留存于世的唯有爱
唯有爱能长存
约翰 · C · 博格
先锋集团创始人兼前董事长
在纽约州罗彻斯特联合之路活动上的演讲
2001 年 10 月 2 日
距离我受邀来这里谈论与社区分享福祉的重要性,差不多整整一年了。那时我们美利坚合众国的公民,生活在一个大体和平的世界里——至少我们自己以为如此——平静而安全。但就在整整三周前的今天,2001 年 9 月 11 日,那个幻象被击碎了。我们的世界变了,今晚我演讲的主题也随之改变。
What Will Survive Of Us Is Love Remarks by John C. Bogle Founder and former Chairman, The Vanguard Group Before the United Way Community Rochester, NY October 2, 2001 It has been nearly a full year since I was invited to speak to you about the importance of sharing our blessings with our community. Then we citizens of the United States of America lived—or at least we thought we lived—serene and safe, in a world that was pretty much at peace. But exactly three weeks ago today, on September 11, 2001, that illusion was shattered. Our world changed, and with it the theme of my remarks this evening.
对世贸中心骄傲双塔的毁灭性袭击,其后果可怕得超乎想象:双塔坍塌成一堆扭曲的废墟和尘土;惨绝人寰的人员伤亡——六千条生命,比珍珠港或安提塔姆战役还多,比 1776 年至 1783 年整个美国独立战争期间的死亡人数还多;那些在死亡面前传递爱意的动人手机留言;数十亿美元的清理和重建费用、加强安保的开销以及准备打仗的军费。我们所有人,都永远不会忘记那个天朗气清、明亮却宿命的上午九点整,自己身在何处。
The aftermath of the devastating attack on the proud towers of the World Trade Center was terrible beyond imagination: Their collapse into a twisted pile of rubble and dust; the devastating human toll—six thousand lives, more than at Pearl Harbor or Antietam, more than in the entire course of the American Revolution from 1776 to 1783; the poignant cell phone messages pledging love in the face of death; the billions of dollars for clean-up and rebuilding costs, for enhanced security, and for preparations to fight a war. None of us will ever forget exactly where we were at nine o’ clock on that crystal clear, bright, and fateful morning.
这一切意味着什么?意味着有生也有死,有恶也有善,有悲伤也有欢乐,有毁灭也有创造。我们美国人明白这些道理——人生中的苦难足以让我们懂得它们——但我们并不把这些认知时刻挂在心头。我们从未如此,现在也不太可能开始这样做。任何值得过的人生,都不会活在终有一死的恐惧中。这些优美的话语并非出自我口,它们属于詹姆斯·格兰特——金融史学家、作家兼记者。但面对“这意味着什么”这个问题,我再也想不出更好的回答了。
What does it all mean? It means there is life as well as death, evil as well as goodness, grief as well as joy, destruction as well as creation. Those things we Americans know—there is enough sorrow in life for us to know them—yet we do not hold that knowledge in the front of our minds. We have never done so, nor is now the time we are likely to start. No life worth living is lived in mortal fear. Those lovely words are not mine. They belong to James Grant, financial historian, author, and journalist. But I could not have answered the question, What does it mean?, any better.
但我想再问一个同样重要的问题,然后尝试用自己的话来回答:我们现在该做什么?人们对我们有何期望?在这个动荡的时代,我们怎样才能最好地帮助我们的国家?我建议两大应对之道:第一,我们必须投身于日常职责——无论它们是什么——但要比以往任何时候都做得更好;提升我们对企业、组织、职业和社会的个人贡献;让我们的机构在成就和使命上变得强大,而最最重要的是,在品格上变得强大。用我在公司里重复过上千次的话来说:为了让这个国家变得更强大,我们必须——无论遇到什么,都要继续奋进。
But I would ask another equally important question, and then try to answer it in my own words: What do we do now? What is expected of us? How can we best help our nation in this troubled era? I suggest two major responses: First, we must go about our daily tasks, whatever they may be, but perform them better than we have ever performed them before; improve our individual contributions to our enterprises, our organizations, our professions, our society; make our institutions strong in accomplishment and mission, and stronger above all in character. To use a phrase I’ve used a thousand times over in my firm over the years: In making this a stronger nation, we must Press On, Regardless..
但我们还必须做第二件事。我们必须张开怀抱,去接纳比我们曾想象过的更广博的爱:更紧地拥抱家人,更珍惜身边的同事,对街坊邻里展现更多的尊重,并敬重我们在人生旅途上遇见的每一个人,无论地位高低贵贱,哪怕只是一个手势、一声简单的善意。这同样会让美国变得更美好。
But there is a second thing we must do. We must open our hearts to greater love than we have ever imagined: Hold our families even tighter; appreciate our colleagues even more; show our neighbors even more respect; and honor all of those whom we meet along the road of life, from the highest to the humblest, even with a single gesture or a simple kindness. That too will make America a better place.
《纽约客》上最近一篇文章也表达了同样的观点,但它引用了一幅令人难忘又痛苦的画面——在我们电视屏幕上闪过的画面。人类从世贸双塔的最高处坠楼身亡,其中有两个人手拉手地一起跳下。这幅画面令人震惊、恐惧,但文章作者安东尼·莱恩却由此联想到菲利普·拉金一首诗,写的是英国一座古墓上刻着的一对石像。诗人写道,当他注意到伯爵与伯爵夫人的石像“并肩而卧,面容模糊”,却手牵着手时,感到一种“敏锐而温柔的震撼”。这“证明了我们近乎本能、近乎真实的信念:能从我们身上留存下来的,是爱。”
A recent article in The New Yorker made the same point, but with the memorable and distressing image that flashed across our television screens. Human beings tumbling to their death from the highest ledges of the towers, including two people jumping in tandem, hand in hand. Appalling and terrifying as it is, that image reminded Anthony Lane, the author of the article, of Philip Larkin’s poem about a pair of stone figures carved on an ancient English tomb. The poet wrote of the “sharp, tender shock” when he noticed that the figures of the earl and countess, “side by side, their faces blurred,” are holding hands. It “proves our almost-instinct, almost true: What will survive of us is love.”
乍一看,我觉得这话过于简单肤浅。但我越想越确信,诗人道出了一个永恒的真理。所以今晚,我想和你们谈谈爱。不是亲情之爱,不是事业之爱,不是同僚之爱,甚至不是博爱,而是对社区的爱,以及我们如何将这份爱表达出来。
On first impression, that seemed to me to be a simplistic banality. But the more I considered the poet’s words, the more I was certain that they expressed an eternal truth. So tonight I want to speak to you about love. Not about love of family nor love of career, nor love of colleagues, nor even love of our fellow man, but love of community, and how we might go about expressing that love.
心灵的给予
在进入正题之前,我想先谈一谈作为精神层面的给予。我以《申命记》中的话来开头:你心里说,“这财富是我靠自己的能力和双手的力量得来的。” 但实际上是耶和华你的神赐给你获取财富的能力,为要坚定祂与你所立的约。接着,再加上圣保罗的劝勉:各人要随本心所酌定的,不要作难,不要勉强,因为神喜爱乐意奉献的人……使你们凡事富足,可以多多施舍,广行善事。
Giving in Spirit Before I get to that subject, however, I want to address for a moment giving as a spiritual matter. I begin with Deuteronomy: Then say in thine heart, “my power and the might of mine hand hath gotten me this wealth.” But it is the Lord thy God that gaveth the power to get wealth that He may establish His covenant. Then add St. Paul’s exhortation: Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give not grudgingly or of necessity, for God loveth a cheerful giver . . . Being enriched in everything to all bountifulness, make liberal distribution to all.
在远为平凡的语境下,我—尽管做得不够—也一直努力达到这一精神标准。五年前,当宾夕法尼亚东南部联合劝募协会授予我亚历克西·德·托克维尔协会社区服务奖时,我用这样一段话总结了我的理念:备受愉悦的,是获得一份自己从未刻意追求的荣誉,因为我始终坚信,单纯的给予行为—无论是付出财富还是付出自我—本身就是回报,一种最纯粹形式的回报。
In a far more mundane context I have sought, if inadequately, to meet that spiritual standard. When, five years ago, the United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania presented me with the Alexis de Tocqueville Society Award for service to the community, I summed up my philosophy with these words: It is especially delightful to receive an honor one has not sought, for I have always believed that the simple act of giving—of one’s wealth and one’s self alike—is its own reward, a reward in its most pristine form.
无论我做过什么才配得上这个奖项,我的精神和行为都反映着这样一个原则:“因为多给谁,就向谁多取。”(请注意,圣路加说的不是“指望”,而是“索取”。)而我们——今晚在座的每一位——所获赠的馈赠,已远远超出合理的尺度。正如约翰逊博士所言:“超乎贪婪的梦想。”慷慨确实是我们的义务,但更重要的是,它是我们的机遇。
Whatever I may have done to deserve this award, my spirit and my deeds reflect this principle: “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required.” (St. Luke did not say expected, mind you, but required.) And we—all of us here tonight— have been given abundance beyond reasonable measure. As Dr. Johnson put it, “beyond the dreams of avarice.” Generosity is indeed our obligation, but more, it is our opportunity.
那么,我要说的,与我从中命记和圣保罗那里学到的其实并无二致。我们不应为了换取一张进入天堂的保证票才去施舍,而是因为我们内心深处明白,那是正确的事。最近有先锋集团的一位股东问了我这个问题,他是名为“博格尔头们”(Bogleheads)的网络粉丝俱乐部成员(真有这么个俱乐部!):您是否发现,当人们将自己的钱财或时间捐献给那些不幸的人时,好运也会降临到他们头上?而当人们吝啬钱财、不愿花时间行善时,报应是不是就会找上门来?
What I am saying, then, is not much different from what I learned from Deuteronomy and from St. Paul. We mustn’t give alms because we want a guaranteed ticket to paradise, but because we know, deep down, that it is the right thing to do. I was recently asked about this issue in a question I received from a Vanguard shareholder, a member of a sort of Internet fan club known as “the Bogleheads.” (It is true!): Do you find that when people donate their money or volunteer their time to those less fortunate, good comes their way? And when people are miserly with their money and not very charitable with their time, do the chickens come home to roost?
我的回答:尽管我很想对那种想法高喊一声“阿门”,但我担心,行善的奖赏和作恶的报应很少会在尘世出现——至少不是以任何系统或因果的方式。如果真有奖赏,我们恐怕要等到天堂才能领到。给予的行为本身就应当是行善的动机。而当你给予时,要慷慨地伸出双手。牺牲带来的满足感——哪怕是微小的牺牲——以及帮助有需要的同胞所带来的满足感,本身就已经是足够的回报了。
My response: Much as I’d like to shout amen to that thought, I fear that the rewards for doing right and the retaliation for doing wrong are rarely found—at least in any systematic or causal way—here on earth. We’ll have to receive the rewards in Heaven, if we are too receive them at all. The act of giving should itself be the motive for the deed. And when you give, give with an open hand. The satisfaction of sacrifice—even modest sacrifice—and the satisfaction of helping one’s fellow human beings in need is quite enough reward.
直到今天,我依然对这些原则推崇备至。
I continue to hold those principles high to this very moment.
应当给予多少?我想到,那些在我们一生中有幸积累了一定财富的人——无论是通过自己的事业、投资,还是继承所得——应当思考一下,我们是否已经足够慷慨了。我从祖辈那里继承的,除了基因,或许还有价值观和品格,别无他物。我创立了先锋集团这家公司,但从未拥有过它(它归我们旗下共同基金的股东所有)。不过,我的年收入相当可观,其中一大部分做了储蓄,又足够明智地投资于我自己创立的共同基金,由此积攒下一份体面的遗产。
How Much to Give It occurs to me that those of us who have had the good fortune to accumulate some wealth during our lives—through our businesses, or our investments, or our inheritances—ought to be thinking about whether we are nearly generous enough. I inherited nothing but my genes, and perhaps my values and my character, from my forebears. And I created in Vanguard a business that I’ve never owned (it is owned by the shareholders of our mutual funds). But I have earned a substantial annual income, a considerable portion of which I saved, and invested intelligently enough in the mutual funds I created to have built a nice-sized estate.
多年来,我始终遵循一项做法——将收入的一半捐给慈善事业,包括我们的联合劝募会、教会、曾给予我悉心照料的医院、社区文化组织(尤其是我参与服务的那些)、曾影响我和妻子、六个孩子以及十二个孙辈生活的中小学和大学,以及许多其他值得我支持的美好事业。尽管达到收入 50% 的捐赠比例并不常见,即便在我这样幸运的人之中也是如此,但这并不像乍看上去那样慷慨。毕竟,在 40% 的边际税率下,我每捐出一美元只花费六十美分,而这些钱常常流向那些为我所取得的一切成功奠定基础的组织。
For many years I’ve followed the practice of giving half of my income to charity, including our United Way; our church; hospitals in which I’ve been given loving care; community cultural organizations, especially those which I serve; the schools and colleges that have touched my life and the lives of my wife, six children, and twelve grandchildren; and lots of other worthy causes that seem to merit my support. While giving at the 50% of income level may be rare, even among those with my good fortune, it is not nearly as generous as it might appear at first glance. After all, at a 40% marginal tax rate, each dollar I give costs me only sixty cents, and it often goes to organizations that have been the foundation of whatever success may have come my way.
尽管这个标准很理想,但我很快要补充一句,我并不指望别人也达到这个标准。(“你们不要论断人,免得你们被论断!”)不过当你在考虑自己的捐赠计划时,我希望你能多想一想:你愿意拿出多大比例的资源与他人分享。根据美国国税局的数据,年收入 5 万美元的美国家庭平均每年捐款约 2000 美元。收入 10 万美元时,平均捐赠 3000 美元;收入 50 万美元时,平均捐赠约 1.5 万美元。第一个比例(4%)在我看来还算合理;第二个比例(3%)偏低;第三个比例(3%)低得令人遗憾。请注意,比例实际上是下降的。我认为比例应该上升,而且上升速度要快于收入增速,与我们的捐赠能力同步增长。因为,一个年收入 50 万美元的人,收入是年收入 5 万美元者的 10 倍,但统计数据告诉我们,在扣税并扣除这个收入水平下高出很多的日常开销之后,他的净收入是后者的 60 倍。所以我希望我们都能在考虑捐赠时,不仅看金额,更要以自己所受眷顾的程度来按比例衡量。
Nice as it might be, I quickly add, I don’t expect others to meet that standard. (“Judge not lest ye be judged!”) But as you consider your own giving plans, I would hope that you’d think a bit more about the right portion of your resources you choose to share with others. According to the Internal Revenue Service, the average American family with an annual income of $50,000 makes contributions of some $2,000 per year. At $100,000 of income, gifts average $3,000; and at $500,000, gifts average about $15,000. The first number (4%) strikes me as within the realm of reasonableness; the second as deficient (3%), and the third (3%) as sadly lacking. Note that the percentages actually decline. I believe that they should grow, and faster than income, in concert with our ability to give. For while a person with income of $500,000 earns ten times the income of a person making $50,000, statistics tell us that his net income, after taxes and even after the much higher living expenses experienced at that income level, is sixty times as high. So I hope we all will consider our giving, not just in dollar terms, but in proportion to good fortune when it comes our way.
一旦您决定了捐赠的金额,接下来就需要考虑捐赠的对象。同样,我绝不愿越俎代庖为您回答这个问题。但我会借此机会告诉您,为何我个人认为您所在的社区联合劝募会(United Way)应当成为您慈善捐赠的重点方向。我在五年前的德·托克维尔奖颁奖典礼上已阐述过我的理由,当时我提到两个原则。其一你们已经听过——对于已经有所获得的人而言,敞开双手给予是一种道德义务。但第二个原则同样塑造了我的捐赠理念:“永远记住你的社区。正是在我们的社区里,我们生活、我们的家园安然休憩、我们的财富——它们确实称得上是财富——得以繁盛。当我们履行给予的义务、抓住给予的机会时,还有什么比我们自己的社区更值得关注的对象呢?这里的改善潜力无穷无尽。”
Where to Give Once you’ve decided how much to give, you then have to consider where to give it. Again, far be it from me to answer that question for you. But I will take this opportunity to tell you why I believe that your community United Way should be an important focus of your beneficence. Again, I explained my reasoning at my de Toqueville award ceremony five years ago. For I mentioned two principles. One, which you’ve heard, is that giving with an open hand is a moral obligation for those who have received. But this second principle also helps shape my own giving philosophy: “Always remember your community. It is here in our community where we live our lives, where our homes serenely repose, where our fortunes—for they are indeed that—have flourished. When we come to honor our obligation to give and to capitalize on our opportunity to give, what better object can we have than our own community, with its ever-infinite potential for betterment?
“圣路加也告诉我们……‘凡多托付给他的人,必向他多取。’因此,我把德·托克维尔奖不仅视为对过去的认可,更是一种鼓励——甚至是一种挑战——在我剩余的岁月里,通过我们的联合劝募会做得更多。”
“St. Luke also told us . . . ‘and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.’ And so I look at the de Tocqueville Award not only as recognition of the past, but as an encouragement—indeed a challenge—to do even more through our United Way, in the future years I am given.”
为了实践这一承诺,我在 1995 年加入了德·托克维尔百万美元圆桌。我花了将近六年时间才完成我的认捐,但上周末我刚刚签下了最后一笔支票。能够做出这样的承诺是一种荣幸,而完成它则是一种喜悦——也是一种解脱!
In striving to live up to that promise, I joined the de Tocqueville million-dollar round table in 1995. It took me nearly six years to complete my pledge, but I just wrote my final check over the weekend. It’s a privilege to have made that commitment, and a delight—and a relief!—to have fulfilled it.
我对联合劝募会的信念如此强烈,以至于从 1974 年先锋集团成立之初,我就将公司的力量置于其后。之后每年的夏末,我们都会启动募捐活动。从一开始就由一位高级董事总经理牵头,领导一个覆盖全公司的组织,将成功的责任逐级下放:逐部门、逐单位、逐人。我几乎(只差毫厘)就忍不住要亲自审查我们的捐赠名单,因为我知道有些应该参与的员工不会参与,有些本可以做出重大贡献的人只会给很少的钱。但即使没有这种压力,我们也做得相当不错。
I’ve felt strongly enough about the United Way to have put Vanguard’s weight behind it almost from our very inception in 1974. Late in each subsequent summer, we kicked off our campaign, headed from the outset by a senior managing director, leading a Vanguard-wide organization that spread the responsibility for success down through the company, division by division, unit by unit, person by person. I resisted—but only by a whisker—the temptation to personally review our list of givers, for I knew that some crewmembers who should participate wouldn’t, and some who could make major contributions would give pittances. But even without that pressure, we’ve done a pretty good job.
我们已成为社区联合劝募行动的重要组成部分。先锋集团的总支持额——公司捐赠与员工捐赠大致各占一半——从 1992 年的 70 万美元和 1500 名捐赠者,增长到当前募捐活动的 380 万美元和 9500 名捐赠者。初期我们贡献了大费城地区募捐总额的 1.5%;今年我们的贡献超过了 7%。去年,我们领先于本地区的总捐赠额;我们的员工参与率达到 88%;我们的领导级捐赠者人数达 211 人,其中包括 21 名捐赠金额在 1 万美元或以上的德·托克维尔协会成员。
We’ve become an important part of our community’s United Way effort. Vanguard’s total support—corporate plus crew, in roughly equal proportions—has grown has grown from $700,000 and 1,500 contributors in 1992, to $3.8 million and 9,500 contributors in the current campaign. We produced 1.5% of the greater Philadelphia campaign at the outset; this year our contribution exceeds 7%. Last year, we led our region’s total giving; our crew participation was 88%; and our leadership-giving counted 211 leaders, including 21 de Tocqueville Society members who gave $10,000 or more.
我们是怎么做到的?成功的秘诀并不神秘。它和打开任何募捐活动——实际上任何企业——成功之门的钥匙是一样的:领导力、承诺、组织、执行、渴望和精神的结合。通过言传身教,明确表明我个人的支持至关重要。事实上,我对此如此投入,以至于打破了我通常匿名捐赠的习惯,让我的联合劝募会捐赠和认捐公之于众。我希望我的承诺能激励先锋集团的同事们以及其他公司的同行们也能挺身而出。只有时间能证明我是否成功了。
How did we do it? The key to success is not a mystery. It’s the same key that opens the door to success in any campaign, indeed in any business. A combination of leadership, commitment, organization, execution, desire, and spirit. Making my own support clear, in both word and deed, was essential. Indeed, I was so committed that I violated my usual practice of doing my giving anonymously and made my United Way gifts and pledges public. I hoped my own commitment would inspire my colleagues at Vanguard and my counterparts in other firms to step up to the plate, too. Only time will tell whether or not I succeeded.
“创造性破坏”如今公平地说,我们联合劝募计划的大部分增长都反映了我们自身的增长。我们今年 5500 亿美元的基金资产是 1992 年的六倍。这种增长对我们的社区而言是一件幸事,甚至至关重要。因为在此期间,金融服务业见证了大量的“创造性破坏”——这是约瑟夫·熊彼特创造的短语,用以描述创新和企业家精神对经济的影响。美国大多数大型地区性银行机构的名字已经消失,它们曾经的地方性身份被全国性的金融巨鳄所吞噬,因为在全国范围内,银行业已将其作为美国家庭首选储蓄工具的传统角色让位于共同基金行业。我想,不言而喻的是,如果先锋集团没有填补大费城地区募捐活动的空白,那么我们地区的社区捐赠水平现在将会明显更低。填补这一空白,并敞开双手给予,是我们的义务。而且,说实话,我不仅希望我们的手是张开的,还希望能渴望伸出援手。
Creative Destruction Now in fairness, most of this growth in our United Way program is a reflection of our growth. Our fund assets of $550 billion this year have multiplied six-fold since 1992. That growth has been a happy, even essential, event for our community. For in the financial services industry during this period we’ve seen much creative destruction—the phrase Joseph Schumpeter coined to describe the impact of innovation and entrepreneurship in our economy. The names of most of America’s largest regional banking institutions have vanished, their once-local identity subsumed by national pachyderms, as across the nation the banking industry has relinquished to the mutual fund industry its traditional role as the savings vehicle of choice for America’s families. It is, I suppose, self-evident that had Vanguard not been there to fill the gap in the greater Philadelphia campaign, our region’s community giving would now be at a measurably lower level. It was our obligation to fill that gap, and to give with an open hand. And, truth told, I wanted our hand not only to be open, but eager to help.
我对罗彻斯特社区算不上专家,但作为一名投资者,我确实知道在纽约州北部也发生了一些创造性破坏。你们最老牌的大型企业之一已不再将总部设在这里,另一家则正在进行生死攸关的战斗,以适应全球化带来的残酷竞争以及数字革命中令人瞠目的技术创新速度。因此,当新企业在这个精彩纷呈的地区涌现时,我敦促已经在此落户的企业家们以及他们的后来者——如果愿意,可以称他们为“创造性破坏者”——来填补社区捐赠中不可避免的空缺。我相信,在这个社区需要帮助的人们的需求中,并不存在类似的空缺。事实上,如果你们像费城一样,资源与需求之间的差距无疑比以往任何时候都要大。有太多工作要做,我们越早卷起袖子、打开钱包,就越好。
I’m hardly an expert on the Rochester community, but as an investor I do know that there’s been some creative destruction going on in upper New York state, too. One of your largest old stand-bys is no longer headquartered here, and another is in the battle of its life to adjust both to the dog-eat-dog competition wrought by globalization and to the stunning pace of technological innovation in the digital revolution. So as new businesses spring up in this splendid region, I urge the entrepreneurs who have settled here and those who will follow them—the creative destroyers, if you will—to fill the inevitable gap in community giving. I’m confident that no comparable gap exists in the needs of those in this community who need help. Indeed, if you’re like Philadelphia, that gap in between resources and needs is doubtless larger than ever. There is so much work to be done that the sooner we all roll up our sleeves and open our purses, the better.
如何捐赠现在,我无法想象今晚在座的各位不会参与今年的联合劝募会活动。但我想提一种非常特别的额外方式来表达您的支持:通过做出一个承诺来帮助确保联合劝募会的未来,无论发生什么。这被称为“计划捐赠”。它可以简单到在您的遗嘱中添加一条附录,向您的联合劝募会捐赠基金(Endowment Fund)捐赠(这是我已做的),或者将不可撤销的现金或证券捐赠给一个集体的慈善捐赠基金,这类基金现在可以通过社区捐赠者建议基金以及领先的共同基金公司(包括先锋集团)广泛获得。在这样的计划中,您 25,000 美元或以上的捐赠将被投资于一个平衡且多元化的股票/债券账户,并且您可以立即获得捐赠全额市场价值的税收减免。随后,您可以每年向联合劝募会等符合条件的慈善机构进行捐款——通常至少为本金的 5%。您可以随时追加最多 5,000 美元的税前捐赠,逐步增加实际上属于您自己的私人基金会的规模,该基金会将一直捐赠直至本金耗尽。
How to Give Now, I can’t imagine that anyone here tonight will not participate in this year’s United Way campaign. But I would like to mention a very special extra way you can show your support, by making a commitment that will help insure United Way’s future, come what may. It’s called Planned Giving. It can be as simple as a codicil in your will making a gift to your United Way Endowment Fund (this is what I have done), or in making an irrevocable gift of cash or securities to a collective charitable endowment fund, now broadly available through community donor-advised funds, and through leading mutual fund firms, including Vanguard. In such a program, your gift of $25,000 or more is invested in a balanced and diversified stock/bond account, and you get an immediate tax-deduction for the full market value of the gift. You can then make annual contributions—usually at least 5% of principal—to qualified charities such as the United Way. You can add tax deductible contributions of up to $5,000 at a time, gradually increasing what is in effect your own private foundation, which keeps on giving until the principal is exhausted.
您还可以利用集体捐赠基金来建立慈善剩余信托(charitable remainder trust),它提供即时的税收优惠,并在您有生之年为您提供终身收入流,本金则在您去世后归联合劝募会所有。其他明智的投资规划工具包括使用延税的 IRA 和 401(k) 储蓄计划的收益。这些资产如果留在您或您配偶的遗产中,将首先缴纳遗产税,然后缴纳所得税。事实上,在您的遗产规划中,您的延税计划资产通常应优先用于捐赠——排在您自己的直接投资之前——因为“有关逝者收入”(IRD)不仅提供通常的税收减免,还能避免您的继承人原本需要缴纳的所得税。此外,去年税法的一项变更首次使得可以将延税计划资产的部分分配额捐赠给慈善机构。
You can also use a collective endowment fund to establish a charitable remainder trust, offering an immediate tax-benefit and providing you with a lifetime stream of income, with the principal going to the United Way on your death. Other vehicles for intelligent investment planning include using the proceeds of tax-deferred IRAs and 401-k thrift plans, which, left in your own estate or that of your spouse, are subject at first to inheritance taxes and then to income taxes. In fact, your tax-deferred plan assets should usually be first in line for contributions in your estate plan—ahead of your own direct investments—for income in respect of a decedent (IRD) establishes not only the usual tax deduction, but avoids income taxes that would otherwise be paid by your heirs. Further, a tax law change last year now makes it possible for the first time to make partial distributions of tax-deferred plan assets to charities.
另一个您可能想探索的途径是您可能有权获得的雇主递延薪酬。如果留给继承人,当递延薪酬被分配时,联邦和州的所得税可能会消耗掉总收益的 45%,随后还有高达 60% 的联邦和州遗产税。您的(非配偶)受益人最终从您的计划中每 1 美元可能只能拿到 22 美分,这种情况并不罕见。(这听起来没那么糟糕;别忘了您从未为那份递延薪酬支付过一分钱的所得税。)
Yet another avenue you might want to explore is any deferred compensation from your employer to which you may be entitled. Left to your heirs, Federal and state income taxes can consume up to 45% of the gross proceeds when the deferred compensation is distributed, followed by Federal and state inheritance taxes of up to 60%. It would not be unusual for your (non-spouse) beneficiaries to end up with just 22 cents out of each dollar in your plan. (That’s not as bad as it sounds; don’t forget that you’ve never paid a penny of income tax on that deferred pay.)
如果您像我一样有六个孩子,那么他们每人最终拿到手的,将不到我应得金额每 1 美元的 4 美分。足以说明问题的是,我将我递延薪酬计划中 100% 的金额(其中大部分多年来已经免税复利增长,价值不菲)全部捐赠给慈善机构和基金会。我的孩子们知道这个计划,并且非常友善地支持了它。他们知道在我遗产规划中并没有忘记他们,我遵循了沃伦·巴菲特的原则:给孩子们留下足够他们做任何想做的事的钱,但不要多到让他们无所事事。
If you have, as I do, six children, then, each would end up with less than four cents per dollar that is due me. Suffice it to say, I’m dedicating 100% of the dollars in my deferred compensation program, much of which has compounded tax-free over the years, and is not of inconsequential value, to charities and foundations. My children know of this plan, and are kind enough to endorse it. They know that they are hardly forgotten in my estate planning, in which I’ve followed the Warren Buffett rule: Leave your children enough money so they can do anything they want to do, but not so much they can do nothing.
罗彻斯特联合劝募会捐赠基金我想花一点时间向罗彻斯特的市民们致敬,感谢他们帮助本地的联合劝募会建立了全美最大的社区捐赠基金——超过 1 亿美元。(我们费城联合劝募会的捐赠基金接近 4000 万美元,但我们在努力赶上!)你们的捐赠基金产生的一个美妙副产品是,它产生的收入足以支付罗彻斯特联合劝募会活动及员工 100% 的年度运营费用。最终结果是,从成本效益的角度来看,你们募捐活动报告的运营费用为零:你们为活动捐赠的每一美元都直接流向社区中值得帮助的受益者。
The Rochester United Way Endowment I’d like to take a moment to salute the citizens of Rochester for helping the United Way here to build the largest community endowment of any region in America—more than $100 million. (Our Philadelphia United Way endowment is approaching $40 million, but we’re working on it!) One of the wonderful by-products of your endowment fund is that it generates enough income to pay 100% of the annual operating expenses of your United Way campaign and staff. The net result is that, from a cost-effectiveness standpoint, the reported operating expenses of your fund-raising efforts are nil: 100% of every dollar you give to the campaign flows directly through to the worthy beneficiaries in your community.
我希望我没有让您误以为这个捐赠基金已经足够庞大了。它远远不足以完成捐赠基金一直以来所承担的任务:无论顺境逆境、好年景坏年景,都持续为运作提供资金。我还没听说过有哪个捐赠基金不需要额外的资产来让它能够在它的支持者中更广泛地传播善举。即使是拥有 200 亿美元捐赠基金的哈佛大学,似乎也需要更多!今天,一个可观的捐赠基金是必需品——不仅对于学校、学院、医院和博物馆,对于联合劝募会社区也是如此。“未雨绸缪”正是捐赠基金的全部意义所在。
I hope that I haven’t left you with the idea that the endowment fund is somehow large enough. It’s not nearly large enough to do what endowment funds have always done: Fund operations through thick and thin, good times and bad alike. And I’ve yet to hear of a single one that couldn’t handle additional assets that would enable it to spread its good more widely among its constituency. Even Harvard, at $20 billion, seems to need more! A substantial endowment fund is a necessity today—not just for schools and colleges and hospitals and museums, but for United Way communities. “Saving for a rainy day” is what an endowment fund is all about.
我被告知,该基金会的捐赠基金管理得当——采用 60/40 的债券与股票配置比例,两个投资组合都非常分散。这是一项明智的策略,适用于今天我国面临的严峻形势,正如它同样适用于 2000 年 3 月股市冲顶时那种狂热的环境,那时距今不过一年半。所以,我相信你们可以放心地考虑将捐赠基金作为你们捐赠计划的一个重点选择,无论是在当下还是在你们的遗产规划中。
I am told that the endowment is being managed intelligently—a 60/40 balance between bonds and stocks, with both portfolios being very broadly diversified. That’s an intelligent strategy for the tough conditions prevailing in our country today, just as it was in the ebullient environment that prevailed at the stock market high in March of 2000, just a year and one-half ago. So, I believe you can be comfortable in considering the endowment fund as a prime candidate for your giving program, currently and in your estate planning.
关于金融市场的一点说明 既然今晚你们耐心听完了我关于捐赠的话题,或许我可以花几分钟时间,讨论一下当今金融市场的状况,以此回报你们的耐心。
A Word About the Financial Markets On that note, since you’ve been kind enough to hear me out on the subject of giving tonight, I might try to repay your patience by taking just a few moments to discuss the state of our financial markets today.
虽然在 9 月 11 日停牌后股市重新开盘的第一周,恐惧——对更多恐怖袭击的恐惧、对经济的恐惧、对未知的恐惧——确实主导了市场,但我们必须认识到,我们当时也处于 2000 年 3 月达到顶峰的科技股泡沫破裂的后期阶段。那时,主导市场的不是恐惧,而是贪婪。即便没有恐怖袭击,股票价格也已处于岌岌可危的高位。虽然现在我们可能正在探索某种股票的“公允价值”,但市场钟摆从贪婪一端猛烈摆向另一端时,很少会在公允价值处停下,而是会一路摆向恐惧。
While it was fear—fear about more terrorism, fear about the economy, fear about the unknown—that clearly took over the marketplace during the first week after the stock market re-opened following the suspension of trading on September 11, we must recognize that we were also in the late phases of the burst in the technology stock bubble that reached its zenith in March 2000. Then, it was not fear that was in the saddle, but greed. Even without the terrorist attack, stock prices were resting on a precarious perch. While now we may well be probing for a sort of “fair value” for stocks, the market pendulum, having swung so far toward greed, rarely stops at fair value as it makes it way to fear.
我在受托管理和投资这个行业已经干了半个世纪,我认为最有帮助的视角是将股价视为由两个离散要素组成——经济因素和情绪因素。经济因素,我指的是美国企业产生的盈利和股息,即仅通过将初始股息收益率加上每股收益的任何增长所实现的年投资回报。目前,股息收益率略高于 1%,而美国企业盈利长期以每年 6% 至 7% 的速度增长——这个速度与我们经济(以名义国内生产总值衡量)的增速大致相同。两者相加,结果显而易见:投资回报率为 7% 至 8%。
I’ve been in the profession of trusteeship and investing for a half-century now, and I believe the most helpful perspective is to think of stock prices as consisting of two discrete elements—economics and emotions. By economics, I mean the earnings and dividends generated by American business, the annual investment return achieved simply by adding the initial dividend yield to any increase in earnings per share. Today, the dividend yield is a bit over 1%, and corporate earnings in the U.S. have grown over the long-term at a 6% to 7% annual rate— about the same rate as our economy, measured in nominal terms by our gross domestic product. Adding the two together, the obvious result: An investment return of 7% to 8%.
但推动市场的不仅仅是这些经济因素。我们还必须关注情绪因素,它由投资者愿意为每 1 美元盈利支付的价格变化来衡量——即市盈率。如果市盈率在一年内从 20 倍上升到 24 倍,那就给市场回报率额外增加了 20%!从 1982 年大牛市起点到去年 3 月高点,市场市盈率从 8 倍上升到 32 倍,涨了整整 300%,相当于每年增值 7%。因此,大牛市并非产自同期(实际上正常的)盈利增长,而是我们情绪狂热的产物。
But it is not only these economics that drive the market. We have to concern ourselves with emotions, measured by the change in the amount investors will pay for each dollar of earnings—the p/e ratio. If it goes from 20 to 24 times in a year, add a mere 20%(!) to the market return. From the start of the great bull market in 1982 to its high last March, the market’s p/e rose from 8 to 32, a cool 300% gain, equal to 7% per year. The great bull market, then, was a not product of the (in fact) normal earnings growth during the period, but a product of our emotional exuberance.
我认为那种情景不太可能重演。事实上,基于今年盈利大幅下降的预测,今天的市盈率约为 30 倍;相对于可能正常化的盈利,市盈率仍高达 22 倍。无论如何,我们可能正面临一个经济回报率不超过 7% 或 8% 的漫长时期。无论情况如何,这个回报率很可能每年都会被情绪因素拉低几个百分点,这体现在市盈率在未来十年左右的时间里持续走低。如果这样,股票回报率可能只有 5% 或 6%。也许结果会更好,也许会更差,但未来的回报很可能主要由企业的基础经济状况决定,而非投资者不可预测的情绪。
It is inconceivable to me that that scenario will repeat itself. Indeed, today the p/e ratio is about 30 times based on this year’s estimated sharply lower earnings, and a still high 22 times relative to what are probably normalized earnings. In any event, we are likely to be facing an extended period with an economic return of no more than 7% or 8%. Whatever the case, that return may well be reduced by several percentage points per year by emotions, reflected in a p/e ratio that moves lower over, say, the next decade. If so, the return on stocks would be, say 5% or 6%. Maybe it will be better, maybe worse, but future returns are likely to be shaped largely by the underlying economics of business, not by the unpredictable emotions of investors.
使问题复杂化的是,恐怖威胁和反恐战争使美国企业的经济前景比以往更加不明朗。今年盈利将大幅下滑,明年则无人能预料。但真正长线的投资者可以合理预期,到了 2005 年,企业盈利至少会有所增长,而到 2010 年,几乎可以肯定会有大幅增长。如果你们认同我的判断——并且你们已经通过审慎地平衡股票和债券,明智地平衡了风险与回报——那么我只能给你们一条建议,这是我 50 年来在这个行业里,无论在市场高点、低点还是中间的任意位置都一直给出的建议:坚持到底。总结 让我最后回到最初的主题:在这个美国价值观——乃至美国精神——正受到挑战的时代,没有比现在更需要与不幸者分享我们福分的时候了。在这个话题上,没有人比约翰·加德纳表达得更清晰了,所以我引用他的话,稍作修改以反映 9 月 11 日及之后的事件:今天,我们的社区需要我们,迫切地需要我们的忠诚、我们的理解、我们的支持……这个国家正面临一场精神考验,恐怖袭击之后,这种考验更加明显。考验在于,面对所有的混乱与利益冲突、所有令人分心的矛盾与分歧、所有自我放纵和自我开脱的诱惑,我们是否拥有足够坚定的目标、勇气、信念和精神耐力,去创造一个无愧于我们过去的未来。你可以提供帮助。
To complicate things, the threat of terror and the war on terrorism had made the economics of American business less clear than usual. Earnings will be down sharply this year, and next year is anyone’s guess. But the truly long-term investor can reasonably expect that corporate earnings are likely to be at least somewhat higher in 2005, and almost certain to be much higher in 2010. If you share my conviction that will be the case—and if you’ve intelligently balanced risk and return by prudently balancing stocks and bonds—I can give you but one piece of advice, the same advice I’ve given at market highs and market lows alike—and everything in between—for most of 50 years I’ve been in this business: Stay the Course Summing Up Let me close by returning to my original theme of sharing our blessings with others less fortunate, never more so in these days when America’s values—America’s very character—are being challenged. No one is more articulate on this subject than John Gardner, so here are his words, with one small edit to reflect the events of September 11 and thereafter: Today our communities need us, desperately need our loyalty, our understanding, our support . . . This nation is facing a test of character, all the more obvious after the terrorist attack. The test is whether in all the confusion and clash of interest, all the distracting conflicts and cross purposes, all the temptations to self-indulgence and self-exoneration, we have the strength of purpose, the guts, the conviction, the spiritual staying power to build a future worthy of our past. You can help.
是的,你可以。和我一起回想那首由一对夫妇携手紧握的褪色石像所引发的诗作:我们之中能够存续的是爱。今晚,我想请你们回想一下,全球联合之路(United Way)的标志本身主要就是一只伸出的手,毫不意外。在我看来,那只象征性的手正迫切地需要另一只人的手去握住它,然后是一只又一只手,然后是几十只,数百万只手,遍及全美,全部因共同的事业而联合,全部以奉献的行动去帮助那些比我们不幸的人。那时,诗人那句“我们之中能够存续的是爱”就真正成为了我们的誓言。
Yes, you can. Return with me to that poem inspired by a fading stone image of a man and his wife holding hands: What will survive of us is love. Tonight, I ask you to recall that the world-wide symbol of the United Way is itself dominated by a hand, and, not surprisingly, an open hand. It seems to me that that symbolic hand is crying out to be held by a human hand, and then another, and another, then scores, then millions of hands, all across America, all joined in common cause, all in helping one another in acts of devotion to other human beings less fortunate than we are. Then the poet’s words can truly be our words: What will survive of us is love.