央行行长们更加认真地对待比特币

近年来，中央银行和金融机构出现了越来越多的研究，重点关注比特币及其对货币政策的潜在影响。

A Bitcoin change store is seen in Tel Aviv, Israel on December 30, 2022. (Photo by Beata Zawrzel/NurPhoto via ... [+] Getty Images)

2022 年 12 月 30 日，以色列特拉维夫的一家比特币交易商店。（摄影：Beata Zawrzel/NurPhoto via ... [+] Getty Images）

In recent years, a growing body of research has emerged from central banks and financial institutions, focusing on Bitcoin and its potential impact on monetary policy. These studies, issued by organizations such as the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB), and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), highlight a key theme: the disruptive nature of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies could limit the ability of central banks to perform their traditional role in managing economies. Advocates have argued that Bitcoin could be an alternative to central banking, are central banks finally recognizing Bitcoin as a potential threat?

近年来，中央银行和金融机构出现了越来越多的研究，重点关注比特币及其对货币政策的潜在影响。这些研究由明尼阿波利斯联储、欧洲中央银行（ECB）和国际货币基金组织（IMF）等组织发布，强调了一个关键主题：比特币和其他加密货币的颠覆性可能会限制央行的能力发挥其在管理经济方面的传统作用。支持者认为比特币可以成为中央银行的替代品，中央银行最终是否承认比特币是潜在威胁？

Can Bitcoin Lead To Inequality?

比特币会导致不平等吗？

The European Central Bank’s researchers have published two papers on Bitcoin, both of which offer strikingly different perspectives. The first, published in the wake of the FTX collapse in 2022 while Bitcoin was trading at $16,000 - titled “Bitcoin’s Last Stand” - portrays Bitcoin as being a failed monetary experiment in its final death throes. In 2024, with Bitcoin trading at nearly $70,000, the same authors at the European Central Bank published a paper acknowledging a different reality.

欧洲央行的研究人员发表了两篇关于比特币的论文，两篇论文都提供了截然不同的观点。第一篇文章是在 2022 年 FTX 崩溃之后发布的，当时比特币的交易价格为 16,000 美元，标题为“比特币的最后一站”，将比特币描绘成一个失败的货币实验，处于最后的垂死挣扎。 2024 年，比特币交易价格接近 7 万美元，欧洲央行的同一位作者发表了一篇论文，承认了不同的现实。

This latter paper argues that Bitcoin’s existence and continued appreciation has a significant impact on wealth distribution. According to the paper, when Bitcoin's price rises, early Bitcoin holders get wealthier. However, since Bitcoin doesn't produce anything or increase economic output, this increased wealth and consumption by early holders must come directly from reduced consumption by everyone else in society.

后一篇论文认为，比特币的存在和持续升值对财富分配具有重大影响。该论文称，当比特币价格上涨时，早期比特币持有者会变得更加富有。然而，由于比特币不会产生任何东西或增加经济产出，早期持有者财富和消费的增加必须直接来自社会中其他人消费的减少。

This means that when early Bitcoin holders spend their profits on goods and services, they are using purchasing power that has been taken from non-holders and people who bought Bitcoin later. This reduction in people’s purchasing power happens even if Bitcoin's price keeps going up forever and even impacts individuals who don’t buy Bitcoin at all.

这意味着，当早期的比特币持有者将利润花在商品和服务上时，他们使用的购买力是从非持有者和后来购买比特币的人那里夺走的。即使比特币的价格永远上涨，人们购买力的下降也会发生，甚至影响那些根本不购买比特币的人。

The key insight is that Bitcoin wealth doesn't create new economic value - it just redistributes existing wealth. Even in the most optimistic scenario where Bitcoin's price keeps rising, it makes early holders richer only by making everyone else poorer in relative terms. The authors argue this is different from gains in stocks or property values, which can reflect and contribute to actual increases in economic productivity and output. With Bitcoin, the gains are purely redistributive since Bitcoin itself doesn't produce anything or increase economic capacity.

关键的见解是，比特币财富不会创造新的经济价值——它只是重新分配现有的财富。即使在比特币价格持续上涨的最乐观的情况下，它也只能通过让其他人相对而言变得更穷来让早期持有者变得更富有。作者认为，这与股票或房地产价值的增长不同，后者可以反映并有助于经济生产力和产出的实际增长。对于比特币来说，收益纯粹是再分配性的，因为比特币本身不会产生任何东西或增加经济能力。

This ECB viewpoint mirrors a longstanding critique made by Bitcoin proponents regarding central banks. The Cantillon effect, named after 18th-century economist Richard Cantillon, suggests that central banks, by printing money, disproportionately enrich those who are closest to the money supply (such as banks and wealthy individuals), while the rest of the population sees diminished purchasing power. When new money enters the economy, it doesn't affect all prices simultaneously - instead, the first recipients of the new money (typically financial institutions) can spend it before prices rise, while those furthest from the money supply (typically ordinary citizens) only experience the resulting inflation.

欧洲央行的这一观点反映了比特币支持者长期以来对央行的批评。坎蒂隆效应以 18 世纪经济学家理查德·坎蒂隆 (Richard Cantillon) 的名字命名，表明中央银行通过印钞，使那些最接近货币供应的人（例如银行和富人）不成比例地致富，而其他人的购买力却在减少力量。当新货币进入经济体时，它不会同时影响所有价格 - 相反，新货币的第一批接收者（通常是金融机构）可以在价格上涨之前花费它，而那些距离货币供应最远的人（通常是普通公民）只能经历由此产生的通货膨胀。

Tesla Billionaire Elon Musk Declares ‘Financial Emergency’ As $35.7 Trillion ‘Debt Bomb’ Primes A Bitcoin Price Boom To Rival Gold

特斯拉亿万富翁埃隆·马斯克宣布“财务紧急状态”，因为 35.7 万亿美元的“债务炸弹”导致比特币价格飙升至与黄金相媲美

Trump Vs. Harris 2024 Polls: Harris Leads In Latest 2 Surveys—As Most Polls Show Razor-Thin Race

特朗普对决。哈里斯 2024 年民意调查：哈里斯在最近两项调查中领先——大多数民意调查显示种族微弱

iPhone 17 Pro Max Design Upgrade: New Look Predicted In Latest Leak

iPhone 17 Pro Max设计升级：最新泄露预测新外观

The redistributive properties of monetary policy have been widely documented and debated. Central banks themselves have investigated whether quantitative easing - where central banks purchase financial assets to boost the economy - has increased wealth inequality. By purchasing assets like government bonds and mortgage-backed securities, quantitative easing tends to drive up asset prices, benefiting those who already own such assets. This creates a similar redistributive effect to what the ECB criticizes in Bitcoin: wealth is transferred from one group to another without necessarily creating new economic value.

货币政策的再分配特性已被广泛记录和争论。各国央行本身也调查了量化宽松（央行购买金融资产以提振经济）是否加剧了财富不平等。通过购买政府债券和抵押贷款支持证券等资产，量化宽松往往会推高资产价格，使那些已经拥有此类资产的人受益。这产生了与欧洲央行批评比特币类似的再分配效应：财富从一个群体转移到另一个群体，但不一定创造新的经济价值。

Can Bitcoin Jeopardize Monetary Policy ?

比特币会危及货币政策吗？

A recent working paper from the Minneapolis Fed looks at Bitcoin from a different angle. The paper argues that when people can freely buy and hold Bitcoin (or similar "useless pieces of paper"), it becomes harder for the government to run consistent budget deficits. Normally, the government can spend more than it takes in through taxes by selling government bonds. For this to work, these bonds need to stay valuable. But when Bitcoin exists as an alternative, something tricky happens - no matter what smooth, predictable policies the government tries to use, the government might get forced into a situation where it has to spend only what it collects in taxes. The researchers found only two ways to fix this problem: either completely ban Bitcoin, or put a specific tax on owning it. It's worth noting that this isn't about Bitcoin's price or how many people use it - just its mere existence as something people can buy creates these complications for government deficit spending.

明尼阿波利斯联储最近发布的一份工作文件从不同的角度看待比特币。该论文认为，当人们可以自由购买和持有比特币（或类似的“无用的纸片”）时，政府就更难维持持续的预算赤字。通常情况下，政府可以通过出售政府债券来支出超过税收收入的支出。为了实现这一点，这些债券需要保持价值。但当比特币作为替代品存在时，就会发生一些棘手的事情——无论政府尝试使用多么顺利、可预测的政策，政府都可能被迫陷入一种只能支出其税收收入的境地。研究人员发现只有两种方法可以解决这个问题：要么完全禁止比特币，要么对拥有比特币征收特定税。值得注意的是，这与比特币的价格或有多少人使用它无关——只是它作为人们可以购买的东西的存在给政府赤字支出带来了这些复杂的情况。