网站管理员备注：本文内容不构成投资建议，或暗示我们支持其中的任何观点。
翻译：GPT3.5 校译：无
Good afternoon. Thank you very much.
下午好。非常感谢。
Today I’m here to tell you that the Western world is in danger. And it is in danger because those who are supposed to have to defend the values of the West are co-opted by a vision of the world that inexorably leads to socialism and thereby to poverty.
今天我在这里告诉你，西方世界面临着危险。而且它面临危险是因为那些本应该捍卫西方价值观的人被一种无法避免地导向社会主义、从而导致贫困的世界观所腐蚀。
Unfortunately, in recent decades, the main leaders of the Western world have abandoned the model of freedom for different versions of what we call collectivism. Some have been motivated by well-meaning individuals who are willing to help others, and others have been motivated by the wish to belong to a privileged caste.
然而，近几十年来，西方世界的主要领导人已经放弃了自由模式，转而采用我们所称之为集体主义的不同版本。有些人受到了愿意帮助他人的善意个体的驱使，而另一些人则出于希望属于特权阶层的愿望。
We’re here to tell you that collectivist experiments are never the solution to the problems that afflict the citizens of the world. Rather, they are the root cause. Do believe me: no one is in better place than us, Argentines, to testify to these two points.
我们在这里告诉你，集体主义的实验从来不是解决困扰世界公民的问题的方法。相反，它们是问题的根本原因。请相信我：没有人比我们阿根廷人更能证明这两点。
Thirty five years after we adopted the model of freedom, back in 1860, we became a leading world power. And when we embraced collectivism over the course of the last 100 years, we saw how our citizens started to become systematically impoverished, and we dropped to spot number 140 globally.
我们在 1860 年采用自由模式后的 35 年，成为了一个领先的世界强国。当我们在过去的 100 年里拥抱集体主义时，我们看到我们的公民开始系统性贫困，我们在全球排名下降到第 140 位。
But before having the discussion, it would first be important for us to take a look at the data that demonstrate why free enterprise capitalism is not just the only possible system to end world poverty, but also that it’s the only morally desirable system to achieve this.
但在进行讨论之前，首先重要的是让我们看一下数据，这些数据展示了为什么自由企业资本主义不仅是结束世界贫困的唯一可能系统，而且也是唯一道德上可取的系统来实现这一目标。
If we look at the history of economic progress, we can see how between the year zero and the year 1800 approximately, world per capita GDP practically remained constant throughout the whole reference period.
如果我们看一下经济进步的历史，我们可以看到在公元零年到公元 1800 年左右的这段时间里，世界人均 GDP 在整个参考时期基本上保持不变。
If you look at a graph of the evolution of economic growth throughout the history of humanity, you would see a hockey stick graph, an exponential function that remained constant for 90% of the time and which was exponentially triggered starting in the 19th century.
如果你查看人类历史上经济增长演变的图表，你会看到一张曲线图，呈现出一种曲率急剧上升的指数函数，这个函数在 90%的时间里保持恒定，并在 19 世纪开始呈指数增长。
The only exception to this history of stagnation was in the late 15th century, with the discovery of the American continent, but for this exception, throughout the whole period between the year zero and the year 1800, global per capita GDP stagnated.
这段停滞历史的唯一例外出现在 15 世纪末，随着对美洲大陆的发现，然而除此例外外，在公元 0 年到 1800 年间的整个时期，全球人均 GDP 一直停滞不前。
Now, it’s not just that capitalism brought about an explosion in wealth from the moment it was adopted as an economic system, but also, if you look at the data, what you will see is that growth continues to accelerate throughout the whole period.
现在，不仅仅是资本主义在被作为一种经济体制采纳的那一刻就带来了财富的爆炸，而且，如果你查看数据，你会发现增长在整个时期内持续加速。
And throughout the whole period between the year zero and the year 1800, the per capita GDP growth rate remains stable at around 0.02% annually. So almost no growth. Starting in the 19th century with the Industrial Revolution, the compound annual growth rate was 0.66%. And at that rate, in order to double per capita GDP, you would need some 107 years.
在公元零年至公元 1800 年的整个时期，人均 GDP 增长率保持在每年约 0.02% 的稳定水平。因此几乎没有增长。从 19 世纪开始的工业革命时期，复合年增长率为 0.66%。以这个速度，要使人均 GDP 翻倍，需要大约 107 年。
Now, if you look at the period between the year 1900 and the year 1950, the growth rate accelerated to 1.66% a year. So you no longer need 107 years to double per capita GDP – but 66. And if you take the period between 1950 and the year 2000, you will see that the growth rate was 2.1%, which would mean that in only 33 years we could double the world’s per capita GDP.
现在，如果你看一下 1900 年到 1950 年之间的时期，增长率加速到每年 1.66%。所以你不再需要 107 年来使人均 GDP 翻一番 - 而只需要 66 年。而如果你看 1950 年到 2000 年的时期，你会发现增长率为 2.1%，这意味着我们只需要 33 年就能使全球人均 GDP 翻一番。
This trend, far from stopping, remains well alive today. If we take the period between the years 2000 and 2023, the growth rate again accelerated to 3% a year, which means that we could double world per capita GDP in just 23 years.
这种趋势远非停止，如今仍然活跃。如果我们看 2000 年到 2023 年的时期，增长率再次加速至每年 3％，这意味着我们可能在短短 23 年内将全球人均 GDP 翻倍。
That said, when you look at per capita GDP since the year 1800 until today, what you will see is that after the Industrial Revolution, global per capita GDP multiplied by over 15 times, which meant a boom in growth that lifted 90% of the global population out of poverty.
话虽如此，但当你看到自 1800 年以来的人均 GDP 时，你会发现在工业革命后，全球人均 GDP 增长了超过 15 倍，这意味着一场增长繁荣，使全球 90%的人口摆脱了贫困。
We should remember that by the year 1800, about 95% of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty. And that figure dropped to 5% by the year 2020, prior to the pandemic. The conclusion is obvious.
我们应该记住，到 1800 年左右，世界上约 95%的人口生活在极端贫困中。而在 2020 年疫情爆发之前，这一数字降至 5%。结论显而易见。
Far from being the cause of our problems, free trade capitalism as an economic system is the only instrument we have to end hunger, poverty and extreme poverty across our planet. The empirical evidence is unquestionable.
远非我们问题的根本原因，自由贸易资本主义作为一种经济体系是我们唯一能够终结全球饥饿、贫困和极端贫困的工具。经验证据毋庸置疑。
Therefore since there is no doubt that free enterprise capitalism is superior in productive terms, the left-wing doxa has attacked capitalism, alleging matters of morality, saying – that’s what the detractors claim – that it’s unjust. They say that capitalism is evil because it’s individualistic and that collectivism is good because it’s altruistic. Of course, with the money of others.
因此，由于毫无疑问自由企业资本主义在生产方面更为优越，左翼舆论攻击资本主义，声称涉及道德问题，声称 - 这是反对者声称的 - 这是不公正的。他们说资本主义邪恶，因为它个人主义，而集体主义则因其利他主义而受欢迎。当然，是用别人的钱。
So they therefore advocate for social justice. But this concept, which in the developed world became fashionable in recent times, in my country has been a constant in political discourse for over 80 years. The problem is that social justice is not just, and it doesn’t contribute to general well-being.
因此，他们主张社会公正。但这个概念在发达世界最近变得时尚，而在我的国家，它在政治话语中已经持续了 80 多年。问题在于社会公正不仅不公正，而且对总体福祉没有贡献。
Quite on the contrary, it’s an intrinsically unfair idea because it’s violent. It’s unjust because the state is financed through tax and taxes are collected coercively. Or can any one of us say that we voluntarily pay taxes? This means that the state is financed through coercion and that the higher the tax burden, the higher the coercion and the lower the freedom.
恰恰相反，这是一个本质上不公平的观念，因为它是暴力的。这是不公正的，因为国家是通过征税来融资的，而税收是强制性征收的。或者我们中的任何一个人能说我们自愿支付税款吗？这意味着国家是通过强制手段融资的，税负越高，强制力就越大，自由就越低。
Those who promote social justice start with the idea that the whole economy is a pie that can be shared differently. But that pie is not a given. It’s wealth that is generated in what Israel Kirzner, for instance, calls a market discovery process.
推动社会公正的人始于这样一个观念，即整个经济是一个可以以不同方式分享的馅饼。但这个馅饼并非是既定的。正如以色列·科兹纳（Israel Kirzner）所说，它是在市场发现过程中生成的财富。
If the goods or services offered by a business are not wanted, the business will fail unless it adapts to what the market is demanding. They will do well and produce more if they make a good quality product at an attractive price. So the market is a discovery process in which the capitalists will find the right path as they move forward.
如果一家企业提供的商品或服务不受欢迎，除非它适应市场的需求，否则该企业将会失败。如果他们能够以有吸引力的价格生产出优质产品，他们将表现得很好并生产更多。因此，市场是一个发现过程，资本家将在前进的过程中找到正确的道路。
But if the state punishes capitalists when they’re successful and gets in the way of the discovery process, they will destroy their incentives, and the consequence is that they will produce less.
但如果国家在资本家取得成功时惩罚他们，并妨碍发现过程，他们将破坏他们的动机，结果是他们会产生更少。
The pie will be smaller, and this will harm society as a whole. Collectivism, by inhibiting these discovery processes and hindering the appropriation of discoveries, ends up binding the hands of entrepreneurs and prevents them from offering better goods and services at a better price.
饼干将变得更小，这将对整个社会造成伤害。通过抑制这些发现过程并阻碍对发现的挪用，集体主义最终束缚企业家的手脚，阻止他们以更好的价格提供更好的商品和服务。
So how come academia, international organisations, economic theorists and politicians demonise an economic system that has not only lifted 90% of the world’s population out of extreme poverty but has continued to do this faster and faster?
那么为什么学术界、国际组织、经济理论家和政治家们会妖魔化一种经济体系呢？这个经济体系不仅使全球 90%的人口摆脱了极端贫困，而且还以越来越快的速度持续着这一过程。
Thanks to free trade capitalism, the world is now living its best moment. Never in all of mankind or humanity’s history has there been a time of more prosperity than today. This is true for all. The world of today has more freedom, is rich, more peaceful and prosperous. This is particularly true for countries that have more economic freedom and respect the property rights of individuals.
由于自由贸易资本主义，世界现在正经历着最好的时刻。在整个人类或人类历史上，从未有过比今天更繁荣的时刻。这对所有人来说都是真实的。当今世界更加自由、富裕、更加和平繁荣。这对那些拥有更多经济自由并尊重个人财产权的国家尤其如此。
Countries that have more freedom are 12 times richer than those that are repressed. The lowest percentile in free countries is better off than 90% of the population in repressed countries. Poverty is 25 times lower and extreme poverty is 50 times lower. And citizens in free countries live 25% longer than citizens in repressed countries.
拥有更多自由的国家比被压制的国家富裕 12 倍。在自由国家中，最低百分位的人比被压制国家中 90%的人口更富裕。贫困率降低了 25 倍，极端贫困率降低了 50 倍。而且，在自由国家中的公民寿命比被压制国家中的公民长 25%。
Now what is it that we mean when we talk about libertarianism? And let me quote the words of the greatest authority on freedom in Argentina, Professor Alberto Benegas Lynch Jr, who says that libertarianism is the unrestricted respect for the life project of others based on the principle of non-aggression, in defence of the right to life, liberty and property.
现在当我们谈论自由主义时，我们指的是什么呢？让我引用阿根廷自由权威阿尔贝托·贝内加斯·林奇·朱尔回答这个问题，他说自由主义是对他人生命项目的无限尊重，基于非侵犯原则，捍卫生命、自由和财产的权利。
Its fundamental institutions are private property, markets free from state intervention, free competition, and the division of labour and social cooperation, in which success is achieved only by serving others with goods of better quality or at a better price.
其基本制度是私有财产、免于国家干预的市场、自由竞争，以及分工和社会合作，在这种制度下，只有通过以更高质量或更优价格为他人提供商品而取得成功。
In other words, capitalist successful business people are social benefactors who, far from appropriating the wealth of others, contribute to the general well-being. Ultimately, a successful entrepreneur is a hero.
换句话说，资本主义成功的商业人士是社会的恩人，远非侵占他人财富，而是为了促进整体福祉而贡献。最终，成功的企业家是一位英雄。
And this is the model that we are advocating for the Argentina of the future. A model based on the fundamental principle of libertarianism. The defence of life, of freedom and of property.
这是我们倡导给未来阿根廷的模式。这是一个基于自由主义基本原则的模式。捍卫生命、自由和财产。
Now, if the free enterprise, capitalism and economic freedom have proven to be extraordinary instruments to end poverty in the world, and we are now at the best time in the history of humanity, it is worth asking why I say that the West is in danger.
现在，如果自由企业、资本主义和经济自由已被证明是消除世界贫困的非凡工具，而我们现在正处于人类历史上最好的时期，那么值得问一下，为什么我说西方正面临危险。
And I say this precisely because in countries that should defend the values of the free market, private property and the other institutions of libertarianism, sectors of the political and economic establishment are undermining the foundations of libertarianism, opening up the doors to socialism and potentially condemning us to poverty, misery and stagnation.
我之所以说这一点，正是因为在本应捍卫自由市场、私有财产以及其他古典自由主义制度价值观的国家中，政治和经济体系的一些部分正在破坏古典自由主义的基础，为社会主义打开了大门，有可能将我们推向贫困、苦难和停滞的命运。
It should never be forgotten that socialism is always and everywhere an impoverishing phenomenon that has failed in all countries where it’s been tried out. It’s been a failure economically, socially, culturally and it also murdered over 100 million human beings.
永远不应忘记，社会主义在任何时候、任何地方都是一种贫困化的现象，在所有尝试实施的国家都失败了。它在经济、社会、文化方面都是一场失败，也夺去了 1 亿多人的生命。
The essential problem of the West today is not just that we need to come to grips with those who, even after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the overwhelming empirical evidence, continue to advocate for impoverishing socialism.
当今西方的根本问题不仅仅是我们需要应对那些在柏林墙倒塌和压倒性经验证据之后，仍然主张贫困社会主义的人。
But there’s also our own leaders, thinkers and academics who are relying on a misguided theoretical framework to undermine the fundamentals of the system that has given us the greatest expansion of wealth and prosperity in our history.
但也有我们自己的领导者、思想家和学者，他们依赖一个误导的理论框架来破坏赋予我们历史上最大财富和繁荣扩张的体系的基础。
The theoretical framework to which I refer is that of Neoclassical economic theory, which designs a set of instruments that, unwillingly or without meaning to, end up serving intervention by the state, socialism and social degradation.
我所指的理论框架是新古典经济理论，该理论设计了一套工具，不情愿地或无意中最终为国家干预、社会主义和社会堕落提供服务。
The problem with Neoclassicals is that the model they fell in love with does not map reality, so they put down their mistakes to supposed market failures rather than reviewing the premises of the model.
新古典主义的问题在于，他们迷恋的模型并不符合现实，因此他们将自己的错误归咎于所谓的市场失灵，而不是重新审视模型的前提。
Under the pretext of a supposed market failure, regulations are introduced. These regulations create distortions in the price system, prevent economic calculus, and therefore also prevent saving, investment and growth.
在所谓的市场失灵借口下，引入了法规。这些法规在价格体系中造成扭曲，阻碍了经济计算，因此也阻碍了储蓄、投资和增长。
This problem lies mainly in the fact that not even supposed libertarian economists understand what the market is because if they did understand, it would quickly be seen that it’s impossible for there to be market failures.
这个问题主要在于即便是所谓的自由主义经济学家也不理解市场是什么，因为如果他们理解的话，很快就会看到市场失灵是不可能的。
The market is not a mere graph describing a curve of supply and demand. The market is a mechanism for social cooperation, where you voluntarily exchange ownership rights. Therefore based on this definition, talking about a market failure is an oxymoron. There are no market failures.
市场不仅仅是描述供需曲线的图表。市场是社会合作的机制，您在这里自愿交换所有权。因此，基于这个定义，谈论市场失败是一个矛盾之词。不存在市场失败。
If transactions are voluntary, the only context in which there can be market failure is if there is coercion and the only one that is able to coerce generally is the state, which holds a monopoly on violence.
如果交易是自愿的，市场失败只能在存在强迫的情况下发生，而能够施加强迫的通常只有国家，其持有暴力的垄断。
Consequently, if someone considers that there is a market failure, I would suggest that they check to see if there is state intervention involved. And if they find that that’s not the case, I would suggest that they check again, because obviously there’s a mistake. Market failures do not exist.
因此，如果有人认为存在市场失败，我建议他们检查是否涉及国家干预。如果他们发现不是这种情况，我建议他们再次检查，因为显然存在错误。市场失败是不存在的。
An example of the so-called market failures described by the Neoclassicals is the concentrated structure of the economy. From the year 1800 onwards, with the population multiplying by 8 or 9 times, per capita GDP grew by over 15 times, so there were growing returns which took extreme poverty from 95% to 5%.
新古典经济学所描述的市场失灵之一是经济的集中结构。从 1800 年开始，随着人口增长了 8 到 9 倍，人均 GDP 增长了超过 15 倍，因此出现了不断增长的回报，将极端贫困率从 95%降至 5%。
However, the presence of growing returns involves concentrated structures, what we would call a monopoly. How come, then, something that has generated so much well-being for the Neoclassical theory is a market failure?
然而，增长回报的存在涉及集中的结构，这就是我们所说的垄断。那么，为什么对新古典理论来说带来了如此多福祉的东西却成为市场失灵呢？
Neoclassical economists think outside of the box. When the model fails, you shouldn’t get angry with reality but rather with a model and change it. The dilemma faced by the Neoclassical model is that they say they wish to perfect the function of the market by attacking what they consider to be failures. But in so doing, they don’t just open up the doors to socialism but also go against economic growth.
新古典经济学家有独特的思考方式。当模型失败时，你不应该对现实感到愤怒，而是对模型感到愤怒并进行更改。新古典模型面临的困境是，他们声称希望通过攻击他们认为是失败的地方来完善市场的功能。但这样做不仅打开了通往社会主义的大门，也违背了经济增长的方向。
For example, regulating monopolies, destroying their profits and destroying growing returns would automatically destroy economic growth.
例如，监管垄断，破坏其利润和摧毁增长回报将自动破坏经济增长。
However, faced with the theoretical demonstration that state intervention is harmful – and the empirical evidence that it has failed couldn’t have been otherwise – the solution proposed by collectivists is not greater freedom but rather greater regulation, which creates a downward spiral of regulations until we are all poorer and our lives depend on a bureaucrat sitting in a luxury office.
然而，面对有关国家干预有害的理论论证以及它已经失败的经验证据，解决方案并非是更大的自由，而是更多的规制。这导致了一系列的规定，最终使我们变得更加贫困，我们的生活取决于坐在豪华办公室里的官僚。
Given the dismal failure of collectivist models and the undeniable advances in the free world, socialists were forced to change their agenda: they left behind the class struggle based on the economic system and replaced this with other supposed social conflicts, which are just as harmful to life and to economic growth.
考虑到集体主义模式的惨败和自由世界的不可否认的进步，社会主义者被迫改变他们的议程：他们抛弃了基于经济体制的阶级斗争，取而代之的是其他所谓的社会冲突，同样对生活和经济增长有害。
The first of these new battles was the ridiculous and unnatural fight between man and woman. Libertarianism already provides for equality of the sexes. The cornerstone of our creed is that all humans are created equal and that we all have the same inalienable rights granted by the Creator, including life, freedom and ownership.
这些新战斗中的第一个是荒谬而不自然的男女之间的战斗。古典自由主义已经确保了性别平等。我们信条的基石是所有人类生来平等，并且我们都拥有由创造者赋予的同样不可剥夺的权利，包括生命、自由和所有权。
All that the radical feminism agenda has led to is greater state intervention to hinder economic process, giving jobs to bureaucrats who have not contributed anything to society. Examples are ministries of women or international organisations devoted to promoting this agenda.
激进女权主义议程所导致的一切只是更多的国家干预，阻碍经济进程，为那些没有为社会做出贡献的官僚提供工作。例如，致力于推动这一议程的妇女部门或国际组织。
Another conflict presented by socialists is that of humans against nature, claiming that we human beings damage a planet which should be protected at all costs, even going as far as advocating for population control mechanisms or the abortion agenda.
社会主义者提出的另一个冲突是人类与自然的冲突，声称我们人类破坏了一个应该被全力保护的星球，甚至走到了倡导人口控制机制或堕胎议程的地步。
Unfortunately, these harmful ideas have taken a stronghold in our society. Neo-Marxists have managed to co-opt the common sense of the Western world, and this they have achieved by appropriating the media, culture, universities and also international organisations.
遗憾的是，这些有害的观念已经在我们的社会中扎根。新马克思主义者成功地挟持了西方世界的常识，他们通过霸占媒体、文化、大学以及国际组织来实现这一目标。
The latter case is the most serious one, probably because these are institutions that have enormous influence on the political and economic decisions of their member states.
后一种情况是最严重的，这可能是因为这些机构对其成员国的政治和经济决策具有巨大影响力。
Fortunately there’s more and more of us who are daring to make our voices heard, because we see that if we don’t truly and decisively fight against these ideas, the only possible fate is for us to have increasing levels of state regulation, socialism, poverty and less freedom, and therefore, worse standards of living.
幸运的是，越来越多的人敢于发声，因为我们看到，如果我们不真正坚决地与这些观念斗争，唯一可能的命运就是我们将面临更加严格的国家管制、社会主义、贫困以及更少的自由，从而导致生活水平下降。
The West has unfortunately already started to go along this path. I know, to many it may sound ridiculous to suggest that the West has turned to socialism, but it’s only ridiculous if you only limit yourself to the traditional economic definition of socialism, which says that it’s an economic system where the state owns the means of production. This definition in my view, should be updated in the light of current circumstances.
西方不幸已经开始沿着这条道路前行。我知道，对许多人来说，提出西方已经转向社会主义可能听起来荒谬，但只有当你仅限于传统的经济定义社会主义时，这才是荒谬的，传统定义认为社会主义是一个国家拥有生产要素的经济体系。在我看来，这个定义应该根据当前情况进行更新。
Today, states don’t need to directly control the means of production to control every aspect of the lives of individuals. With tools such as printing money, debt, subsidies, controlling the interest rate, price controls, and regulations to correct so-called market failures, they can control the lives and fates of millions of individuals.
今天，国家无需直接控制生产手段，就能掌控个人生活的各个方面。通过印钞、债务、补贴、控制利率、价格控制和调整所谓市场失灵的法规等工具，它们能够掌控数百万个体的生活和命运。
This is how we come to the point where, by using different names or guises, a good deal of the generally accepted ideologies in most Western countries are collectivist variants, whether they proclaim to be openly communist, fascist, socialist, social democrats, national socialists, Christian democrats, neo-Keynesians, progressives, populists, nationalists or globalists.
这就是我们到达的地方，通过使用不同的名称或伪装，大多数西方国家普遍接受的意识形态很大程度上是集体主义变体，无论它们声称自己是公开的共产主义者、法西斯主义者、社会主义者、社会民主主义者、国家社会主义者、基督教民主主义者、新凯恩斯主义者、进步主义者、民粹主义者、民族主义者还是全球主义者。
Ultimately, there are no major differences. They all say that the state should steer all aspects of the lives of individuals. They all defend a model contrary to the one that led humanity to the most spectacular progress in its history.
最终，没有主要的区别。它们都表示国家应该指导个人生活的方方面面。它们都捍卫一种与引领人类历史上最引人注目进步的模式相反的模式。
We have come here today to invite the Western world to get back on the path to prosperity. Economic freedom, limited government and unlimited respect for private property are essential elements for economic growth. The impoverishment produced by collectivism is not a fantasy, nor is it an inescapable fate. It’s a reality that we Argentines know very well.
今天我们来到这里，邀请西方世界重新走上繁荣之路。经济自由、有限政府和对私有财产的无限尊重是经济增长的基本要素。由集体主义导致的贫困并非幻想，也不是不可逃避的命运。这是我们阿根廷人非常了解的现实。
We have lived through this. We have been through this because, as I said earlier, ever since we decided to abandon the model of freedom that had made us rich, we have been caught up in a downward spiral – a spiral by which we are poorer and poorer, day by day.
我们经历过这一切。我们经历过这一切，因为正如我之前所说，自从我们决定放弃使我们富有的自由模式以来，我们陷入了一个不断恶化的螺旋－一个使我们日益贫困的螺旋。
This is something we have lived through and we are here to warn you about what can happen if countries in the Western world, that became rich through the model of freedom, stay on this path of servitude.
这是我们经历过的事情，我们在这里警告你，如果那些通过自由模式变得富裕的西方国家继续走上奴役之路，会发生什么。
The case of Argentina is an empirical demonstration that no matter how rich you may be, how much you may have in terms of natural resources, how skilled your population may be, how educated, or how many bars of gold you may have in the central bank – if measures are adopted that hinder the free functioning of markets, competition, price systems, trade and ownership of private property, the only possible fate is poverty.
阿根廷的案例是一个经验性的证明，无论你有多富有，拥有多少自然资源，人口多么熟练，受过多少教育，或者中央银行有多少金条，如果采取了妨碍市场、竞争、价格体系、贸易和私人财产所有权自由运作的措施，唯一可能的命运就是贫困。
Therefore, in conclusion, I would like to leave a message for all business people here and those who are not here in person but are following from around the world.
因此，总结而言，我想给在场的所有商业人士和那些未亲临现场但正在全球关注的人留言。
Do not be intimidated by the political caste or by parasites who live off the state. Do not surrender to a political class that only wants to stay in power and retain its privileges. You are social benefactors. You are heroes. You are the creators of the most extraordinary period of prosperity we’ve ever seen.
不要被政治统治阶级或寄生于国家的人所吓倒。不要屈服于只想保持权力和保留特权的政治阶层。你们是社会的恩人。你们是英雄。你们是创造我们所见过的最不寻常繁荣时期的创造者。
Let no one tell you that your ambition is immoral. If you make money, it’s because you offer a better product at a better price, thereby contributing to general wellbeing.
不要让任何人告诉你，你的雄心是不道德的。如果你赚钱，那是因为你提供了更好的产品以更好的价格，从而促进了整体的福祉。
Do not surrender to the advance of the state. The state is not the solution. The state is the problem itself. You are the true protagonists of this story and rest assured that as from today, Argentina is your staunch and unconditional ally.
不要屈服于国家的进展。国家不是解决方案，国家本身就是问题。你们是这个故事的真正主角，请放心，从今天起，阿根廷是你们坚定而无条件的盟友。
Thank you very much and long live freedom, dammit!
非常感谢，自由万岁，该死的！