Nathan Rothschild was the richest man in the world when he died in 1836. A list compiled by Forbes magazine, ranks him as the second richest man who ever lived – ahead of John D Rockefeller, and way ahead of Mexican telecoms mogul Carlos Slim and Bill Gates of Microsoft. (The richest was a Roman general who was the power behind Julius Caesar’s throne.) The figures used by Forbes are, of course, adjusted for inflation.
内森•罗斯柴尔德(Nathan Rothschild)于1836年去世，当时他是世界首富。在《福布斯》(Forbes)杂志编撰的一份榜单上，他被评为有史以来第二富有的人——排在约翰•D•洛克菲勒(John D. Rockefeller)之前，远远领先于墨西哥电信巨头卡洛斯•斯利姆(Carlos Slim)和微软(Microsoft)的比尔•盖茨(Bill Gates)。（有史以来最富有的是一位罗马将军，是他把凯撒(Julius Caesar)推上皇位的。）当然，《福布斯》使用的数字经过了通胀调整。

But what does “adjusted for inflation” mean? Rothschild died of septicaemia following an abscess, and in spite of buying the best medical attention available in Europe at the time. He had never been in a car, a train or an aircraft, nor visited the Taj Mahal, heard recorded music, seen a film, made a phone call or used electric light. Nor (despite the legends about the killing he made from inside information) could he have heard about the outcome of Waterloo until many hours after the battle was won. And he was dead at the age of 58 from an illness that could today be cured by an antibiotic costing a few pence.
但“经过了通胀调整”是什么意思？尽管能够享受当时欧洲最好的医疗条件，罗斯柴尔德仍死于脓肿引发的败血症。他从没坐过汽车、火车、飞机，也没到过泰姬陵(Taj Mahal)，没听过录制音乐，没看过电影，没打过电话，也没用过电灯。滑铁卢战役分出胜负几小时后，他才有可能得知结果（尽管有传闻称他利用内幕消息发了大财）。他在58岁那年病逝，若换到今天，那种病只消花上几便士买点抗生素便能治愈。
Was Rothschild really the second richest man in history? Was he, in fact, richer than me? True, he could hire a fleet of carriages and eat off gold plate; but I would happily trade both for still being alive , and I suspect that Rothschild would have felt the same.
罗斯柴尔德真的是历史上第二富有的人吗？那时的他，比现在的我富裕吗？没错，他雇得起一整支马车队，用金盘子吃饭；但跟继续活下来相比，我宁愿不要这两者——我猜罗斯柴尔德也会这么想。
The question is prompted by a considerably more mundane event. Inflation in the eurozone has fallen to 0.3 per cent, arousing concerns that there might actually be deflation in the months ahead – and that Eurostat, Europe’s statistics agency, will soon declare that prices in Europe are lower than a year earlier.
我是由一件很普通的事情想到这个问题的。欧元区的通胀率已降至0.3%，令人担忧未来几个月可能真的发生通缩，而欧盟统计局(Eurostat)将在不久之后宣布，欧洲的物价低于一年前。
That worry is premised on the existence of a qualitative difference between inflation – that is, prices rising, even if slowly; and deflation – prices falling, however swiftly. It is also premised on an assumption that deflation is undesirable and that the goal should be gently rising prices; and on the belief that we are able to tell which state we are in.
人们之所以会产生这种担心，一个前提是通胀与通缩性质不同——前者指物价上涨，哪怕上涨缓慢；后者指物价下降，无论降得有多么快。另一个前提是关于通缩是不可取的、应该以物价温和上升为目标的观念，以及我们能够判断通胀形势的想法。
Contemplation of the antibiotics not available in 1836 casts doubt on all these premises. It is generally accepted medical costs rise faster than general inflation – and in the US, where they represent more than 20 per cent of consumer spending, they have contributed significantly to that general inflation. But medicine has become better – quite a lot better, even if too late for Rothschild.
考虑到1836年还没有抗生素，这就令人对上述所有假设产生了怀疑。大家普遍认为，医疗成本上涨快于总体通胀率。在美国，医疗费用对总体通胀率的贡献很大，因为它在消费者支出中的占比高于20%。然而，医疗技术已经进步，比以往好很多，尽管这对罗斯柴尔德来说已太迟了。
Price indices are compiled by measuring the changes in the cost of buying a fixed bundle of goods chosen to represent the consumption of an average household. But what the average household buys changes with the arrival of new goods; and with changes in relative prices; as well as with variations – good and bad – in quality. Antibiotics replace leeches, carriages become more expensive, computers become more powerful, and the service from a call-centre deteriorates. That is how modern economies evolve and grow.
统计人员选取能代表普通家庭消费状况的一篮子物品，测算这些物品的价格变化，从而计算出物价指数。但普通家庭购买的物品组合会随着新商品的问世而变化；也随着相对价格的变化而变化；还随着商品质量（优与劣）的变化而变化。抗生素取代了蚂蟥，马车价格变得更贵，计算机变得更强大，而呼叫中心的服务却恶化了。这就是现代经济演进与发展的方式。
But price indices are ill equipped to cope with these changes. The bundle of goods Rothschild bought in his day might now be prohibitively expensive, even for him – the carriages, the plate – and is certainly very different from the bundle of goods Mr Gates would want to buy. The difference in consumption patterns of an average household is more dramatic still.
但物价指标不能很好地适应这些变化。罗斯柴尔德当年买的一篮子物品，放在今天可能价格高不可攀，即便对他来说也是一样——那些马车、金盘子——当然跟盖茨今天想买的一篮子物品也有很大不同。普通家庭消费模式的变化更是大得惊人。
There are techniques for measuring and incorporating quality improvements, which are used for many consumer goods – but in the case of medicine, it is the amount of attention received that has increased rather than the price of treatments.
如今有一些技术可以衡量并计入质量改进因素，这些技术已使用到许多消费品上——但就医疗而言，上升的是病人得到的护理服务总量，而非治疗的价格。
Overall, there are probably more upward than downward biases in the way inflation is calculated. But to claim that we know that prices have risen by 0.3 per cent in the past year implies a degree of precision in our estimates to which we cannot lay claim nor realistically aspire.
总体而言，在计算通胀率过程中，高估的倾向可能要大于低估的倾向。但是，声称我们知道物价在过去一年里上涨了0.3%，等于暗示我们的估算有一定精确度——其实我们不可能达到那样的精确度，那是不切实际的妄想。