2019年2月，查理·芒格在接受CNBC專訪時，針對主持人的提問作出了他自己的解答，針對部分備受大家關注的熱點問題，力場君（微信公號：wuzhijingu）進行了翻譯，並摘錄如下：
1、關於投資的“黃金時代”
主持人：
You spent a lot of time today talking abouthow people who think that they can beat the market averages are probablyfooling themselves, how much tougher it's gotten to be avalue investor, or evenjust an investor in general. And I was just wondering, do you think the goldenera of investing is over?
今天你花了很多時間談論那些自認為能夠超越市場平均投資收益率的投資者很可能是在自欺欺人。您認為需要花費很多時間和精力，才能夠成為一名廣義上的投資人，甚至是一位“價值投資者”。我想知道，你認為投資的黃金時代結束了嗎?
芒格：
Well, not forever. because I think, itisn't like the last recession or the last big opportunity that the world isever going to get is past. There'll be opportunities in the future. There aretimes where they're easier, and there are times when it-- which are harder.
不，黃金時代永遠不會結束。因為我認為，這不是最後的經濟衰退或世界將要獲得的最後一次大好機會。將來總會有機會的。有時候世道會容易些，有時候世道會稍微艱難些。
The opportunities that we all remember camefrom a demoralized period when about 90% of the natural stock buyers got verydiscouraged with stocks. That's what created the opportunity for these fabulousrecords that my generation had. And that was a rare opportunity that came to arare group of people of whom I was one. And Warren was another.
我們都記得的一次機會來自一個士氣低落的時期，那時候大約90%的自然股票買家對股票非常失望。 這就是我這一代人所經歷的那次創造了驚人記錄的機會。 這就是包括我在內的一小部分人所偶然獲得的這次罕見的機會。沃倫也是其中一個。
2、關於中美貿易
主持人：
You-- you've been a huge- booster ofChina's economies and some of the Chinese companies, and the entrepreneurs whorun them. We've gotten, obviously, into a little sticker situation with Chinawith the trade talks that are going back and forth. And maybe a differentrelationship than we've been dealing with for the last 20 or 30 years. What doyou think about China right now and its future?
你是中國經濟和一些中國公司以及經營它們的企業家的巨大助推器。 顯然，我們已經與中國形成了一個類似於小小的貼紙狀態。貿易談判正在進行， 我們和中國之後也許會形成和過去20或30年間所經歷過的截然不同的關係。您如何看待中國現在及未來?
芒格：
Well, I think it's natural to have sometension over-- the truth of the matter is that Ricardo, when he invented thelaw of comparative advantage, did not predict that some day the law ofcomparative advantage would make-- would grasp-- would greatly accelerate thegrowth of some poor nation which had a particularly able populace, like China.That free trade would enable them to come up rapidly and take a lot of poweraway from companies that had been on top and like being on top. He just hadn'tthink about it. Once we realized it could happen, I don't think it's crazy tothink there may be some limit to the amount of destruction we want to occur inour aerospace industry or something.
我認為有一些緊張局勢發生是很自然的。事情的真相是，李嘉圖（力場君注：大衛·李嘉圖，英國古典政治經濟學的主要代表之一，也是英國古典政治經濟學的完成者，主要經濟學代表作是1817年完成的《政治經濟學及賦稅原理》，書中闡述了他的稅收理論）在發明比較優勢法時，並沒有預測到某種程度上比較優勢的法則會使 - 會抓住 - 會大大加速一些貧窮國家的經濟增長，特別是擁有特別有能力的民眾的國家，比如中國。 這種自由貿易將使他們迅速發展，並從那些一直處於領先地位及將要處於領先地位的公司那裡獲得大量利潤(利益、能量)。 他只是沒考慮到這個問題。 如果我們曾經意識到它發生的可能性的話，我認為我們會對將要發生在我們的航空航天工業中的破壞量做一些預估，並提前設置好一些限制。
So I don't regard free trade as such a purething that we could never, under any circumstances, intervene. And I think thatthe advantages to United States and China, to getting along, are so great onboth sides, that I anticipate that they will reach some tolerable adjustment.
因此，我不認為自由貿易是一種純粹的東西，在任何情況下都不會被幹預。 而且我認為美國和中國相處的優勢在雙方都是如此之大，我預計他們會達成一些在雙方忍耐範圍內的調整。
主持人：
Do you think the president's right to raisethe questions about whether free trade is really trade and open trade and fairto both sides?
你認為總統提出的自由貿易是真正的貿易和開放貿易以及對雙方都公平的主張是否正確?
芒格：
I don't consider it wrong to have somelimits on free trade that matter to the United States. I don't want many, and Idon't want them to be huge. But some limits on the operation of free trade arequite acceptable.
我認為對其它國家和美國的自由貿易設置一些限制沒有錯，但我不想要很多，我不希望這些限制變得龐大。但是一些對自由貿易運作的限制是可以接受的。
主持人：
Have you changed your perspective onChinese investments, to this point, based on this trade talks, or based on thenew relationship we may have going forward?
在此基礎上，您是否根據此次貿易談判，或根據我們可能進行的新關係，改變了您對中國投資的看法?
芒格：
I basically believe in a lot of trade.Because I want two companies-- two countries with a lot of hydrogen bombs to betrading happily with one another instead of posturing the way we are withRussia. So I vastly prefer our relations with China to our relations withRussia. And I think China thinks likewise. And I anticipate that we will getalong. It will be crazy on both sides if United States and China don't-- doesany one country, both sides should want to keep friendly, it's the other.
我基本上對很多交易都持信任態度。 因為我想要兩個組織、兩個擁有大量核武器的國家相互之間愉快地交易，而不是像我們對待俄羅斯一樣。 因此，相較於我們和俄羅斯的關係，我更喜歡我們與中國的關係， 我認為中國也是這樣認為的，而且我預計我們會相處融洽；如果美國和中國不這樣做，雙方都會受到損失。另一方面，任何一個國家，雙方都應該保持友好。
3、關於亞馬遜
主持人：
Charlie, can I ask you about some news ofthe day today? While you were in your board meeting, and then with theshareholders, there was news out that Amazon was actually pulling itsheadquarters bid for New York City. And I don't know how closely you followthat. But it's certainly an interesting study when you start looking at howmuch- states and municipalities should be doing to woo corporate investmentsand when or if there's a time where it's giving too much, or if they'restanding up and have just left a potential for a huge investment?
我可以問你關於今天剛公佈的一條新聞的看法嗎? 當你參加董事會會議，與股東會面時，有消息稱亞馬遜實際上正在爭取將其總部建在紐約市。我不知道你是否關注過這件事情。這是一個特別有意思的現象，你會發現一些州或市政當局花了多少精力在吸引公司在當地投資上，例如什麼時間起開始招商引資以及是否花費了過多的時間，或者是那些企業是否只是走個過場留下一堆無法兌現的“空頭支票”。
芒格：
Well, of course, we've had states doingthis kind of thing for a long, long time. And, by and large, the states thathave done it have been wise to do it.
這種事情我們已經做了很長一段時間了，總的來說，各個州(國家)很明智地做到了這一點。
It's been smart of them to-- to woo outsidecompanies to come in. And, and of course it will go on time the wretchedexcess, that's our system. No, I don't worry too much about it. And -- and myattitude toward them is on the-- utter phenomenon of nature. It's hardly everbeen anything like it in the history of our country. And very talented, drivenpeople. And I would not have predicted the success that happened. And now thatit's happened, I wouldn't want to predict that it was going to stop, either. Ithink it may run a long way.
他們努力吸引外面的公司進入當地這一做法很明智。當然，它會出現超額的情況，這是我們機制的問題。我並不太擔心這些。我對這些做法的態度是：這些行為的發生很自然。它在我們國家的歷史上幾乎沒有任何類似的東西。採取這些行為的人是非常有才華的。我不會預測事情的成功幾率。 現在它已經發生了，我也不想預測它會停止。我認為它可能持續很久。
Just back to the idea of whether New Yorkcreated big problem for itself. I was just thinking about in terms of the newtax laws that are there, and the blue states, the SALT states, have lost a lotin the new tax legislation. And it's basically punishment from the governmentfor having such high local taxes, because they can no longer deduct those on afederal level.
So New York's going to get hit with that.You combine that with the idea that it's not going to be-- not just only wooingAmazon, but what message that may send to the broader business community, coulda state like New York or someone in the northeast region really have shotthemselves in the foot with a double whammy?
我們回到紐約是否為自己製造了一個大麻煩這個問題上來。 我只是在考慮那裡的新稅法，支持民主黨的各州，涉及鹽業的各州，因為新的稅法產生了巨大的損失。這是高稅賦的產生是因為各個州政府所採取的懲罰性措施，因為他們不能再截留聯邦政府的稅收收入。紐約就是這麼做的。你把這些和吸引亞馬遜落戶當地以及上述稅收政策對其它各個行業的商業社區所傳達的信息結合起來，就會發現紐約以及東北部的一些州的做法真的是雪上加霜以及搬起石頭砸自己的腳。
There are a number of places that have shotthemselves in the foot. Connecticut, California, New York City. They-- it's--it's been serious. And driving the rich people out is pretty dumb if you're astate or a city. And the idea that you're going to help New York by driving therich people out, of course it hurts New York. And of course it hurtConnecticut. The idea of that beautiful real estate in Connecticut, down 50% invalue—
有些州已經搬起石頭砸自己的腳了。像康涅狄格州，加利福尼亞州，紐約市。這是很嚴重的問題，把富人趕出去的州或城市是相當愚蠢的，想要通過驅逐富人來幫助紐約的這種做法，毫無疑問會傷害紐約。當然這種行為也會傷害康涅狄格州。這種做法讓位於康涅狄格州的風景優美的房地產價值下降了50%。
they've driven out all the rich people. AndCalifornia's doing the same thing. I know a lot of rich people who leftCalifornia. It-- I think it's really stupid for a state to drive the richpeople out. They're old. They keep your hospitals busy. They don't burden yourschools, the police department, your prisons. They give a lot. Who wouldn'twant rich people? I think Florida and Hawaii have both been very smart in theway they've recruited rich people. And I think Connecticut and California havebeen stupid.
他們驅逐了所有的富人。 而加利福尼亞也在做同樣的事情。我認識的很多富人都離開了加利福尼亞。我認為把富人趕出去的州政府的行為非常愚蠢。那些富人已經老了，他們可以使當地的醫院正常運轉起來。他們不會給學校，警察局和監獄帶來負擔。他們可以產生巨大的消費。哪個行業不想要富人光顧? 我認為佛羅里達州和夏威夷隊在吸引富豪方面非常聰明。 我認為康涅狄格州和加利福尼亞州一直都很愚蠢。
主持人：
What do you think about the prospects forAmazon longer term? There-- there are some movements in Washington that pushback against him, whether it's because he's the owner of The Washington Post orwhether it's just-- one company getting too big and-- and regulators worryingabout that.
您如何看待亞馬遜的長期前景?華盛頓有一些運動在反對他，無論是因為他是華盛頓郵報的所有者還是隻是他的公司發展的越來越大。監管機構擔心這一點。
芒格：
My guess is he still has a long ways to go.Up.
我認為他還有很長的一段上升空間。
支持人：
What do you think about his move that he'smade recently with the owner ofThe Enquirer to say, 'Look,' he just came outand said, 'They're blackmailing me. They're extorting me.'"
你怎麼看待他最近與TheEnquirer的老闆做出的舉動，他剛出來說“看，他們正在勒索我。他們敲詐我。”
芒格：
Well, I admire people who simply confrontproblems head-on. And so I have no quarrel with his confronting The NationalEnquirer. But I regard it as a little nothing place that the world would be--could well do without. And so-- and to the extent they've behaved badly, andhe's objecting vigorously-- I'm all for it.
我很佩服那些可以直接面對問題的人。我和The National Enquirer.之間沒有矛盾。但我認為這個世界上是沒有秘密的。所以在某種程度上他們表現得很糟糕，而且他的反擊很猛烈。
4、抵押貸款及房地產泡沫
主持人：
Let's talk about bad behavior in business.Because I think of you sometimes as the high priest, somebody who looks aroundand lauds good behavior, but also calls out bad behavior where he sees it.What-- what do you think some of the worst behaviors are in business today?
我們來談談商業中的不良行為。你作為商業殿堂級人物，環顧四周時，會讚美良好的行為，但也會發現不良的行為。你認為今天最糟糕的一些行為是什麼?
芒格：
Well, I think the behavior of the mortgageand banking industry in the delusional prosperity that preceded the great realestate bust was obscene. Practically everywhere. And I think that the peoplewho got into a lot of trouble richly deserved it. And-- I think they didn't getenough. If God were just, there would have been-- there would have been morepenalties. They were bailed out, to some extent, because the country had to doit. And-- but it never should have been allowed to run. I mean all thatdisgusting lying and-cheating and delusional assumptions and-- and-- it wasjust-- we all would consider it totally illicit and awful to adulterate thebaby food to make more money to an extent where the babies died. And they weredoing pretty much the same thing with the basic-- with their basic product.They were adulterating it so badly that it threatened the whole welfare of therepublic. This was deeply evil. It's one of the things Elizabeth Warren isreally right about.
我認為抵押貸款和銀行業在大房地產泡沫破裂之前的假象繁榮中的行為是應該被詬病的。這種行為幾乎無處不在。而且我認為這是因此事而陷入困境的富人們應得的報應。我認為他們沒有得到足夠的懲罰。 如果上帝是公正的，就會有更多的懲罰。 在某種程度上，他們被拯救出來，因為國家必須這樣做。但那種行為永遠不應該被允許。 我的意思是所有那些令人作嘔的謊言、作弊、妄想的假設，就像我們都會認為利用導致嬰兒死亡的摻假嬰兒食品所賺的錢是完全非法和可怕的。
抵押貸款和銀行業做了與這個摻假嬰兒食品類似的事情。 他們如此嚴重地摻假，以至於威脅到整個國家的福利。 這是非常邪惡的，這也是伊麗莎白·沃倫（原哈佛法學院的教授，現為美國民主黨參議員）非常正確的事情之一。
閱讀更多 基本面力場 的文章
