Where the Middle Class Goes to Die
哪里的中产阶级没活路？
In progressive Manhattan, inequality is maxed out.
在进步主义盛行的曼哈顿，不平等已达到空前程度。
A new report being released today by the Census Bureau finds that Manhattan has the highest level of income inequality in the United States. That is not entirely surprising, though it would also not have been surprising if it had been San Francisco or another progressive fiefdom.
美国人口调查局(Census Bureau)今天发表的一份报告显示，曼哈顿是全美收入差距最悬殊的地方。而这并不怎么出人意料，就算是出现在旧金山或其他进步主义大本营也不会令人吃惊。
For all the rhetoric about wicked 1 percenters and inequality, progressivism is a luxury good, and progressive-dominated enclaves are generally pretty okay places to live if you have a fair amount of money, but sort of stink if you’re in the middle or at the lower end of the earnings curve.
不论怎样夸张描绘那可恶的“1%”【译注：在近年来美国有关贫富差距和反全球化的抗议（比如“占领华尔街”运动）中，抗议者常自称为“99%”，而将最富裕阶层称为“1%”】和收入差距，进步主义都是一种奢侈品。此外，如果你手头有些钱的话，这些由进步派主导的地方都是很不错的安居之地；但若你处于收入曲线的中段或末端的话，那就有点不妙了。
Because most Americans experience New York City as tourists or in television shows and movies, it is easy to forget that the hometown of Wall Street and a very large population of obnoxious celebrities is a poor city: New York City is not only poorer than the New York State average, its median household income is, in absolute dollar terms, lower than that of such dramatically less expensive areas as Austin, Texas, or Cleveland County, Okla., where the typical household income is a few thousand dollars a year more than in New York City but the typical house costs less than a third of what the typical New York City home costs — and 17 percent of what the average Manhattan home costs. (And it’s a house, not a two-room coop.)
由于大多数美国人都只是到纽约旅行过，或是在电影电视中了解的纽约，所以很容易忘了，这个华尔街的故乡，这个充斥着众多令人生厌的名流的城市，其实是个“穷人之城”——在富裕程度方面，纽约市不仅低于纽约州的平均水平，而且其家庭中位数收入（以不变价美元计算）甚至还低于诸如德克萨斯州的奥斯汀和俄克拉何马州的克里夫兰县这样物价远低于纽约市的地区，这些地区的典型家庭年收入比纽约市高出几千美元，但是其一般房价却不足纽约一般房价的三分之一，甚至仅相当于曼哈顿房屋均价的17%。（而且这可是独栋屋，不是两居室公寓。）
Inequality per se is a relatively minor and generally misunderstood issue, inasmuch as if New York’s median household earned four times what it does now but its top–5 percent households earned ten times what they do, there would be more income inequality but a much higher overall standard of living for rich and middle-class alike.
不平等本身其实是个相对次要并且被广泛误解的问题，因为如果纽约的家庭中位数收入是现有水平的四倍，但收入排名前5%的家庭收入是现在的10倍，那么收入差距就会更加悬殊，但是富裕阶层和中产阶层的总体生活水平却大大提高了。
What is particularly salient about the progressive governance of places such as New York City and San Francisco is not the income inequality coincident with it — which has many causes, only some of which are directly related to public policy — but the myriad ways in which misgovernment makes these cities such hostile places to live for people of relatively modest means.
像纽约和旧金山这种城市的进步主义治理模式，其最显眼的地方，不是与这种治理模式相伴的收入不平等（收入不平等的原因有很多，而只有一部分与公共政策有关），而是对于相对不富裕的人群来说，这些城市处处表现出敌意，而那都是由于治理不善的缘故。
As indicated above, the income figures by themselves hardly tell the story. The median household income in the city of New York is a few hundred dollars a year more than the median household income in the state of Texas, but in practical terms the average New York City household is much worse off.
正如上文所指出，收入数据本身并不能解释一切。纽约的家庭中位数年收入比德州高出几百美元，但实际上纽约普通家庭的状况要差得多。
The most obvious issue is the cost of housing, which for New Yorkers is about four times what it is for Texans. Housing prices are a function of supply and demand, and demand for New York City housing is relatively high, a fact that probably does not have very much to do with public policy. I have lived in New York City for some time, and I have never met anybody who says he moved here because it is so well governed.
其中最明显的问题就是住房成本，纽约人的住房成本大约是德州人的四倍。房价乃供求使然，而且纽约的住房需求相对较高，这个事实恐怕跟公共政策没多大关系。本人在纽约住过一段时间，而我从未听闻有人说搬到这是因为这儿的治理有多么好。
On the other hand, supply is highly restricted, and that is a direct consequence of bad public policy, an economic reality that is obvious even to such sympathetic progressives as Matt Yglesias, who sensibly notes that limitations on the number of new housing units in places such as Washington, D.C., bias construction toward high-priced luxury homes, while hostile zoning codes in places such as San Francisco prevent markets from responding to demand and lead to “deliberately underutilized” mass-transit arteries.
另一方面，住房供给却是被严格限制的，而这就是不良政策的直接后果了，这个经济现状非常显而易见，就连Matt Yglesias这样抱同情之心的进步派人士都说，在像华盛顿这样的地方对新建住房单位数量加以限制，会导致高价豪宅数量增多，而在旧金山等地实施的限制措施则阻碍了市场对需求的回应，从而导致了“蓄意不充分利用的”公交要道的产生。
In New York City, housing prices are kept artificially high by draconian restrictions on new construction, rent control and the less aggressive “rent stabilization,” political interference with development financing, onerous union rules that drive up construction prices, byzantine regulation that imposes enormous compliance costs, and more. Even in a city in which four of the five boroughs are located on islands, there are vast tracts of underused real estate, the development of which could alleviate housing expenses for the middle class and the poor.
在纽约，房价被人为抬高的原因有很多：针对新建房屋的严苛限制、租房管制以及不那么激进的“租房稳定措施”、政治因素对开发融资的妨碍、抬升造价的繁冗的工会规定、错综复杂的监管规章带来的巨大合规成本，如此等等不一而足。即使是在这个五个行政区中有四个都坐落在岛屿上的城市，也有大片的地产都未被充分利用，对这些地产的开发，将能够减轻中产和贫困阶层的住房负担。
There is also the problem of the 13th month’s rent in New York City.
纽约市还有个第13个月房租的问题。
If you earn the median income of $52,223 in New York City and you live within the city limits — not just in Manhattan but in the distant Bronx and Staten Island, too — you pay the city nearly $1,800 a year in additional income tax for the privilege.
在纽约市，如果你能赚到该市的中位数收入52,223美元，并且住在纽约市区里（不仅仅是曼哈顿，还包括布朗克斯和史泰登岛），那么你就要为这项特权支付每年近1,800美元的附加所得税。
You can basically forget about owning a home — the median house price in the city is more than a half a million dollars — but renting won’t be easy, either: Applying New York landlords’ prevailing 40-times-the-rent rule, you can afford about $1,300 a month; not impossible if you’re single, but a substantial challenge for a family.
你基本可以不用想买房子的事了，因为这个城市的房价中位数已经不止50万美元，但租房住也不容易：套用盛行于纽约房东之间的“40倍房租规则”，你仅能负担不到每月1,300美元的房租，如果你是单身的话，这个数目不至于完全租不到够你住的房子，但这点钱要想租到够一家人住的房子，那就难咯。
But in any case, you’ll be paying a 13th month’s rent and change to the city for the privilege of residing within its boundaries. Assuming you are single, taxes and rent would consume between 50 percent and 60 percent of your income. Move to Houston, and you’d get a $3,000-a-year discount before even accounting for the lower cost of housing.
但无论如何，你都要为了居于城内这项特权支付这第13个月的租金给这座城市。假设你是单身，那么光缴税缴租都要花掉你收入的五到六成。如果搬到休斯敦，你就能每年少付3,000美元，就这还没算更低的住房成本呢。
If you are truly concerned about inequality, then that matters a great deal, because income inequality is only one kind of economic inequality, and one of the less important kinds: Wealth inequality is more significant. If the majority of your income is being consumed by taxes and rent, saving and investing becomes hard.
如果你果真对不平等耿耿于怀的话，那这就是关乎要害的大事了，因为收入不平等只是经济不平等的一种，而且还是不那么重要的一种——财富不平等更加重要。如果你的大部分收入都用来缴税缴租了的话，那就很难进行储蓄和投资。
And given progressives’ abysmal record in providing key municipal services such as effective law enforcement and decent public schools to low-income communities, there are powerful incentives to take on additional expenses by paying the premium for living in a better neighborhood or enrolling your children in private schools.
而且考虑到进步派在提供关键市政公共服务上（比如有力的执法和面向低收入社群的适宜的公立学校）的糟糕记录，那你就有很强动机想要居住在更好的街区，或让你的孩子就读于私立学校，但这就要支付额外的费用。
When it comes time to pay for college or to leave behind a bequest for children or grandchildren — an important means of building wealth within families — you’re almost certainly better off in San Antonio or Provo than in New York or San Francisco.
一旦到了该支付大学学费或为你的子孙后代留下遗产（这是一种积累家族财富的重要方式）的时候，那么几乎可以肯定的是，如果你住在圣安东尼奥或普罗沃的话，会比住在纽约或旧金山的情况要好。
Highly skilled, highly educated people are likely to do well wherever they are, and creative, dynamic, global cities such as New York are gold mines for them. But not everybody is going to be an investment banker or a tech entrepreneur. If you want to get a picture of what progressive policies look like for everybody else, try living in New York City for a year with an average New York City income — and try it with a family.
高技能水平、高学历人群可能在哪里都会过得不错，而且像纽约这样富有创意和活力四射的国际大都市对于他们来说更是一座金矿。但并不是每个人都能成为投行家，或创办一家科技企业。如果你想了解一下在其他人眼中进步主义政策是怎么样的，那就试试在纽约市拿着平均收入生活一年，而且要拖家带口。
Kevin D. Williamson is roving correspondent at National Review.
Kevin D. Williamson，《国家评论》杂志流动通讯记者
翻译：Marcel ZHANG（@马赫塞勒张）
校对：史祥莆（@史祥莆），慕白（@李凤阳他说）
编辑：辉格@whigzhou