If you have two strong arguments, the surest way to lose a debate is to add a third one. The superfluous¹ argument of our time is, more often than not, the finger-wagging warning of economic doom².

如果你已经提出了两个强有力的论点，输掉一场辩论的最“稳妥”办法是添加第三个论点。我们这个时代的多余论点经常是晃晃手指警告经济末日。

Starting this week, we need to get our heads around the possibility that US President-elect Donald Trump³ is simultaneously⁴ reprehensible⁵ and economically successful — at least for some time. The instinct has often been to conflate political decency⁶ and economic efficiency because this is what has been done for such a long time. Fortuitously, our open, liberal systems also happened to be the most efficient. They even produced an acceptable distribution of income until about 10 years ago. Yet the period from 1989 to 2007 was exceptional — history is littered with economically successful dictators and economically disastrous⁷ liberal democrats⁸.

本周开始，我们要开始考虑这样一个可能性了：美国当选总统唐纳德?特朗普(Donald Trump)既应该受到谴责，又在经济上获得成功——至少在一段时间内如此。人们的本能反应往往是把政治正派与经济效率混为一谈，因为长久以来一直是这么做的。碰巧的是，我们的开放、自由的体系也恰恰是最有效率的体系。它们甚至产生了让人可以接受（直到差不多10年前）的收入分配。然而1989年至2007年这段时期是个例外——人类历史的长河中充斥着在经济上获得成功的独裁者和带来经济灾难的自由派民主人士。

You may be in Davos this week, seeking reaffirmation of your deeply held beliefs when you pontificate about the future of the universe. Or you may be on Facebook or Twitter, expressing your fury about where the world is headed. My advice is to narrow your focus. Brexit is terrible because it deprives young Britons of the right to choose where to live, study and work. It deprives them of a European identity many believed they possessed⁹ forever.

本周你可能身在达沃斯，对世界的未来发表高论，寻求让你坚信的信仰获得肯定。或者你可能在Facebook或Twitter上表达你对于世界发展方向的愤怒。我的建议是收窄你的关注点。英国退欧很可怕，因为它剥夺了英国年轻人选择在哪里生活、学习和工作的权利，剥夺了很多人以为会永远拥有的欧洲身份认同。

If this is what upset you about the Leave vote, then you were insane to allow your political campaign to be hijacked¹⁰ by lobbyists who kept whining¹¹ about the loss of the single European passport for banks. This is the superfluous argument that lost the Brexit referendum. Keep making that same mistake in the battles that loom¹² in 2017 and the populists will win everywhere.

如果这是退欧公投结果让你心烦的地方，那么你让那些不断抱怨银行将失去单一欧洲护照的说客来劫持你的政治运动就是疯了。正是这种多余论点输掉了退欧公投。在2017年将要迎来的战斗中继续犯同样的错误，将让各地的民粹主义者胜利。

Brexit has been a particularly bitter experience. Not only were the economic forecasts electorally disastrous, but some of them were wrong. It was gracious of Andy Haldane, Bank of England chief economist¹³, to admit the limitations of economic forecasting. But he is an exception. I know economists¹⁴ who now say that Brexit will cause a recession this year, having failed to produce one in 2016.

英国退欧是一次格外苦涩的经历。经济预测不仅对投票结果造成了灾难性的影响，而且其中一些预测是错误的。英国央行(Bank of England)首席经济学家安迪?霍尔丹(Andy Haldane)高尚地承认了经济预测的局限性。但他是个例外。我认识的一些经济学家，他们现在说英国退欧会在今年引发一场衰退，即便有关2016年将出现经济衰退的预测未能应验。

One of the many factors the forecasters have failed sufficiently¹⁵ to consider is the global environment. A Brexit-induced sterling¹⁶ crash could in theory have turned out to be dangerous. But this is not the 1970s. We are living in an age of excess global liquidity¹⁷, which renders a fall in sterling self-limiting. Asian investors¹⁸, for example, are streaming into the top of the London property market, where they find deflated¹⁹ prices, which they pay with a devalued currency.

预测者未能充分考虑的众多因素之一是全球环境。由英国退欧引发的英镑贬值，在理论上可能造成危险后果。但现在不是上世纪70年代。我们生活在全球流动性过剩的时代，这使英镑下跌具有自限性。例如，亚洲投资者正涌入伦敦高端房地产市场，他们发现这里房价下跌，而且购房所用的货币贬值了。

The truth is that our ability to forecast the future beyond the current quarter is limited. We certainly cannot forecast the economic impact of a complex political event, such as Brexit or the election of a new US president. Too many future unforeseen events will intrude²⁰.

事实是，我们对超越当前季度的未来的预测能力有限。我们肯定没法预测复杂政治事件所带来的经济冲击波，比如英国退欧或美国大选。有太多无法预见的未来事件会搅局。

We cannot translate the result of an opinion poll into an election probability, either. People keep asking me to tell them the probability of Marine²¹ Le Pen, the far-right National Front leader, winning the French presidency²². The problem is that the election campaign has not even started. The correct answer about the probability of a Le Pen victory is that I do not have the foggiest. Nor does anyone else.

我们也无法把民调结果转化为选举概率。人们总是让我告诉他们极右翼政党国民阵线(National Front)领导人马琳?勒庞(Marine Le Pen)赢得法国总统大选的几率。问题是，现在竞选活动甚至还未开始。对于勒庞获胜几率的正确答案是，我一点也不知道。也没人知道。

The curse of our time is fake maths. Think of it as fake news for numerically literate²³ intellectuals: it is the abuse of statistics and economic models to peddle²⁴ one’s own political prejudice. More often than not, there is a kernel²⁵ of truth in those forecasts, as there was in the BoE’s prediction of what could happen after Brexit. The fakeness of the maths lies in an exaggerated inference. Economic models have their uses, as do opinion polls. They provide information to policymakers and markets. But nobody can see through the fog of the future.

我们这个时代的诅咒是“假数学”。不妨把它视为面向具备数字头脑的知识分子的假新闻：通过滥用统计数据和经济模型来兜售自己的政治偏见。那些预测往往都有事实作为核心，就像英国央行对于英国退欧后可能出现的情况的预测。数学上的虚假性存在于夸张的推理中。经济模型有其用处，就像民调一样。它们为政策制定者和市场提供信息。但没人能借此看清未来。

Fake maths has given us, the liberal establishment, the illusion of certainty. Once the illusion crumbles²⁶, we are left with an uncomfortable question: is it possible that some populist demagogues will end up producing better economic policy than our friends in Davos? Take Italy as an example. The euro has been a disaster for the economy. If a populist were to win the Italian election, force a euro exit and default on foreign investors, is it not at least possible they would spur a genuine economic recovery? I do not know the answer; I know for sure that the present regime will not.

假数学给我们这些自由主义建制派一种确定性的错觉。一旦这种错觉被打破，我们就要面对一个令人不快的问题：某些民粹主义煽动者是否可能拿出比我们在达沃斯开会的朋友更好的经济政策？以意大利为例。欧元给意大利经济带来了灾难。如果某个民粹主义者赢得意大利大选、强制退出欧元区并对外国投资者违约，难道他们不是至少有可能刺激真正的经济复苏？我不知道答案；但我肯定当前的体制做不到。

The populists could succeed simply by undoing²⁷ the mistakes of the present regime. They will not succeed in the long run. But they may succeed before they fail. The political and economic regime change we are undergoing constitutes the most serious assault on our values I can remember. We would be foolish to deny that it could just be possible, from the perspective of the median voter, that the odious²⁸ populists are getting the economy right when the liberal elite²⁹ did not.

民粹主义可能只要纠正当前体制的错误就能成功。长期而言他们不会成功。但他们有望在失败之前先取得成功。我们正在经历的政治和经济体制变动，构成了我记忆中我们的价值观遭受的最严重攻击。在中间选民看来，如果我们否认可恶的民粹主义者有可能在自由派精英已经失败的情况下让经济步入正轨，那么我们将是愚蠢的。