※ 引述《shefans0530 (就是我)》之銘言： : 以下是財政原文課本的兩個段落，這個章節主要在講「美國的移轉支付」的問題（公共選 : 擇的觀點下），其中其實有五六個段落是老師要求我們自己讀，基本上是希望我們理解「 : 人們為什麼會從自私到願意捐錢給社會福利機構」的問題，我打的是比較難懂也比較重要 : 的兩個段落，老師要我們讀的範圍我大概還ok，[ ] 的部份還好， ” ”的部份則是幾乎 : 無法理解，如果各位大大能整體提一下我將會非常感激，若沒有很多時間的大大，能夠幫 : 助我引號的部份我也萬分感謝！！！ : 這是期中考考題...老師目前堅持不公佈答案...只好求救於...各位大大...T^T : Q：詳細比較公共選擇觀點（public choice perspective）與主流觀點（mainstream : view）對社會保險（social security）與社會救濟（social assistance）的看法的異同 : 。 : The Public Choice Perspective on Public Assistance（這是課本那段標題） : 下面取三段 : People may be self-interested, but they also clearly have altruistic or : charitable impulses that contribute to their own utility. We know this 人們可能會投資自己 , 但也很清楚地有利他及慈善的動力來做奉獻 : because many people contribute to private charities and their contributions : are entirely voluntary. These contributions obviously increase the donor’s 我們知道這是因為很多人奉獻在私底下的愛心而且出於完全自願 : own utility or they would not be given. Public assistance can be viewed as an : extension of private charity – the free-rider problem. 這些奉獻明顯地增加捐助者的功能價值或者他們未受人施予 公開的救助可以視為私底下愛心的延續 --自由供述的問題 : Before looking at the free-rider problem associated with charitable giving, : note the subtle difference in the mainstream and public choice views of : public assistance. [[[ The mainstream, social welfare view of public assistance 在看待關於慈善捐助自由供述問題之前 , 註記副標題的差異於主流和公共選擇的公開 救助觀點 : sees it as a win-lose proposition. When wearing their other-interested hats 主流 , 社會福利觀點視它為輸贏的支持論點 : and thinking about distributive justice, people conclude that public : assistance is appropriate. """They would rather not pay the taxes to support 當戴著其它感興趣的帽子想著捐贈的正義 , 人們對公共救助的結論是適當的 : public assistance from their narrow self-interested economic perspective, but 從狹義的經濟觀點來看, 他們甚至在做此事時不用繳稅 , 但支持這樣的公共投資 最後的平等性 : they reluctantly do so to support the public interest in end-results equity. : Under this line of thought, public assistance is viewed as a win-lose : proposition: the poor beneficiaries of public assistance gain utility but the : nonpoor lose utility when they pay their taxes. Not so under the public 在這條思想線上 , 公共救助的輸贏支持論點 : 窮者在公共救助功能上獲得利益 , 但當非窮人繳其他稅時卻失去功用 : choice perspective.""" Voluntary gifts to private charities are clearly a : win-win proposition: the donors gain utility along with the beneficiaries of 並非在公共選擇觀點之下 "自奉願奉獻慈善顯然是雙贏的支持論點 : their gifts. Since public assistance is just an extension of private charity, : it too is a win-win proposition. ]]] 捐贈者在他們的奉獻中得到好處 . 即使公共救助只是私底下愛心的延續 但它仍是雙贏的 : Win-win proposition sound more like issues of efficiency than of equity. : Recall that inefficiencies place society below its utility possibilities : frontier. Correcting an inefficiency and returning to the frontier leads to 雙贏聽起來比平等的議題更為有效 回應不足讓社會功能的可能性界限往下降 修正不足而返回界限讓這可能性是每個人可以得到的 : the possibility that everyone gains. In contrast, the mainstream view of : redistributional policies is that they move society along the utility : possibilities frontier, with the result that some people gain and others lose. 反之, 主流觀點的政策移動了社會的界限 隨著這結果讓一些人得到而其他人卻失去 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 125.224.54.211