms of where we overlap, I have no interesting disagreement with him.
但就我们的重叠之处而言，我与他没有什么有趣的分歧。
How would you describe your media diet to follow the areas you care about?
您如何描述您的媒体饮食以关注您关心的领域？
The environment, commodities, resource scarcity, bubbles — what do you do to track those and other issues?
环境、大宗商品、资源稀缺、泡沫 — 您如何跟踪这些问题和其他问题？
That has become the great problem for me.
这对我来说已经成为一个大问题。
I wanted to try and keep up with COVID, and I was hiding in the countryside, and I was doing 8, 9, 10, 11 hours of reading a day because, suddenly, climate became an investment issue.
I wanted to try and keep up with COVID, and I was hiding in the countryside, and I was doing 8, 9, 10, 11 hours of reading a day because, suddenly, climate became an investment issue.
Resources — my other pet theme — I had a decent paper done on that in 2013, “Time to Wake Up,” we’re running out of resources — which I still believe is much more right than wrong.
Resources — my other pet theme — I had a decent paper done on that in 2013, “Time to Wake Up,” we’re running out of resources — which I still believe is much more right than wrong.
Suddenly, they became fashionable.
突然间，它们变得时尚起来。
Then to add insult to injury, if you will, we got into a bubble, which is the last specialty that I have in the investment business.
然后，雪上加霜的是，如果你愿意的话，我们陷入了泡沫，这是我在投资业务中的最后一个专长。
It was the first one I got into, and it will be the last one on my way out.
这是我进去的第一个，也是我出去的最后一个。
All three components went from really back burner to front burner.
所有三个组件都从真正的后燃烧器变成了前燃烧器。
At the same time, our activity in our foundation with climate became much more intense because we decided to invest our principal.
与此同时，我们基金会的气候活动变得更加激烈，因为我们决定投资我们的本金。
And in two and a half years, we have built up our own team and done going on 45 of our own investments in early-stage green VC.
在两年半的时间里，我们建立了自己的团队，并完成了 45 项早期绿色风险投资。
Fascinating, wonderful people.
令人着迷、很棒的人。
Couldn’t be a better topic to spend time on, in my opinion.
在我看来，这是一个更值得花时间讨论的话题。
I think it’s a candidate to make more money than anything else, particularly after the new bill has passed.
我认为这是一个比其他任何东西都能赚更多钱的候选人，特别是在新法案通过之后。
Countries all over the world are beginning to put their shoulder behind climate change.
世界各国都开始支持气候变化。
Taxes on carbon are coming in here, there, and everywhere.
碳税无处不在。
Incentives for electrification and alternatives.
电气化和替代方案的激励措施。
The real money is usually in the early stages of the next wave of inventions, and they are unbelievably important.
真正的钱通常出现在下一波发明的早期阶段，而且它们的重要性令人难以置信。
We have to find our way to engineer around the bottlenecks.
我们必须找到解决瓶颈的方法。
We live in a world of bottlenecks, suddenly, from COVID, from climate change, from resource shortages.
我们生活在一个突然之间充满瓶颈的世界，这些瓶颈来自新冠疫情、气候变化和资源短缺。
We really need to spend more money and time and talent on anticipating the next level of bottlenecks and working on them in advance.
我们确实需要花费更多的金钱、时间和人才来预测下一阶段的瓶颈并提前解决它们。
That is what we try and do in the foundation.
这就是我们在基金会中尝试和做的事情。
Are taxes on carbon so common?
碳税如此普遍吗？
I see Australia repealing theirs, Germany still getting rid of nuclear power and burning more dirty coal, Japan seems to be returning to nuclear power, but remarkably little progress toward making dirty energy more expensive.
I see Australia repealing theirs, Germany still getting rid of nuclear power and burning more dirty coal, Japan seems to be returning to nuclear power, but remarkably little progress toward making dirty energy more expensive.
It’s so important to the average voter to fill up their car and do their heating that it’s a nearly impossible ask of politicians to do it.
对于普通选民来说，给汽车加油和供暖是如此重要，以至于要求政客们几乎不可能做到这一点。
Given that, one has to be amazed that the EU has a pretty effective form of carbon tax, and that the Chinese are struggling manfully to .
鉴于此，人们不得不惊讶于欧盟拥有一种相当有效的碳税形式，而中国正在勇敢地为此奋斗。
.
。
.
。
That’s probably unacceptable now, to say “manfully.” Struggling humanly to bring in a carbon cap-and-trade.
现在说“有男子气概”可能是不可接受的。人类努力引入碳限额与交易。
A talent question.
A talent question.
If you were looking to hire someone to work in your foundation, obviously they should be smart, hardworking, and so on, but what traits do you look for above and beyond the usual when you’re evaluating talent?
If you were looking to hire someone to work in your foundation, obviously they should be smart, hardworking, and so on, but what traits do you look for above and beyond the usual when you’re evaluating talent?
Being agreeable and cooperative.
和蔼可亲、合作。
That’s easy, give me another one.
很简单，再给我一份。
How about when you hire an investment portfolio manager for GMO?
当您为 GMO 聘请投资组合经理时怎么样？
Do you look for the same or different?
您寻找相同还是不同？
I don’t hire them.
I don’t hire them.
But at some point, you’ve hired them, right?
但在某个时候，你雇佣了他们，对吗？
No, hardly ever.
No, hardly ever.
I only hired three people in my entire career at GMO.
我在 GMO 的整个职业生涯中只雇用了三个人。
I considered that I had no talent for it and attempted to duck it to the best of my ability.
我认为自己没有这方面的天赋，并试图尽我最大的能力去回避它。
I was very proud of the three I did hire, but —
我为我雇佣的三个人感到非常自豪，但是 ——
If you think about the course of your own life, you’re 83 now.
如果你想想自己的人生轨迹，你现在已经 83 岁了。
There’s what you want to do at 83 and what you wanted to do when you were 60.
有你83岁时想做的事情和你60岁时想做的事情。
How has that changed?
How has that changed?
I’ve got to say, my life has been a pleasant surprise.
我不得不说，我的生活充满了惊喜。
I’ve been a drifter.
I’ve been a drifter.
I never had any great plans or ambitions.
我从来没有什么伟大的计划或野心。
As a kid, I was a terrible student and finally woke up about a year into college.
小时候，我是一个糟糕的学生，最后在大学一年左右醒来。
Only one university in England — Sheffield — would have me.
英国只有一所大学——“谢菲尔德”——愿意接纳我。
Then, by a series of coincidences, I drifted, really, into Harvard Business School and then drifted into finance.
然后，由于一系列的巧合，我真的进入了哈佛商学院，然后又进入了金融领域。
Why?
为什么？
Because my friends were having the most fun, not because I had a battle to make lots of money.
因为我的朋友们玩得很开心，而不是因为我为了赚很多钱而奋斗。
They were having more fun than anybody else by such a wide margin, I would’ve had to be an idiot in 1968 not to try and get a job in such an entertaining industry, so I did.
They were having more fun than anybody else by such a wide margin, I would’ve had to be an idiot in 1968 not to try and get a job in such an entertaining industry, so I did.
I was driven by ideas.
I was driven by ideas.
You can never have too many ideas in the investment business, right?
在投资行业，你的想法永远不会太多，对吧？
It’s dense with theoretical ideas, practical ideas, ideas about an individual company, ideas about a sector, ideas about the market, ideas about superbubbles.
It’s dense with theoretical ideas, practical ideas, ideas about an individual company, ideas about a sector, ideas about the market, ideas about superbubbles.
Those three lousy data points — are they so unique that it constitutes something worth betting on?
这三个糟糕的数据点 ——它们是如此独特以至于值得下注吗？
Someone like you wouldn’t get into Harvard Business School today, right?
像你这样的人今天不会进入哈佛商学院，对吗？
Has it become too hard to get into Harvard Business School?
进入哈佛商学院变得太难了吗？
How did you get in?
你是怎么进来的？
I got in by a series of such ludicrous strokes of good fortune that it would be a pity to tell the story in less than a few minutes, but it needed a lot of luck.
I got in by a series of such ludicrous strokes of good fortune that it would be a pity to tell the story in less than a few minutes, but it needed a lot of luck.
Do you think there’s not enough serendipity today in who gets into top universities?
您是否认为现在进入顶尖大学的机缘不够？
Probably not, yes.
Probably not, yes.
How do you think about your own plans from here on out?
您如何看待自己今后的计划？
You’re 83.
You’re 83.
Do you think it’s imperative to earn all the more money to support the foundation?
您认为有必要赚更多的钱来支持基金会吗？
Or do you think, well, I can stop earning money now?
或者你认为，好吧，我现在可以停止赚钱了吗？
How do you view your own forthcoming trajectory?
您如何看待自己未来的发展轨迹？
A part of that is very easy.
其中一部分非常简单。
I would like to make absolutely as much money as possible for the foundation because we can use it.
我绝对想为基金会赚尽可能多的钱，因为我们可以使用它。
I think recycling early-stage green VC, having it come back with a decent return, go out a second time, come back with profit — I think it’s a candidate to make more profit than any other area of venture capital, or one of the top segments because of circumstances, because of the environment moving in our favor — the real environment and the financial environment.
I think recycling early-stage green VC, having it come back with a decent return, go out a second time, come back with profit — I think it’s a candidate to make more profit than any other area of venture capital, or one of the top segments because of circumstances, because of the environment moving in our favor — the real environment and the financial environment.
No, this is great.
不，这太棒了。
I could not have wished for more agreeable colleagues and for more agreeable contemporaries in the green business.
我实在不希望在绿色行业能有更多和蔼可亲的同事和同时代人。
They are a very pleasant group to deal with in the environment, broadly speaking, including the NGOs.
从广义上讲，他们是一个非常令人愉快的环境中的群体，包括非政府组织。
They’re well-intentioned, and other things being even, it’s good to deal with people who are well-intentioned.
他们是善意的，而且其他事情都是平等的，与善意的人打交道是有好处的。
You seem quite involved in your own foundation, but putting that aside, how efficient do you think American foundations are today?
您似乎对自己的基金会非常投入，但抛开这些，您认为当今美国基金会的效率如何？
I have no idea.
我不知道。
I assume averagely bureaucratic and averagely efficient, but I’m not an expert.
我认为官僚主义和效率一般，但我不是专家。
I haven’t attempted .
I haven’t attempted .
.
。
.
。
There are some new foundations being spawned by new wealth, which tends to be more dynamic and fast-moving.
新的财富催生了一些新的基础，这些财富往往更具活力和快速流动。
There aren’t many of them, but they tend to be allies of ours.
他们的数量不多，但他们往往是我们的盟友。
They make quicker decisions, and of course, they’re helped by the fact that the money is still coming in.
他们做出更快的决定，当然，资金仍在源源不断地流入也对他们有所帮助。
Most foundations are limited to their principal.
大多数基金会仅限于其本金。
Nuclear fusion — will it work?
核聚变 — 它会起作用吗？
I rather suspect it will.
我宁愿怀疑它会的。
There are about 30 or so new second-generation fusion.
大约有30个左右新的第二代融合。
I think there’s some chance that the big bureaucratic fusion efforts will work — maybe one in four — that they’ll be commercial, some chance anyway, but I think there’s a bigger chance than that that one or more of the 30 newbies, where they’re basing their research on brilliant new ideas.
我认为大型官僚融合努力有可能会发挥作用——“也许四分之一”——它们将商业化，无论如何，有一些机会，但我认为这比 30 个新手中的一个或多个更大的机会，他们的研究基于出色的新想法。
The original establishment is a bit like the Concorde.
原来的设施有点像协和式飞机。
You’re building on a technology that very quickly is 30 years out of date, which is a huge handicap.
你正在开发的技术很快就会过时 30 年，这是一个巨大的障碍。
The new second generation are availing themselves of math and science of all kinds that has progressed.
新的第二代正在利用各种已经取得进展的数学和科学。
I suspect that one or more of them will work.
我怀疑其中的一个或多个会起作用。
I would say, better than 50/50, that we will indeed have — from an engineering point of view and science point of view — successful fusion.
I would say, better than 50/50, that we will indeed have — from an engineering point of view and science point of view — successful fusion.
There is a pretty decent risk that it will not be economic, that we will have had major breakthroughs in storage and that the marginal cost of wind and solar will continue to fall towards zero, so that it simply will not be necessary.
存在相当大的风险，即它不经济，我们将在存储方面取得重大突破，风能和太阳能的边际成本将继续降至零，因此根本没有必要。
But it may well be necessary, and it’s, in any case, imperative — given the risks involved here — that we try everything, including perhaps old-fashioned nuclear.
但这很可能是必要的，而且无论如何，当务之急是——“考虑到这里涉及的风险”——我们尝试一切，也许包括老式的核能。
More general forms of geothermal energy — will they work?
更一般形式的地热能 ——它们会起作用吗？
I suspect geothermal will also work, and I suspect it has a very good shot at being commercial in some parts, because we have just drilled hundreds of thousands of holes in fracking.
I suspect geothermal will also work, and I suspect it has a very good shot at being commercial in some parts, because we have just drilled hundreds of thousands of holes in fracking.
And the technology improvement, the engineering improvements in that 15-year window were just cosmic, and now we can transfer a lot of that technology towards geothermal.
And the technology improvement, the engineering improvements in that 15-year window were just cosmic, and now we can transfer a lot of that technology towards geothermal.
If you imagine 20,000 wells later in geothermal, with capitalists and engineers beavering night and day to do it better, it’s hard to believe that we will move from a handful of super attractive, easy places today — which are commercial — it’s hard to believe we won’t move to having big chunks of available commercial geothermal.
如果你想象一下，后来地热有 20,000 口井，资本家和工程师夜以继日地努力把它做得更好，很难相信我们会从今天的几个超级有吸引力、简单的地方转移到商业化的地方，很难相信我们不会转向拥有大量可用的商业地热。
I think that’s very promising.
我认为这非常有希望。
Very last question.
最后一个问题。
Let’s say you’re right about the superbubble.
假设你对超级泡沫的看法是正确的。
What should be the next thing happening that we should be watching for?
我们应该关注的接下来发生的事情应该是什么？
What will be telling us, “Jeremy was right”?
什么会告诉我们“杰里米是对的”？
Well, my job description is underrated long-term problems.
嗯，我的工作描述是被低估的长期问题。
They’re absolutely fascinating, and not the least reason is, why are they underrated?
它们绝对令人着迷，最重要的原因是，为什么它们被低估了？
How do people ignore them?
人们如何忽视他们？
It brings us back to toxicity.
它让我们回到毒性。
We are making this planet hostile to life in every form.
我们正在让这个星球对各种形式的生命充满敌意。
The insect population, from the tropics to the poles, has gone down by 50 percent, and it’s probably closer to 75 percent.
从热带到两极，昆虫数量减少了 50%，甚至可能接近 75%。
Every insect person that you can meet will tell you that that could have dire results.
你遇到的每一个昆虫人士都会告诉你，这可能会带来可怕的结果。
The top ones .
The top ones .
.
。
.
。
We spent hours badgering poor old E.O.
我们花了好几个小时纠缠可怜的老E.O.
Wilson — recently deceased — just before COVID on this topic.
威尔逊 ——“最近去世了”—— 就在新冠疫情讨论这个话题之前。
The great insect people believe that when insects go — and they seem to be going; they’re dropping at over 1 percent, closer to 2 percent a year in biomass of wild insects — when they go, it might cascade into a threat to human survivability also.
伟大的昆虫人们相信，当昆虫去时，它们似乎正在去；野生昆虫的生物量每年下降超过 1%，接近 2%——当它们消失时，也可能对人类的生存构成威胁。
The trouble is they can’t prove it.
问题是他们无法证明这一点。
Why can’t they prove it?
为什么他们不能证明这一点？
Because it’s an incredibly complicated system-wide problem which is not financed.
因为这是一个极其复杂的系统范围问题，而且没有资金支持。
E.O.
E.O.
Wilson and the rest of the guys could not get money to fund broad-based research of the type that is required to prove a cascade effect from broad loss of insects.
威尔逊和其他人无法获得资金来资助广泛的研究，而这些研究需要证明昆虫广泛消失所产生的级联效应。
Then soil erosion.
Then soil erosion.
We might be down to our last 30, 40 decent years of traditional farming as the soil gets eroded from important parts, breadbasket parts of the world.
随着世界重要地区、粮仓地区的土壤受到侵蚀，我们过去 30、40 年的传统农业生产可能已经结束。
There are two pretty good problems to be going on with.
有两个很好的问题需要解决。
Water shortages — horribly unappreciated.
水资源短缺 ——严重未被重视。
What about the population base?
人口基数又如何呢？
The fertility rate in South Korea is 0.8, so they’re more than halving every generation of 35 years.
韩国的生育率为0.8，因此每35年一代人的生育率就会减少一半以上。
They’re more than halving their baby cohorts.
他们的婴儿数量减少了一半以上。
Japan is 1.35, the US is 1.65, the UK about 1.7, and parts of Europe — Hungary, Italy — very low, getting close to 1.0.
日本为1.35，美国为1.65，英国约为1.7，欧洲部分地区——匈牙利、意大利——非常低，接近1.0。
This is a crash.
This is a crash.
We have no idea how we’ll be able to handle aging population and few workers.
我们不知道如何应对人口老龄化和劳动力短缺的问题。
These are massive problems for the future, and I try and filter them into every conversation, including the letter that we just posted yesterday.
这些都是未来的重大问题，我尝试将它们过滤到每次对话中，包括我们昨天刚刚发布的那封信。
It has the required two paragraphs to try and wake people up on these other issues.
它有必要的两个段落来试图唤醒人们对这些其他问题的认识。
It’s pretty hard condensing these arguments into a paragraph, I might say, but more than a paragraph and no one will listen.
我可能会说，将这些论点压缩成一个段落是相当困难的，但超过一个段落就没有人会听。
We have been trying to filter these issues in, like we tried to filter climate change for 15 years.
我们一直在努力解决这些问题，就像我们 15 年来试图解决气候变化一样。
Every time I talked about the stock market, I had to plug climate change and waking up, that it would dominate investment portfolios of the future, which of course it will if it’s not already.
每次我谈到股市时，我都不得不提及气候变化并醒悟，它将主导未来的投资组合，当然，如果现在还没有的话，它肯定会主导。
Jeremy Grantham, thank you very much.
杰里米·格兰瑟姆，非常感谢你。
It’s been a real pleasure.
这真是一种乐趣。
Thank you.
谢谢。
*indicates an edit Jeremy requested for clarity.
*表示 Jeremy 为清楚起见要求进行编辑。