The People’s Money (Part 3)

An Explanation of the Federal Reserve Money system and what it means for the potential accomplishments of American Democracy

解释美联储货币体系及其对美国民主潜在成就的意义

The big surprise of our tour of the Federal Reserve system (please see PARTS 1 & 2 ) is that the FED (America’s central bank)—as it is presently authorized to operate—can create “money,” as necessary, to support not only the undertakings of private enterprise, but the undertakings of public enterprise as well.

我们参观美联储系统（请参阅第 1 部分和第 2 部分）的最大惊喜是，美联储（美国中央银行）——目前被授权运作——可以在必要时创造“货币”，不仅支持私营企业的事业，也支持公共企业的事业。

Please recall that public enterprise produces needed goods and services which private enterprise cannot produce at a profit or, to make its profit, must set prices higher than what most citizens can afford to pay.

请记住，公共企业生产所需的商品和服务，而私营企业无法盈利，或者为了盈利，必须将价格定得高于大多数公民能够支付的价格。

To accomplish what private enterprise cannot, therefore, the U.S. Treasury, as directed by Congress, pays U.S. citizens and businesses directly to produce the goods and services of public enterprise.

因此，为了完成私营企业无法完成的任务，美国财政部根据国会的指示，直接向美国公民和企业支付费用，以生产公共企业的商品和服务。

The fact that the Federal Reserve system is able to create the “money” required for this spending is a surprise because we, the American voters, have always been led to believe that public enterprise is “financed” by a different method: namely, some combination of taxing private profits/income and borrowing from the investment capital of private enterprise.

美联储系统能够创造这种支出所需的“货币”这一事实令人惊讶，因为我们，美国选民，一直被引导相信公共企业是通过不同的方法“融资”的：即对私人利润/收入征税和从私人企业的投资资本中借款的某种组合。

What we discovered, instead, is that, yes, taxes do fund some portion of the Treasury’s spending—but the remainder of the funding is derived from operations that have nothing to do with “borrowing” in any meaningful sense of the term.

相反，我们发现的是，是的，税收确实为财政部的部分支出提供了资金，但其余资金来自与任何有意义的“借款”无关的业务。

What we clearly observed and documented on our tour is that the Reserves (fiat dollars) which the U.S. Treasury uses to meet the federal government’s spending requirements come, in fact, from three sources: (1) federal tax collections; (2) the voluntary exchange of privately held Reserves for future Reserves issued by the Treasury (i.e. “treasury bonds”); and (3) the exchange of future Reserves issued by the Treasury (i.e. “treasury bonds” again) for new Reserves issued by the FED.

我们在旅途中清楚地观察和记录的是，美国财政部用于满足联邦政府支出需求的储备金（法定美元）实际上来自三个来源：（1）联邦税收； (2) 私人持有的储备金自愿兑换为财政部发行的未来储备金（即“国债”）； (3) 将财政部发行的未来储备金（再次称为“国债”）兑换为美联储发行的新储备金。

This third source is a multi-step process because the FED is not allowed to trade directly with the Treasury—but the net result of the operation we observed on our tour is exactly the same as if it did.

第三个来源是一个多步骤的过程，因为美联储不允许直接与财政部进行交易，但我们在旅行中观察到的操作的最终结果与实际操作的结果完全相同。

The federal government, we discovered, doesn’t ever “borrow” anything—and what we are persuaded to think of as a “national debt” is, in fact, merely a bookkeeping tally of some portion of the undertakings of public enterprise.

我们发现，联邦政府从不“借”任何东西，而我们被说服认为的“国债”实际上只是公共企业部分事业的簿记记录。

It is not something that has to be “repaid” to anybody in the future; it is not something that future tax collections will have to reimburse.

这不是将来必须“偿还”给任何人的东西；它是一种东西。这不是未来税收必须偿还的东西。

Nor is there a limit on the number of Reserves that can be created to pay for public enterprise: what is limited is not the availability of fiat money (the “Reserves” of the Federal Reserve system), but the real resources—skilled labor, technology, energy, materiel—which the Reserves are used to employ.

用于支付公共企业费用的储备金数量也没有限制：有限的不是法定货币（美联储系统的“储备金”）的可用性，而是储备金用于使用的真正资源——熟练劳动力、技术、能源、物资。

If the need for some public enterprise exists, and the real resources are available to meet the challenge, the Reserves can be issued, as necessary, to employ those resources.

如果存在对某些公共企业的需求，并且有真正的资源可以应对挑战，则可以根据需要发行储备金以使用这些资源。

The implications of this “surprise discovery” are game-changing.

这一“惊喜发现”的意义正在改变游戏规则。

As I write, for example, Elizabeth Warren has just released her long-awaited formula to pay for Medicare-for-all—a $50 trillion +/- federal spending commitment.

例如，在我撰写本文时，伊丽莎白·沃伦 (Elizabeth Warren) 刚刚发布了她期待已久的全民医疗保险支付方案——50 万亿美元+/-联邦支出承诺。

Playing the old game, Elizabeth’s formula pulls out all the stops on raising taxes on the super-wealthy and large corporations—and pieces together a multitude of spending adjustments and projected cost savings to miraculously come up with the “money” necessary to pay American medical providers to provide medical care to Americans.

伊丽莎白的公式又玩起了老游戏，使出浑身解数对超级富豪和大企业增税，并将大量的支出调整和预计的成本节约结合起来，奇迹般地筹集到了向美国医疗服务提供者支付费用所需的“资金”，以便为美国人提供医疗服务。

(Elizabeth has, of necessity, carefully manipulated all these pieces within the old-game formula so it doesn’t appear the government has to “borrow” dollars—a proposition which American voters have been trained to view as political suicide.)

（伊丽莎白必须在老套路中小心翼翼地操纵所有这些部分，这样政府就不会显得必须“借”美元——这一提议被美国选民视为政治自杀。）

Mission accomplished!

任务完成！

Except, having now stretched the old-game formula as far as it apparently can go to accomplish goal no. 1 of public enterprise (universal healthcare) we are left to wonder about the other major, money-intensive, public enterprise challenges we presently face as a collective society:

除了，现在已经将旧游戏公式延伸到了它显然可以实现的目标。公共企业（全民医疗保健）的第一条 我们不禁想知道我们作为一个集体社会目前面临的其他主要的、资金密集型的公共企业挑战：

(2) student debt —$1.6 trillion plus $47 billion per year for free tuition at state colleges; (3) early child-hood care and development —$70 billion per year; (4) affordable housing —$350 billion for 7 million units (5) climate change —$90 trillion for the “Green New Deal.” And let’s now add another one to the list: (6) large-scale middle-class job displacement via the pending AIbot revolution —$148 billion per year (as a conservative estimate) for a job guarantee.

(2) 学生债务——1.6万亿美元，加上每年470亿美元的州立大学免费学费； (3) 幼儿保育和发展——每年 700 亿美元； (4) 经济适用房——700 万套，3500 亿美元 (5) 气候变化——“绿色新政”90 万亿美元。现在让我们在清单中添加另一个：(6) 即将到来的人工智能机器人革命将导致大规模中产阶级失业——每年 1,480 亿美元（保守估计）的就业保障。

That’s a total of about $110 trillion over the next decade— after we’ve paid for universal health care— for the undertakings of public enterprise that are genuinely, if not existentially, needed by the citizens of modern American society.

在我们支付了全民医疗保健费用后，未来十年总计约 110 万亿美元用于公共企业的事业，这些事业是现代美国社会公民真正需要的（如果不是存在的）。

How is the old-game formula going to work with a number like that?

旧游戏公式如何处理这样的数字？

And what’s going on, anyway?

到底发生了什么？

Have we suddenly, in the twenty-first century, become exceedingly and unreasonably profligate in our needs?

在二十一世纪，我们是否突然变得极度无理地挥霍我们的需求？

You can’t help but consider how fortuitous the “surprise discovery” we made in our Federal Reserve tour really is.

你不禁会想，我们在美联储之旅中的“惊喜发现”到底是多么的偶然。

As it happens, modern society seems to have evolved to a point where the old-game formula is, mathematically, simply incapable (as exemplified in the calculations above) of addressing the major challenges modern society confronts.

碰巧的是，现代社会似乎已经发展到这样一个地步：从数学上讲，旧游​​戏公式根本无法（如上面的计算所示）解决现代社会面临的主要挑战。

Specifically, there seems to be a dramatic increase in the kinds of goods and services modern society needs, but which the profit model of private enterprise cannot provide—or cannot provide at a price that a large percentage of society’s membership can afford to pay.

具体来说，现代社会所需的商品和服务种类似乎急剧增加，但私营企业的盈利模式无法提供这些商品和服务，或者无法以社会大部分成员能够支付的价格提供这些商品和服务。

To effectively function, then, modern society requires a new approach to public enterprise—and a new understanding of how U.S. citizens and businesses will be paid to undertake and implement it.

那么，为了有效运作，现代社会需要一种新的公共企业方法，以及对美国公民和企业如何获得报酬来承担和实施公共企业的新理解。

What our tour of the Federal Reserve system has shown us is this goal can be (and currently is being ) accomplished within the existing operations of the Federal Reserve system.

我们对美联储系统的考察向我们展示的是，这一目标可以（并且目前正在）在美联储系统的现有运作中实现。

If only we could clearly see it.

如果我们能清楚地看到它就好了。

I should emphasize, now, that the intention here is not to denigrate or call for the curtailment of the private enterprise system.

我现在要强调的是，这里的意图并不是诋毁或呼吁限制私营企业制度。

As I proposed in PARTS 1 & 2 of this essay, private enterprise and public enterprise are partners in the larger American Enterprise .

正如我在本文第一部分和第二部分中提出的那样，私营企业和公共企业是更大的美国企业的合作伙伴。

As things have evolved, however—and continue to evolve with every more rapidity—the new structures of modern society are requiring larger and larger inputs from the public enterprise side of the equation.

然而，随着事物的发展——并且继续以更快的速度发展——现代社会的新结构需要公共企业方面越来越大的投入。

To glimpse how this is so, let’s briefly look, one by one, at the previously listed money-intensive challenges we’re currently facing.

为了了解这是怎么回事，让我们一一简单地看一下之前列出的我们目前面临的资金密集型挑战。

The first four can be considered with just a few casual observations:

前四个可以通过一些随意的观察来考虑：

Before World War 1, health-care goods and services involved a relatively limited and straightforward set of technologies and skills.

第一次世界大战之前，医疗保健产品和服务涉及相对有限和简单的技术和技能。

Doctors did simple surgeries, set bones, applied poultices, prescribed homeopathic tinctures, administrated morphine and, for the most part, watched, comforted and advised both patients and families.

医生进行简单的手术、接骨、涂抹药膏、开顺势疗法酊剂、注射吗啡，并且大部分时间是观察、安慰患者和家属并为其提供建议。

A doctor’s bill, almost by definition, was limited to a certain magnitude simply by the limitations of what a doctor could undertake to do, or what medications could be prescribed.

几乎根据定义，医生的账单在一定程度上受到医生可以做的事情或可以开的药物的限制。

In today’s modern society, of course, things couldn’t be more different.

当然，在当今的现代社会，情况完全不同了。

There’s hardly a human medical condition that cannot be ameliorated or totally cured by the application of advanced technologies and pharmacology.

几乎没有一种人类疾病不能通过应用先进技术和药理学来改善或完全治愈。

These are administered in highly technical hospital complexes attended by specialized teams of highly trained physicians and aides.

这些都是在技术精湛的医院综合体中进行的，由训练有素的医生和助手组成的专业团队负责管理。

Illnesses or conditions that a few generations ago were simply accepted as one’s lot in life, or end-life, can now be routinely treated—and cured.

几代人之前被简单地认为是人生或临终时的疾病或状况，现在可以得到常规治疗和治愈。

And the “doctor’s bill” can now be virtually as unlimited as the amazing outcomes provided.

现在，“医生的账单”实际上可以与所提供的惊人结果一样无限。

The problem, of course, is that only a fraction of American citizens has the income and/or wealth to buy these outcomes.

当然，问题是只有一小部分美国公民有收入和/或财富来购买这些结果。

To be profitable—or even to be provided at cost (out of empathetic generosity) — the modern medical services of private enterprise must be priced beyond the means of most members of modern society.

为了盈利，甚至是按成本提供（出于同理心的慷慨），私营企业的现代医疗服务的定价必须超出现代社会大多数成员的承受能力。

The ethical choice of modern society is stark: either a large percentage of citizens must go without available medical services—or public enterprise must step in and make up the difference.

现代社会的道德选择是严峻的：要么很大一部分公民必须得不到医疗服务，要么公共企业必须介入并弥补差额。

It should not be a surprise that modern American society has generated a student debt crisis.

现代美国社会产生学生债务危机并不奇怪。

Two or three generations ago most young people, embarking on a career in life, didn’t need a college education.

两三代人之前，大多数年轻人在开始职业生涯时，不需要大学教育。

Most employment involved manual skills.

大多数就业涉及手工技能。

Employment that required technical thinking or management skills could be obtained by apprenticing or learning on the job.

需要技术思维或管理技能的就业可以通过学徒或在职学习来获得。

College was reserved either for learning highly complex/professional skills—e.g. medicine, law, mathematics and science—or as a badge of upper-class identity in the fine arts.

大学要么是为了学习高度复杂/专业的技能而保留的——例如医学、法律、数学和科学——或者作为美术上流社会身份的徽章。

In modern society, the availability (and social status) of manual employment has dramatically declined.

在现代社会，体力劳动的可用性（和社会地位）急剧下降。

Production and management skills, in virtually every employment field and endeavor, have become highly technical and specialized—requiring expensive, post-high school degrees and training before a career can be embarked upon.

几乎在每个就业领域和工作中，生产和管理技能都变得高度技术化和专业化——在开始职业生涯之前需要昂贵的高中后学位和培训。

In itself, this could be viewed as a positive evolution except, of course, for one big problem: Most career-aspiring youth do not have the financial resources to buy the required higher education and, as a result, are forced into substantial debt to do so.

就其本身而言，这可以被视为一种积极的演变，当然，除了一个大问题：大多数有抱负的年轻人没有财力来购买所需的高等教育，因此被迫背负巨额债务。

The perversity of being pushed into debt in order to begin earning a living is one of the most extraordinary structures modern American society has yet produced—and it weighs heavily on many crucial aspects of our collective well-being, including family formation and consumer markets.

为了谋生而背负债务的反常现象是现代美国社会迄今为止所产生的最不寻常的结构之一，它严重影响着我们集体福祉的许多关键方面，包括家庭组建和消费市场。

The only remedy to this evolved structure of modern society is for higher education—and specialized technical training—to be undertaken as a public enterprise.

现代社会这种不断发展的结构的唯一补救办法是作为公共企业进行高等教育和专业技术培训。

(What could possibly be, by the way, a more logical investment by collective society in itself?)

（顺便问一下，集体社会本身的更合乎逻辑的投资可能是什么？）

Three generations ago, the challenge of early childhood care and development—outside the realm and context of the parental family—did not exist.

三代人之前，在父母家庭的领域和背景之外，幼儿保育和发展的挑战并不存在。

Pre-school children grew up in, and were nurtured by, an extended family context which covered the bases of their needs and early acclimation to the norms of becoming a socially productive individual.

学龄前儿童在大家庭环境中长大并受到养育，该家庭环境涵盖了他们的需求基础和早期适应成为社会生产力个人的规范。

Families paid nothing for these services—other than the hours “donated” as parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, or neighbor.

除了作为父母、祖父母、阿姨、叔叔或邻居“捐赠”的时间之外，家庭无需为这些服务支付任何费用。

Transition, now, to modern American society: Extended family structures have been spatially fractured and displaced.

现在，过渡到现代美国社会：大家庭结构在空间上已经破裂和移位。

Grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins are, typically not around to donate childcare hours to a young family.

祖父母、阿姨、叔叔和表兄弟姐妹通常不会为年轻家庭贡献托儿时间。

Neighbors are typically only casual acquaintances, at best—and hardly open to stepping in for a few hours of care.

邻居们充其量只是泛泛之交，而且很难愿意介入提供几个小时的照顾。

The difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that, in most modern families, both parents are obliged to be employed to earn wages adequate to meet basic living expenses.

在大多数现代家庭中，父母双方都必须工作，赚取足以满足基本生活费用的工资，这一事实加剧了这一困难。

Or, most problematic of all, many families have only a single parent—usually working more than one job to make up for the lack of a second income.

或者，最有问题的是，许多家庭只有单亲——通常会做不止一份工作，以弥补第二收入的缺乏。

The modern pre-school child, as a result, is virtually “abandoned.”

结果，现代学龄前儿童实际上被“遗弃”。

Private enterprise, of course, provides child-care services which “solve” this problem of modern society.

当然，私营企业提供的托儿服务“解决”了现代社会的这个问题。

Except the price for these services—even if it simply covers operating costs and expenses—must be set far beyond the ability of most families to pay.

除了这些服务的价格之外——即使它只是涵盖运营成本和开支——也必须远远超出大多数家庭的支付能力。

Result: either modern society must suffer the uncalculated (to date) consequences of a generation of poorly nurtured and acclimated children—or public enterprise, in defense of itself, must produce high quality child-care, as needed, for every American family.

结果：要么现代社会必须承受一代未受良好教育和适应的儿童所带来的无法估量的（迄今为止）后果，要么公共企业为了保护自己，必须根据需要为每个美国家庭提供高质量的儿童保育服务。

Before the two World Wars, most Americans lived and worked in rural communities that revolved around agriculture and subsistence economies.

两次世界大战之前，大多数美国人在以农业和自给经济为中心的农村社区生活和工作。

Housing for the most part was a simple structure, providing shelter from the elements and an organizational matrix for the tools, implements, and subsistence activities of family life.

住房大部分是一个简单的结构，为家庭生活的工具、器具和生存活动提供了躲避自然因素的庇护所和组织矩阵。

A dwelling was something that could be put together with hard-nosed, hands-on-and-neighbor-assisted labor—and there was plenty of land-space to be owned or rented in the rural communities for that purpose.

住宅是可以通过精明的、亲力亲为和邻居协助的劳动来建造的，并且农村社区有大量的土地空间可以为此目的而拥有或租赁。

In the non-subsistence, consumer-structure of modern society, most citizens (in order to have access to employment and education) must live in high-density megalopolises where a dwelling space is, of necessity, created by an entirely different process—a process that unfolds within a highly regulated and technical context.

在现代社会的非自给消费结构中，大多数公民（为了获得就业和教育）必须生活在高密度的特大城市中，其中的居住空间必然是通过完全不同的过程创建的——一个在高度监管和技术背景下展开的过程。

And while private enterprise, with great relish, rapidly produces dwellings in these complicated urban contexts, its necessary profit and overhead demands that prices for the dwellings be set far higher than what a growing number of families can afford to pay.

尽管私营企业兴致勃勃地在这些复杂的城市环境中迅速建造住宅，但其必要的利润和管理费用要求将住宅的价格定得远远高于越来越多的家庭的承受能力。

If every American family is to have access to an affordable dwelling, then, public enterprise must play a major role in the construction and/or ownership operations of strategic segments of the housing industry.

如果每个美国家庭都想拥有负担得起的住房，那么公共企业必须在住房行业战略部分的建设和/或所有权运营中发挥重要作用。

In each of the cases just described, the structure of modern society has evolved to create a human need for goods and services—or a technical level of goods and services—which previously did not exist.

在刚才描述的每一个案例中，现代社会的结构已经发展到创造了人类对商品和服务的需求——或者商品和服务的技术水平——这是以前不存在的。

And while private enterprise has the real resources to produce those goods and services, it either cannot do so within a profit-making structure, or it must set prices at a level beyond what a significant membership of society can afford to pay.

尽管私营企业拥有生产这些商品和服务的真正资源，但它要么无法在盈利结构内这样做，要么必须将价格定在超出社会重要成员能够支付的水平。

Another way of visualizing this imbalanced structure is to say that private enterprise, in producing the goods and services that modern society uniquely needs, is no longer able to provide adequately compensated employment for a large segment of that society’s members—thus enabling them to be consumers of the goods and services.

体现这种不平衡结构的另一种方式是，私营企业在生产现代社会独特需要的商品和服务时，不再能够为该社会的大部分成员提供充分补偿的就业机会，从而使他们成为商品和服务的消费者。

This endemic under-employment, relative to the goods and services that an average citizen needs to buy to live an existence of relative health and well-being, has become, in fact, the primary structural disconnect of modern society itself.

事实上，相对于普通公民过上相对健康和福祉所需购买的商品和服务而言，这种普遍存在的就业不足已经成为现代社会本身的主要结构性脱节。

And it is this disconnect (among other things) which is necessitating the dramatic growth in public enterprise.

正是这种脱节（除其他外）使得公共企业需要急剧增长。

Of all the structural changes modern society is imposing on its citizens, however, the most challenging are the next two items our list.

然而，在现代社会对其公民施加的所有结构性变化中，最具挑战性的是我们列出的接下来两项。

By comparison, the four we’ve just briefly considered—devastating as they may be to the well-being of families and collective society—are mere aggravations.

相比之下，我们刚刚简要考虑的四种情况——尽管它们可能对家庭和集体社会的福祉具有毁灭性——只不过是一种烦恼。

The ultimate magnitude of the necessity for public enterprise —and of the Federal Reserve system’s ability to create the fiat money necessary to marshal efforts to undertake that enterprise—becomes apparent when we consider, now, the challenges of (a) climate change and (b) massive job displacement by AIbots.

当我们现在考虑（a）气候变化和（b）人工智能机器人造成的大规模就业岗位流失的挑战时，公共企业的必要性以及美联储系统创造必要的法定货币来共同开展该企业的能力的最终重要性就变得显而易见。

Let’s consider these in reverse order because, as we’ll see, the former may well be the savior of the latter.

让我们以相反的顺序来考虑这些，因为正如我们将看到的，前者很可能是后者的救世主。

When my brother went to college (this is less than one generation ago!) he used a slide-rule to make calculations in his engineering courses.

当我哥哥上大学时（这还不到一代人！），他在工程课程中使用计算尺进行计算。

He even gave me (I was still in high-school) a slide-rule (in a beautiful leather case) for Christmas—and showed me the rudiments of its use.

他甚至在圣诞节送给我（当时我还在上高中）一把计算尺（装在一个漂亮的皮盒里），并向我展示了它的基本使用方法。

Before I got to college myself, the slide-rule was useless—replaced by the hand-held electronic calculator.

在我上大学之前，计算尺已经没用了，取而代之的是手持电子计算器。

(The oddest thing, for me, was abandoning the leather case, which had suggested the protection of something magically precious that was now rendered meaningless.)

（对我来说，最奇怪的事情是放弃皮箱，这意味着保护一些神奇珍贵的东西，但现在变得毫无意义。）

In modern society today, the calculations of technology do not even require human input.

在当今的现代社会，技术的计算甚至不需要人类的输入。

Measurements of all kinds are taken by robotic machines, organized as data by other robotic machines, then sorted, evaluated, and applied to a task (“stay in the middle of the road!”) by artificial intelligence communicating with another robotic machine.

各种测量由机器人进行，由其他机器人组织为数据，然后通过与另一个机器人进行通信的人工智能进行分类、评估并应用于任务（“留在路中间！”）。

The relentless (and “logical”) effort by private enterprise to eliminate from any given task or goal the overhead expense, inconvenience, and inefficiency of human labor has brought us to the brink of a situation that’s difficult to rationally comprehend: a society in which human participation in the production of needed things—even the creative contribution of human thought and ingenuity—have a rapidly diminishing role to play in the efforts of private enterprise.

私营企业为消除任何给定任务或目标的管理费用、不便和人类劳动的低效率而做出的不懈（和“合乎逻辑”）努力，已将我们带到了一种难以理性理解的境地的边缘：在这样一个社会中，人类参与所需物品的生产——甚至是人类思想和独创性的创造性贡献——在私营企业的努力中所发挥的作用正在迅速减弱。

Which points directly, of course, to an approaching, overwhelming problem of massive unemployment.

当然，这直接指向一个迫在眉睫的、压倒性的大规模失业问题。

There are those who say that, as with the industrial and digital revolutions, “work” will simply transition, and people will re-train themselves to do new things.

有人说，就像工业和数字革命一样，“工作”将发生转变，人们将重新训练自己去做新事情。

The march of “progress,” they say, inevitably must replace old work and employment paradigms with new roles.

他们说，“进步”的进程不可避免地必须用新的角色取代旧的工作和就业范式。

And this might indeed prove to be the case with the AIbot revolution as well—except this time, at least from the perspective of profit-making private enterprise, the last of the contributing human organs is being replaced: the BRAIN.

人工智能机器人革命也可能确实如此——只不过这一次，至少从营利性私营企业的角度来看，最后一个有贡献的人体器官正在被取代：大脑。

How do you recover from that?

你如何从中恢复过来？

What role remains for the human being to earn his daily bread produced by the AIBot?

为了赚取 AIBot 生产的日常面包，人类还扮演什么角色？

Perhaps I just misspoke.

也许我只是说错了。

There is one human organ left which private enterprise’s profit motive cannot (I don’t think) replace.

人体还剩下一个器官，是私营企业的逐利动机无法（我认为无法）取代的。

I’ll save that thought for PART 4 of this essay which will consider the challenge of climate change, and how, ironically, it might be what saves us—with a lot of help from the operations of the Federal Reserve system—from ourselves.

我将在本文的第四部分中保留这个想法，该部分将考虑气候变化的挑战，以及具有讽刺意味的是，在美联储系统运作的大力帮助下，气候变化可能如何拯救我们自己。