【推文】Students For Liberty - Marx’s bad ideas never die. Price controls. Central planning...
連結
原推文 - x.com/sfliberty/stat...
Thread Reader App版本（一頁版本） - threadreaderapp.com/...
原文及個人翻譯
（不含原文沒甚麼意義的圖）
Karl Marx said he had discovered the scientific laws of economics. Value came from labor. Profit was theft. Only central planning could build a just society. But four Austrian economists—Menger, Böhm-Bawerk, Mises, and Hayek—tore his theory apart. 🧵
卡爾·馬克思說他發現了經濟學的科學法則。價值來自於勞動。利潤是盜竊。只有中央計劃才能建立一個公正的社會。但四個奧地利經濟學家——孟格、博姆-巴維克、米塞斯和海耶克——嚴厲批評了他的理論。 🧵
Marx said value comes from labor. Carl Menger said: value comes from us. In Principles of Economics (1871), he showed that value is subjective. It depends on the preferences of individuals—changing across people, places, and time. A violin is priceless to a musician, worthless to someone else. Food is worth more to the starving than to the full. Labor doesn’t determine value. Human needs do.
馬克思說價值來自於勞動。Carl Menger說：價值來自於我們自己。在他1871年的《經濟學原理》中，他展示了價值是主觀的。它取決於個體的偏好——在不同的人、地方和時間中變化。對一個音樂家來說，小提琴是無價的，對別人來說可能是沒有價值的。對飢餓的人來說，食物比對飽腹的人更有價值。勞動並不決定價值。人類的需求決定價值。
Marx said capitalists exploit workers. Eugen Böhm-Bawerk introduced a different explanation: time preference. Workers value present income. Capitalists provide that income now in exchange for uncertain profits later. They take the risk, front the capital, and hope it pays off. Profit is not exploitation. It’s compensation for time, risk, and planning.
馬克思說資本家剝削工人。Eugen Böhm-Bawerk提出了一個不同的解釋：時間偏好。工人重視當前收入。資本家現在提供那筆收入，以換取未來的不確定利潤。他們承擔風險，提供資本，並希望有回報。利潤不是剝削。它是對時間、風險和規劃的補償。
But what if we abolished capitalism? How would the state know what to produce? Ludwig von Mises asked this in 1920—and proved socialism couldn’t answer it. Without prices, there’s no way to compare costs or plan tradeoffs. No real prices = no real economy. He didn’t say socialism lacked morality. He said it lacked logic.
但是，如果我們廢除資本主義呢？國家該如何知道生產什麼？Ludwig von Mises於1920年提出了這個問題，並證明社會主義無法回答。沒有價格，就無法比較成本或規劃權衡取捨。沒有真實的價格=沒有真實的經濟。他並不是說社會主義缺乏道德性。他說它缺乏邏輯。
F.A. Hayek went further. He argued that no central planner could match the knowledge spread across society. Prices aren’t just numbers. They’re signals—reflecting local needs, priorities, and scarcities. Prices reflect that knowledge. They allow individuals to coordinate without any central planner needing to understand the full picture. No expert, no algorithm, no five-year plan can replace that.
F.A. Hayek走得更遠。他辯稱，任何中央計劃者都無法匹配社會中傳播的知識。價格不僅僅是數字。它們是信號——反映當地的需求、優先事項和稀缺性。價格反映了那種知識。它們使個人能夠在沒有任何中央計劃者需要了解全局的情況下進行協調。沒有專家、沒有算法、沒有五年計劃可以取代它。
By the mid-20th century, Marxist economics had collapsed.
Menger refuted the labor theory of value.
Böhm-Bawerk dismantled surplus value.
Mises exposed the limits of planning.
Hayek explained why decentralization matters.
The Austrians didn’t just critique Marx. They offered a more coherent framework—rooted in individual choice, not class struggle.
到20世紀中葉，馬克思主義經濟學已經崩潰。
Carl Menger反駁了勞動價值理論。
Eugen Böhm-Bawerk拆除了剩餘價值（的理論）。
Ludwig von Mises揭露了規劃的局限性。
F.A. Hayek解釋了為什麼去中心化很重要。
奧地利經濟學家不僅批評了馬克思。他們提供了一個更連貫的框架——根植於個人選擇，而不是階級鬥爭。
So why does it matter now? Because Marx’s bad ideas never die. Price controls. Central planning. The constant vilification of profit. Every time we forget what crushed Marxism, it crawls back—under new slogans, with old consequences.
Most students never learn this story. They don’t know how Marx fell. They don’t know why the Austrians won. And they don’t realize how many of today’s bad ideas echo the same fallacies—just with friendlier branding.
那麼，為什麼這在現在很重要？因為馬克思的錯誤思想從未消亡。價格控制。中央計劃。對利潤的不斷詆毀。每當我們忘記了什麼壓制了馬克思主義，它就會再次爬回來——在新的口號下，帶來舊的後果。
大多數學生從未學過這個故事。他們不知道馬克思是如何倒下的。他們不知道為什麼奧地利人會獲勝。他們也沒有意識到，當今許多錯誤的想法都迴響著同樣的謬誤——只是有了更友好的品牌形象。