手机版
AS job losses mount and bailout costs run into the trillions, the social costs of the economic downturn become clearer. The primary question, to be sure, is what can be done to shorten or alleviate these bad times. But there is also a broader set of questions about how this downturn is changing our lives, in ways beyond strict economics.
All recessions have cultural and social effects, but in major downturns the changes can be profound. The Great Depression, for example, may be regarded as a social and cultural era as well as an economic one. And the current crisis is also likely to enact changes in various areas, from our entertainment habits to our health.
First, consider entertainment. Many studies have shown that when a job is harder to find or less lucrative, people spend more time on self-improvement and relatively inexpensive amusements. During the Depression of the 1930s, that meant listening to the radio and playing parlor and board games. These stay-at-home tendencies persisted through at least the 1950s.
In today’s recession, we can also expect to turn to less expensive activities — and maybe to keep those habits for years. They may take the form of greater interest in free content on the Internet and the simple pleasures of a daily walk, instead of expensive vacations and N.B.A. box seats.
In any recession, the poor suffer the most pain. But in cultural influence, it may well be the rich who lose the most in the current crisis. This downturn is bringing a larger-than-usual decline in consumption by the wealthy.
The shift has been documented by Jonathan A. Parker and Annette Vissing-Jorgenson, finance professors at Northwestern University, in their recent paper, “Who Bears Aggregate Fluctuations and How? Estimates and Implications for Consumption Inequality.” Of course, people who held much wealth in real estate or stocks have taken heavy losses. But most important, the paper says, the labor incomes of high earners have declined more than in past recessions, as seen in the financial sector.
Popular culture’s catering to the wealthy may also decline in this downturn. We can expect a shift away from the lionizing of fancy restaurants, for example, and toward more use of public libraries. Such changes tend to occur in downturns, but this time they may be especially pronounced.
Recessions and depressions, of course, are not good for mental health. But it is less widely known that in the United States and other affluent countries, physical health seems to improve, on average, during a downturn. Sure, it’s stressful to miss a paycheck, but eliminating the stresses of a job may have some beneficial effects. Perhaps more important, people may take fewer car trips, thus lowering the risk of accidents, and spend less on alcohol and tobacco. They also have more time for exercise and sleep, and tend to choose home cooking over fast food.
In a 2003 paper, “Healthy Living in Hard Times,” Christopher J. Ruhm, an economist at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, found that the death rate falls as unemployment rises. In the United States, he found, a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate, on average, decreases the death rate by 0.5 percent.
David Potts studied the social history of Australia in the 1930s in his 2006 book, “The Myth of the Great Depression.” Australia’s suicide rate spiked in 1930, but overall health improved and death rates declined; after 1930, suicide rates declined as well.
While he found in interviews that many people reminisced fondly about those depression years, we shouldn’t rush to conclude that depressions are happy times.
Many of their reports are likely illusory, as documented by the Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert in his best-selling book “Stumbling on Happiness.” According to Professor Gilbert, people often have rosy memories of very trying periods, which may include extreme poverty or fighting in a war.
But this downturn will likely mean a more prudent generation to come. That is implied by the work of two professors, Ulrike Malmendier of the University of California, Berkeley, and Stefan Nagel of the Stanford Business School, in a 2007 paper, “Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk-Taking?”
A generation that grows up in a period of low stock returns is likely to take an unusually cautious approach to investing, even decades later, the paper found. Similarly, a generation that grows up with high inflation will be more cautious about buying bonds decades later.
IN other words, today’s teenagers stand less chance of making foolish decisions in the stock market down the road. They are likely to forgo some good business opportunities, but also to make fewer mistakes.
When all is said and done, something terrible has happened in the United States economy, and no one should wish for such an event. But a deeper look at the downturn, and the social changes it is bringing, shows a more complex picture.
In addition to trying to get out of the recession — our first priority — many of us will be making do with less and relying more on ourselves and our families. The social changes may well be the next big story of this recession.
Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
当事业人数上升和救市资金达到万亿计的时候，经济衰退所造成的社会损失更加明了了。我们要确定的最主要的问题是我们应该做什么来缩短这个糟糕的时期或者降低糟糕的程度。但是这里有一些关于衰退怎样改变我们的生活的更加广泛的问题，这种改变超越了严格的经济学规律。
所有的衰退都有文化和社会的影响，但是在大的衰退中这种改变是深刻的。比如说大萧条时期，在被认为是一个经济时期的同时也被认为是一个社会和文化的时期。并且目前的危机会导致在很多领域法律条规的改变，从我们的娱乐习惯到我们的健康。
首先，考虑到娱乐。很多研究表明当工作更难找或者不赚钱的时候，人们花费更多的时间用于自我的提高和花费少的消遣。在20世纪30年代的大萧条时期，那意味着听收音机和在客厅玩些棋牌类游戏。这种在家里玩的倾向至少持续到上世纪50年代。
在今天的衰退中，我们也希望转向一些花费少的活动——并且或许会保留这些习惯很多年。他们或许会以对互联网上的免费内容感兴趣和每天散步的不同乐趣为形式，用以取代昂贵的旅行和NBA门票。
这种转变已经被西北大学的金融学教授Jonathan A. Parker 和 Annette Vissing-Jorgenson在他们最近的报告“谁能承受所有的波动和怎样承受这样的波动？消费不等式的估计和推理”证明了。当然，在房地产和股票市场投入巨额财富的人们承受了巨大的损失。但是更为重要的是，这份报告说，就金融部门来看，高收入阶层的劳动收入减少的比历次衰退中减少的更多。
在这次衰退中流行餐饮文化的消费也会减少。我们可以预见结交朋友的场所将会从在高档餐馆转移到比如说公共图书馆这样的地方。这样的改变将会在衰退中发生，但是这次这种改变将特别明显。
经济衰退和不景气对于心理健康当然是不利的。但是这一点在美国和其他富裕国家没有被普遍认识到，在一般情况下，在衰退中人的身体健康将会改进。当然，薪水降低是有压力的，但是消除这种工作中的压力会有一些有一的效果�；蛐砀匾氖�，人们可能更少乘车旅行，因此降低了交通事故的风险，而且人们更少喝酒和抽烟。他们也有更多的时间进行运动和睡眠，并且更倾向于在家里做饭而不是快餐。
在2003年的一份报告“在困难时期健康的生活”中，Christopher J. Ruhm，北卡罗莱大学格林斯伯勒分校的一位经济学家发现，当失业率上升的时候死亡率下降。在美国，他发现，失业率平均每增长1%，死亡率就下降0.5%。
David Potts在他2006年的一本书《大萧条的神话》中研究了在20世纪30年代澳大利亚的社会历史。1930年澳大利亚的自杀率升高，但是总体的健康状况改善而且死亡率下降；1930年以后，自杀率也下降了。
当他在访谈中发现很多人深情的怀念那个萧条的年代，我们当然不能草率的得出大萧条是个幸福年代这样的结论。
他们的很多报告很可能是虚幻的，就如同哈佛大学精神学家丹尼尔吉尔伯特在他的畅销书《被幸福绊倒》中证明的那样。根据吉尔伯特教授的理论，人们对于困难时期往往有着美好的回忆，这些困难时期可能包括极度的贫穷和战争。
但是这次衰退很可能意味着一个更加节俭的时代来临了。这点被两位教授的研究所暗示了，北卡罗来纳大学伯克利分校的Ulrike Malmendier 和斯坦福商学院的Stefan Nagel ，在2007年的一篇论文“萧条的前身:宏观经济的经历影响到风险承担了吗？”
这篇论文发现，在股票市场低收益的时代中成长起来的一代在投资上会更加谨慎，就算是10年以后。相似的，在通货膨胀中成长起来的一代10年后会更加谨慎的购买债券。
换句话说，今天的青少年在将来某个时候在股票市场中做出愚蠢决定的机会不大。他们可能会放弃一些好的商机，但是也会更少的犯错误。
当所有的东西都被说了和做了之后，美国经济中一些很严重的事情已经发生了，并且没有人想看到这样一个事件。但是更深入的看这次衰退和它所带来的社会变迁的话，它又呈现一个更复杂的画面。
在努力摆脱衰退（这是我们首先要做的）的同时，我们中的大多数人要用更少的钱生活并且更多的以来自己和我们的家人。这种社会变革可能成为这次衰退中的下一个特大新闻。
