Moore's Law for Everything
打开互动全文版（逐段中英对照 + 图/公式 + 论文问答）→我在 OpenAI 的工作每天都在提醒我，社会经济变革的规模比大多数人想象的来得更快。能够思考和学习的软件将越来越多地取代人类目前从事的工作。更多的权力将从劳动力转移到资本。如果公共政策不相应调整，大多数人最终会比今天更糟。我们需要设计一个拥抱这一技术未来的体系，并对构成未来世界大部分价值的资产——公司和土地——征税，以便公平分配即将到来的部分财富。这样做可以使未来的社会减少分裂，让每个人都能分享其收益。在未来五年内，能够思考的计算机程序将阅读法律文件并提供医疗建议。在未来十年内，它们将从事流水线工作，甚至可能成为伴侣。而在那之后的几十年里，它们将几乎能做所有事情，包括做出新的科学发现，从而扩展我们对“一切”的概念。
My work at OpenAI reminds me every day about the magnitude of the socioeconomic change that is coming sooner than most people believe. Software that can think and learn will do more and more of the work that people now do. Even more power will shift from labor to capital. If public policy doesn’t adapt accordingly, most people will end up worse off than they are today. We need to design a system that embraces this technological future and taxes the assets that will make up most of the value in that world–companies and land–in order to fairly distribute some of the coming wealth. Doing so can make the society of the future much less divisive and enable everyone to participate in its gains. In the next five years, computer programs that can think will read legal documents and give medical advice. In the next decade, they will do assembly-line work and maybe even become companions. And in the decades after that, they will do almost everything, including making new scientific discoveries that will expand our concept of “everything.”
我在 OpenAI 的工作每天都在提醒我，社会经济变革的规模比大多数人认为的来得更快。能够思考和学习的软件将越来越多地完成人类目前所做的工作。更多的权力将从劳动力转向资本。如果公共政策不相应调整，大多数人的境况将比今天更糟。
My work at OpenAI reminds me every day about the magnitude of the socioeconomic change that is coming sooner than most people believe. Software that can think and learn will do more and more of the work that people now do. Even more power will shift from labor to capital. If public policy doesn’t adapt accordingly, most people will end up worse off than they are today.
我们需要设计一个体系，拥抱这一技术未来，并对构成未来世界大部分价值的资产——公司和土地——征税，以公平分配即将到来的部分财富。这样做可以使未来的社会减少分裂，并让每个人都能参与分享其收益。
We need to design a system that embraces this technological future and taxes the assets that will make up most of the value in that world–companies and land–in order to fairly distribute some of the coming wealth. Doing so can make the society of the future much less divisive and enable everyone to participate in its gains.
在未来五年内，能够思考的计算机程序将阅读法律文件并提供医疗建议。在未来十年内，它们将从事流水线工作，甚至可能成为伴侣。而在未来几十年后，它们将几乎能做所有事情，包括做出新的科学发现，从而扩展我们对“所有事情”的概念。
In the next five years, computer programs that can think will read legal documents and give medical advice. In the next decade, they will do assembly-line work and maybe even become companions. And in the decades after that, they will do almost everything, including making new scientific discoveries that will expand our concept of “everything.”
这场技术革命是不可阻挡的。而且，随着这些智能机器本身帮助我们制造更智能的机器，创新的递归循环将加速革命的步伐。由此产生三个关键后果：
This technological revolution is unstoppable. And a recursive loop of innovation, as these smart machines themselves help us make smarter machines, will accelerate the revolution’s pace. Three crucial consequences follow:
1. 这场革命将创造惊人的财富。一旦足够强大的 AI“加入劳动力大军”，许多种类劳动的价格（驱动商品和服务成本）将趋近于零。
1. This revolution will create phenomenal wealth. The price of many kinds of labor (which drives the costs of goods and services) will fall toward zero once sufficiently powerful AI “joins the workforce.”
2. 世界将如此迅速和剧烈地变化，以至于需要同样剧烈的政策变革来分配这些财富，并使更多人能够追求他们想要的生活。
2. The world will change so rapidly and drastically that an equally drastic change in policy will be needed to distribute this wealth and enable more people to pursue the life they want.
3. 如果我们把这两点都做好，就能以前所未有的程度提高人们的生活水平。
3. If we get both of these right, we can improve the standard of living for people more than we ever have before.
由于我们正处于这一结构性转变的开端，我们拥有一个难得的机会来转向未来。这种转向不能仅仅解决当前的社会和政治问题；它必须为不久的将来截然不同的社会而设计。不考虑这一即将到来的转型的政策计划将会失败，原因与农业社会前或封建社会的组织原则在今天会失败相同。
Because we are at the beginning of this tectonic shift, we have a rare opportunity to pivot toward the future. That pivot can’t simply address current social and political problems; it must be designed for the radically different society of the near future. Policy plans that don’t account for this imminent transformation will fail for the same reason that the organizing principles of pre-agrarian or feudal societies would fail today.
以下是对即将到来的情况的描述，以及如何驾驭这一新格局的计划。
What follows is a description of what’s coming and a plan for how to navigate this new landscape.
从宏观的时间尺度来看，技术进步遵循指数曲线。比较一下 15 年前（真的没有智能手机）、150 年前（没有内燃机，没有家庭用电）、1500 年前（没有工业机器）和 15000 年前（没有农业）的世界。
On a zoomed-out time scale, technological progress follows an exponential curve. Compare how the world looked 15 years ago (no smartphones, really), 150 years ago (no combustion engine, no home electricity), 1,500 years ago (no industrial machines), and 15,000 years ago (no agriculture).
即将到来的变革将围绕我们最令人惊叹的能力：思考、创造、理解和推理的非凡能力。在农业革命、工业革命和计算革命这三大技术革命之后，我们将迎来第四次革命：AI 革命。如果我们社会能够负责任地管理，这场革命将产生足够的财富，让每个人都拥有所需之物。
The coming change will center around the most impressive of our capabilities: the phenomenal ability to think, create, understand, and reason. To the three great technological revolutions–the agricultural, the industrial, and the computational–we will add a fourth: the AI revolution. This revolution will generate enough wealth for everyone to have what they need, if we as a society manage it responsibly.
未来 100 年我们将取得的技术进步，将远远超过自我们首次控制火和发明轮子以来所取得的所有进步。我们已经构建了能够学习和做有用事情的 AI 系统。它们仍然原始，但趋势是清晰的。
The technological progress we make in the next 100 years will be far larger than all we’ve made since we first controlled fire and invented the wheel. We have already built AI systems that can learn and do useful things. They are still primitive, but the trendlines are clear.
广义上讲，过上美好生活有两条路径：个人赚更多钱（这使个人更富有），或者价格下降（这使所有人更富有）。财富就是购买力：我们用拥有的资源能获得多少东西。
Broadly speaking, there are two paths to affording a good life: an individual acquires more money (which makes that person wealthier), or prices fall (which makes everyone wealthier). Wealth is buying power: how much we can get with the resources we have.
增加社会财富的最佳方式是降低商品成本，从食品到电子游戏。技术将迅速推动许多类别的成本下降。以半导体和摩尔定律为例：几十年来，芯片每两年左右在相同价格下性能翻倍。
The best way to increase societal wealth is to decrease the cost of goods, from food to video games. Technology will rapidly drive that decline in many categories. Consider the example of semiconductors and Moore’s Law: for decades, chips became twice as powerful for the same price about every two years.
在过去几十年里，美国电视、电脑和娱乐的成本下降了。但其他成本显著上升，最明显的是住房、医疗和高等教育。如果这些成本继续飙升，仅靠财富再分配是行不通的。
In the last couple of decades, costs in the US for TVs, computers, and entertainment have dropped. But other costs have risen significantly, most notably those for housing, healthcare, and higher education. Redistribution of wealth alone won’t work if these costs continue to soar.
人工智能将降低商品和服务的成本，因为劳动力是供应链多个层面的驱动成本。如果机器人能用你在自有土地上开采和提炼的自然资源建造房屋，并使用太阳能，那么建房的成本就接近于租用机器人的成本。而如果这些机器人由其他机器人制造，租用它们的成本将远低于人类制造它们时的成本。
AI will lower the cost of goods and services, because labor is the driving cost at many levels of the supply chain. If robots can build a house on land you already own from natural resources mined and refined onsite, using solar power, the cost of building that house is close to the cost to rent the robots. And if those robots are made by other robots, the cost to rent them will be much less than it was when humans made them.
同样，我们可以想象人工智能医生能比任何人类更好地诊断健康问题，人工智能教师能诊断并准确解释学生不理解的内容。
Similarly, we can imagine AI doctors that can diagnose health problems better than any human, and AI teachers that can diagnose and explain exactly what a student doesn’t understand.
“万物的摩尔定律”应该成为一代人的战斗口号，他们买不起自己想要的东西。这听起来像乌托邦，但这是技术能够实现（在某些情况下已经实现）的事情。想象一个世界，几十年来，一切——住房、教育、食品、服装等——每两年价格减半。
“Moore’s Law for everything” should be the rallying cry of a generation whose members can’t afford what they want. It sounds utopian, but it’s something technology can deliver (and in some cases already has). Imagine a world where, for decades, everything–housing, education, food, clothing, etc.–became half as expensive every two years.
我们会发现新的工作——技术革命后总是如此——并且由于另一侧的富足，我们将拥有难以置信的自由来创造性地定义这些工作。
We will discover new jobs–we always do after a technological revolution–and because of the abundance on the other side, we will have incredible freedom to be creative about what they are.
一个稳定的经济体系需要两个组成部分：增长和包容性。经济增长之所以重要，是因为大多数人希望自己的生活每年都有改善。在一个零和世界中，即没有或只有很少增长的世界，民主可能变得对立，因为人们试图通过投票从彼此那里获取金钱。这种对立会导致不信任和两极分化。在一个高增长的世界中，争斗会少得多，因为每个人更容易获胜。
A stable economic system requires two components: growth and inclusivity. Economic growth matters because most people want their lives to improve every year. In a zero-sum world, one with no or very little growth, democracy can become antagonistic as people seek to vote money away from each other. What follows from that antagonism is distrust and polarization. In a high-growth world the dogfights can be far fewer, because it’s much easier for everyone to win.
经济包容性意味着每个人都有合理的机会获得他们所需的资源，以过上他们想要的生活。经济包容性之所以重要，是因为它公平、能产生稳定的社会，并且能为大多数人创造最大的蛋糕份额。作为附带好处，它还能带来更多的增长。
Economic inclusivity means everyone having a reasonable opportunity to get the resources they need to live the life they want. Economic inclusivity matters because it’s fair, produces a stable society, and can create the largest slices of pie for the most people. As a side benefit, it produces more growth.
资本主义是经济增长的强大引擎，因为它奖励人们投资于能够随时间产生价值的资产，这是创造和分配技术收益的有效激励体系。但资本主义进步的代价是不平等。
Capitalism is a powerful engine of economic growth because it rewards people for investing in assets that generate value over time, which is an effective incentive system for creating and distributing technological gains. But the price of progress in capitalism is inequality.
一定程度的不平等是可以接受的——事实上，它是至关重要的，正如所有试图实现完全平等的体系所证明的那样——但一个不能为每个人提供足够机会平等以使其进步的社会，是无法持久的。
Some inequality is ok–in fact, it’s critical, as shown by all systems that have tried to be perfectly equal–but a society that does not offer sufficient equality of opportunity for everyone to advance is not a society that will last.
解决不平等的传统方法是对收入进行累进征税。由于各种原因，这种方法效果并不理想。在未来，效果会更差。虽然人们仍然会有工作，但其中许多工作不会像我们今天所认为的那样创造大量经济价值。随着人工智能生产世界上大部分基本商品和服务，人们将被解放出来，花更多时间与他们关心的人在一起，照顾他人，欣赏艺术和自然，或致力于社会公益。
The traditional way to address inequality has been by progressively taxing income. For a variety of reasons, that hasn’t worked very well. It will work much, much worse in the future. While people will still have jobs, many of those jobs won’t be ones that create a lot of economic value in the way we think of value today. As AI produces most of the world’s basic goods and services, people will be freed up to spend more time with people they care about, care for people, appreciate art and nature, or work toward social good.
因此，我们应该专注于对资本而非劳动力征税，并利用这些税收作为直接向公民分配所有权和财富的机会。换句话说，改善资本主义的最佳方式是让每个人都能作为股权所有者直接从中受益。这不是一个新想法，但随着人工智能变得更加强大，它将变得可行，因为将有更多的财富可供分配。两个主要的财富来源将是：1）公司，特别是那些利用人工智能的公司；2）土地，其供应是固定的。
We should therefore focus on taxing capital rather than labor, and we should use these taxes as an opportunity to directly distribute ownership and wealth to citizens. In other words, the best way to improve capitalism is to enable everyone to benefit from it directly as an equity owner. This is not a new idea, but it will be newly feasible as AI grows more powerful, because there will be dramatically more wealth to go around. The two dominant sources of wealth will be 1) companies, particularly ones that make use of AI, and 2) land, which has a fixed supply.
实施这两种税收有很多方法，也有很多关于如何处理这些税收的想法。经过很长一段时间，也许大多数其他税收都可以被取消。以下是一个作为对话开端的想法。
There are many ways to implement these two taxes, and many thoughts about what to do with them. Over a long period of time, perhaps most other taxes could be eliminated. What follows is an idea in the spirit of a conversation starter.
我们可以设立一个叫做“美国股权基金”的东西。该基金的资金来源是：对估值超过一定门槛的公司每年征收其市值 2.5%的税，以股票形式支付给基金；以及对所有私有土地价值征收 2.5%的税，以美元支付。
We could do something called the American Equity Fund. The American Equity Fund would be capitalized by taxing companies above a certain valuation 2.5% of their market value each year, payable in shares transferred to the fund, and by taxing 2.5% of the value of all privately-held land, payable in dollars.
所有 18 岁以上的公民每年都会获得一次分配，以美元和公司股票的形式存入他们的账户。人们将被信任，可以按照自己的需要或意愿使用这些钱——用于更好的教育、医疗、住房、创办公司等等。随着越来越多的人在竞争性市场中选择自己的服务，政府资助的行业中不断上涨的成本将面临真正的压力。
All citizens over 18 would get an annual distribution, in dollars and company shares, into their accounts. People would be entrusted to use the money however they needed or wanted—for better education, healthcare, housing, starting a company, whatever. Rising costs in government-funded industries would face real pressure as more people chose their own services in a competitive marketplace.
只要国家持续向好，每个公民每年从基金中获得的钱就会更多（平均而言；仍然会有经济周期）。因此，每个公民将越来越多地享受到经济自决所带来的自由、权力、自主和机会。贫困将大大减少，更多的人将有机会过上他们想要的生活。
As long as the country keeps doing better, every citizen would get more money from the Fund every year (on average; there will still be economic cycles). Every citizen would therefore increasingly partake of the freedoms, powers, autonomies, and opportunities that come with economic self-determination. Poverty would be greatly reduced and many more people would have a shot at the life they want.
以公司股票形式支付的税收将使公司、投资者和公民之间的激励保持一致，而利润税则不能——激励是超能力，这是一个关键区别。公司利润可以被掩饰、递延或转移到海外，并且通常与股价脱节。但每个持有亚马逊股票的人都希望股价上涨。随着个人资产与国家资产同步增长，他们与国家繁荣有了直接的利益关系。
A tax payable in company shares will align incentives between companies, investors, and citizens, whereas a tax on profits does not–incentives are superpowers, and this is a critical difference. Corporate profits can be disguised or deferred or offshored, and are often disconnected from share price. But everyone who owns a share in Amazon wants the share price to rise. As people’s individual assets rise in tandem with the country’s, they have a literal stake in seeing their country do well.
美国政治经济学家亨利·乔治在 19 世纪末提出了土地价值税的想法。这一概念得到了经济学家的广泛支持。土地价值因社会在其周围所做的工作而升值：围绕一块土地运营的公司的网络效应、使其可达的公共交通，以及使其具有吸引力的附近餐馆、咖啡店和自然景观。由于土地所有者并未完成所有这些工作，因此将这些价值与做出贡献的更广泛社会分享是公平的。
Henry George, an American political economist, proposed the idea of a land-value tax in the late 1800s. The concept is widely supported by economists. The value of land appreciates because of the work society does around it: the network effects of the companies operating around a piece of land, the public transportation that makes it accessible, and the nearby restaurants, coffeeshops, and access to nature that makes it desirable. Because the landowner didn’t do all that work, it’s fair for that value to be shared with the larger society that did.
如果每个人都拥有美国价值创造的一部分，那么每个人都会希望美国变得更好：对创新和国家成功的集体股权将协调我们的激励。新的社会契约将为每个人提供一个底线，而不设上限，并共同相信技术可以且必须带来社会财富的良性循环。（我们仍需要政府的强有力领导，以确保股价上涨的愿望与保护环境、人权等保持平衡。）
If everyone owns a slice of American value creation, everyone will want America to do better: collective equity in innovation and in the success of the country will align our incentives. The new social contract will be a floor for everyone in exchange for a ceiling for no one, and a shared belief that technology can and must deliver a virtuous circle of societal wealth. (We will continue to need strong leadership from our government to make sure that the desire for stock prices to go up remains balanced with protecting the environment, human rights, etc.)
在一个每个人作为所有者从资本主义中受益的世界里，集体的焦点将是让世界“变得更好”而不是“减少糟糕”。这两种方法比看起来更不同，当社会专注于前者时会做得更好。简单地说，“变得更好”意味着优化以使蛋糕尽可能大，而“减少糟糕”意味着尽可能公平地分配蛋糕。两者都可以一次性提高人们的生活水平，但只有蛋糕变大才能实现持续增长。
In a world where everyone benefits from capitalism as an owner, the collective focus will be on making the world “more good” instead of “less bad.” These approaches are more different than they seem, and society does much better when it focuses on the former. Simply put, more good means optimizing for making the pie as large as possible, and less bad means dividing the pie up as fairly as possible. Both can increase people’s standard of living once, but continuous growth only happens when the pie grows.
可用于资本化美国股票基金的财富数额将是巨大的。仅美国公司就有约 50 万亿美元的市值。假设未来十年这一数字至少翻一番，这与过去一个世纪的平均水平一致。
The amount of wealth available to capitalize the American Equity Fund would be significant. There is about $50 trillion worth of value, as measured by market capitalization, in US companies alone. Assume that, as it has on average over the past century, this will at least double over the next decade.
美国还有约 30 万亿美元的私有土地（不包括土地上的改良）。假设未来十年这一价值也大致翻一番——这比历史速度略快，但随着世界真正开始理解 AI 带来的变革，土地作为少数真正有限的资产之一，其价值应该以更快的速度增长。
There is also about $30 trillion worth of privately-held land in the US (not counting improvements on top of the land). Assume that this value will roughly double, too, over the next decade–this is somewhat faster than the historical rate, but as the world really starts to understand the shifts AI will cause, the value of land, as one of the few truly finite assets, should increase at a faster rate.
当然，如果我们增加持有土地的税负，其价值相对于其他投资资产将会下降，这对社会来说是好事，因为它使基本资源更易获得，并鼓励投资而非投机。公司的价值短期内也会下降，尽管长期来看它们仍将表现良好。
Of course, if we increase the tax burden on holding land, its value will diminish relative to other investment assets, which is a good thing for society because it makes a fundamental resource more accessible and encourages investment instead of speculation. The value of companies will diminish in the short-term, too, though they will continue to perform quite well over time.
一个合理的假设是，这种税收会导致土地和公司资产价值下降 15%（这只需几年时间就能恢复！）。
It’s a reasonable assumption that such a tax causes a drop in value of land and corporate assets of 15% (which only will take a few years to recover!).
在上述假设（当前价值、未来增长以及新税带来的价值下降）下，十年后美国 2.5 亿成年人每人每年将获得约 13,500 美元。如果 AI 加速增长，这一分红可能更高，但即使没有，13,500 美元的实际购买力也将比现在大得多，因为技术将大幅降低商品和服务的成本。而且这种实际购买力每年都会大幅提升。
Under the above set of assumptions (current values, future growth, and the reduction in value from the new tax), a decade from now each of the 250 million adults in America would get about $13,500 every year. That dividend could be much higher if AI accelerates growth, but even if it’s not, $13,500 will have much greater purchasing power than it does now because technology will have greatly reduced the cost of goods and services. And that effective purchasing power will go up dramatically every year.
对公司来说，最简单的方式是每年发行相当于其价值 2.5%的新股来缴税。显然，公司有动机通过离岸来逃避美国股票基金税，但一个简单的测试——基于来自美国的收入百分比——可以解决这个问题。这个想法的一个更大问题是公司有动机将价值返还给股东，而不是再投资于增长。
It would be easiest for companies to pay the tax each year by issuing new shares representing 2.5% of their value. There would obviously be an incentive for companies to escape the American Equity Fund tax by off-shoring themselves, but a simple test involving a percentage of revenue derived from America could address this concern. A larger problem with this idea is the incentive for companies to return value to shareholders instead of reinvesting it in growth.
如果我们只对上市公司征税，公司也有动机保持私有。对于年收入超过 10 亿美元的私有公司，我们可以允许其以股权形式累积税款，在一定（有限）年限内直到上市。如果它们长期保持私有，我们可以允许其以现金结算税款。
If we tax only public companies, there would also be an incentive for companies to stay private. For private companies that have annual revenue in excess of $1 billion, we could let their tax in equity accrue for a certain (limited) number of years until they go public. If they remain private for a long time, we could let them settle the tax in cash.
我们需要设计系统以防止人们持续投票给自己更多钱。一项宪法修正案规定税收的允许范围将是一个强有力的保障。重要的是税收不能大到抑制增长——例如，对公司的税收必须远低于其平均增长率。
We’d need to design the system to prevent people from consistently voting themselves more money. A constitutional amendment delineating the allowable ranges of the tax would be a strong safeguard. It is important that the tax not be so large that it stifles growth–for example, the tax on companies must be much smaller than their average growth rate.
我们还需要一个稳健的系统来量化土地的实际价值。一种方法是使用强大的联邦评估团队。另一种方法是让地方政府进行评估，就像他们现在为确定财产税所做的那样。他们将继续使用相同的评估价值征收地方税。然而，如果某个辖区在任何一年内一定比例的销售价格远高于或低于地方政府对房产的估值，那么该辖区内的所有其他房产将被重新评估上调或下调。
We’d also need a robust system for quantifying the actual value of land. One way would be with a corps of powerful federal assessors. Another would be to let local governments do the assessing, as they now do to determine property taxes. They would continue to receive local taxes using the same assessed value. However, if a certain percentage of sales in a jurisdiction in any given year falls too far above or below the local government’s estimate of the property’s values, then all the other properties in their jurisdiction would be reassessed up or down.
理论上最优的系统是只对土地价值征税，而不对土地上的改良征税。在实践中，这一价值可能难以评估，因此我们可能需要同时对土地和其上的改良征税（税率较低，因为合并价值更高）。
The theoretically optimal system would be to tax the value of the land only, and not the improvements built on top of it. In practice, this value may turn out to be too difficult to assess, so we may need to tax the value of the land and the improvements on it (at a lower rate, as the combined value would be higher).
最后，我们不能允许人们以其未来基金分配进行借贷、出售或质押，否则我们无法真正解决随时间公平分配财富的问题。政府只需使此类交易不可执行即可。
Finally, we couldn’t let people borrow against, sell, or otherwise pledge their future Fund distributions, or we won’t really solve the problem of fairly distributing wealth over time. The government can simply make such transactions unenforceable.
一个伟大的未来并不复杂：我们需要技术来创造更多财富，以及政策来公平分配它。一切必要的东西都将变得廉价，每个人都将有足够的钱来负担得起。由于这个系统将非常受欢迎，早期拥抱它的政策制定者将得到回报：他们自己也会变得非常受欢迎。
A great future isn’t complicated: we need technology to create more wealth, and policy to fairly distribute it. Everything necessary will be cheap, and everyone will have enough money to be able to afford it. As this system will be enormously popular, policymakers who embrace it early will be rewarded: they will themselves become enormously popular.
在大萧条时期，富兰克林·罗斯福能够实施一个庞大的社会安全网，这在五年前是无人能想象的。我们现在正处于类似的时刻。因此，一个既亲商业又亲人民的运动将团结起一个异常广泛的选民群体。
In the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt was able to enact a huge social safety net that no one would have thought possible five years earlier. We are in a similar moment now. So a movement that is both pro-business and pro-people will unite a remarkably broad constituency.
启动美国股权基金的一个政治上可行且能减少转型冲击的方式，是通过立法逐步过渡到 2.5%的税率。完整的 2.5%税率只有在法律通过后 GDP 增长 50%时才会生效。尽早开始小额分配将既具有激励作用，又有助于让人们适应新的未来。实现 50%的 GDP 增长听起来需要很长时间（经济从 2019 年水平增长 50%花了 13 年）。但一旦人工智能开始到来，增长将极其迅速。未来，随着我们对这两类基础资产征税，我们可能能够减少许多其他税收。
A politically feasible way to launch the American Equity Fund, and one that would reduce the transitional shock, would be with legislation that transitions us gradually to the 2.5% rates. The full 2.5% rate would only take hold once GDP increases by 50% from the time the law is passed. Starting with small distributions soon will be both motivating and helpful in getting people comfortable with a new future. Achieving 50% GDP growth sounds like it would take a long time (it took 13 years for the economy to grow 50% to its 2019 level). But once AI starts to arrive, growth will be extremely rapid. Down the line, we will probably be able to reduce a lot of other taxes as we tax these two fundamental asset classes.
即将到来的变化是不可阻挡的。如果我们拥抱它们并为之规划，我们可以利用它们创造一个更公平、更幸福、更繁荣的社会。未来几乎可以是难以想象的伟大。
The changes coming are unstoppable. If we embrace them and plan for them, we can use them to create a much fairer, happier, and more prosperous society. The future can be almost unimaginably great.
感谢 Steven Adler、Daniela Amodei、Adam Baybutt、Chris Beiser、Jack Clark、Ryan Cohen、Tyler Cowen、Matt Danzeisen、Steve Dowling、Tad Friend、Lachy Groom、Chris Hallacy、Reid Hoffman、Ingmar Kanitscheider、Oleg Klimov、Matt Knight、Aris Konstantinidis、Andrew Kortina、Matt Krisiloff、Scott Krisiloff、John Luttig、Erik Madsen、Preston McAfee、Luke Miles、Arvind Neelakantan、David Oates、Cullen O’Keefe、Alethea Power、Raul Puri、Ilya Sutskever、Luke Walsh、Caleb Watney 和 Wojchiech Zaremba 审阅本文草稿，以及感谢 Gregory Koberger 进行设计。
Thanks to Steven Adler, Daniela Amodei, Adam Baybutt, Chris Beiser, Jack Clark, Ryan Cohen, Tyler Cowen, Matt Danzeisen, Steve Dowling, Tad Friend, Lachy Groom, Chris Hallacy, Reid Hoffman, Ingmar Kanitscheider, Oleg Klimov, Matt Knight, Aris Konstantinidis, Andrew Kortina, Matt Krisiloff, Scott Krisiloff, John Luttig, Erik Madsen, Preston McAfee, Luke Miles, Arvind Neelakantan, David Oates, Cullen O’Keefe, Alethea Power, Raul Puri, Ilya Sutskever, Luke Walsh, Caleb Watney, and Wojchiech Zaremba for reviewing drafts of this, and to Gregory Koberger for designing it.