只有比特币能阻止政府腐败 | 彼得·麦科马克

还有来自那不勒斯的马苏里拉奶酪。

And mozzarella from Napoli.

我不知道他们的番茄是从哪里来的。

And I don't know where they get tomatoes from.

番茄原产于美洲，以前意大利根本没有。

Tomatoes came from America, they were never in Italy.

这是真的吗？

Is that true?

是的。

Yeah.

但食品供应商的数量很少。

But there's a small number of suppliers of food.

所以现在你买的奶酪都是预先磨碎、冷冻的大包装，放进冰箱，拿出来就铺在披萨上。

And so when you get your cheese now, you're getting pre grated frozen big packs of cheese goes in the freezer, you get it out, you spread it on the pizza.

食物的质量实际上正在明显变差。

Like food is getting He's actually getting noticeably shit.

是的。

Yeah.

尤其是连锁店。

Especially the chains.

是的。

Yeah.

我们的咖啡店是一家本地经营的店铺，我们从伦敦附近的蒙茅斯采购了最好的咖啡，并使用泽西岛的牛奶。

And you get less and less of the Our coffee shop is a locally run place where we've sourced the best coffee from Monmouth here in London, and we get Jersey milk.

我们并没有赚钱，因为我们致力于制作出最棒的咖啡，但大多数人还是去 Costa 或星巴克。

We're not making any money because we're trying to make the best cup of coffee possible, but most people are going to Costa or Starbucks.

他们的产品比我们的差，但他们能这么做是因为他们掌握了监管优势。

Their product is worse than ours, but they can do it because they have regulatory capture.

当你有严格的雇佣法、会计法和税法时，他们拥有庞大的部门来处理和管理这些事务，并且有能力将资金转移到海外。

When you have strong employment laws and strong accounting laws and tax laws, They have large departments that handle and manage this, and they have the ability to move money offshore.

因此，很难与他们竞争。

And then it's very hard to compete.

我们创造了一个对大企业非常有利、对小企业却极其不利的环境。

We've created an environment which is great for huge businesses, terrible for small business.

因此，我们实际上是在扼杀中产阶级，但

So what we're actually doing is we're killing the middle class, but

这不仅仅是所有事物的同质化。

It's don't just the homogenization of everything though.

没有人敢做任何有点另类的东西，生怕引起争议，无论是食物、音乐还是电影，一切都变得同质化，只追求最大受众，因为这是让商业运营在经济上可行的唯一方式。

It's like no one wants to make anything that's slightly out there in case it causes offense, whether that's food or music or film, everything has just become homogenized, hit the biggest audience possible because that's the only way you make the economics of running a business work.

这很好，因为我们应该再次讨论一下关于电影和音乐的这个话题。

So that's good because we should have that conversation we've had before about film and music.

我会回头再谈这个，因为这是一个非常重要的观点。

I'll come back to that because that's really important point.

还有算法的暴政，我认为这是一个非常重要的观点。

There's the tyranny of algorithms, which is I think a really important point.

但就这一点而言，确实有人希望经营本地企业。

But just on this, there are people who want to run local businesses.

赚钱真的很难，因为如果你开一家咖啡店，你的第一笔开销就是商业税，这在你做任何事情之前就得支付。

It's just really hard to make money because if you've got, say, a coffee shop, your first bill is your business rate, which is a tax you pay before you even do anything.

当你采购产品时，因为是食品类，你无法退还增值税。

When you buy your products, because it's food based, you don't get to reclaim the VAT.

所以我无法退还咖啡豆的增值税，因为它是原材料。

But you have to so I can't reclaim the VAT on the beans because it's a raw product.

这是一种原材料食品。

It's a raw food product.

但我必须对一杯咖啡收取20%的增值税，这笔钱直接上缴给政府。

But I have to charge 20% VAT on the cup of coffee, which goes straight to the government.

所以我们销售的每一分钱中，有20%都交给了政府。

So 20% of everything we sell goes to the government.

然后还有商业税，大约占8%。

And then you have the business rates, which works at about 8%.

所以我们总共要承担约28%。

So we're at about 28%.

然后你还得面对最低工资上涨的问题。

And then you've got Not only have you got Then you've got minimum wage, which has increased.

最低工资对我们这种生意来说简直是个笑话，这又回到了马特·沃尔什的观点。

Minimum wage is a bit of a joke for our business because it goes back to Matt Walsh's point.

他说，所有这些餐厅都变得有点差劲了。

He said, All these restaurants, they've just got a bit rubbish.

他说，现在在这些餐厅工作的人真的很有趣，因为过去这通常是康纳的第一份工作，或者我女儿的第一份工作。

He said, The people that work in them now is really interesting because it used to be someone like Connor's first job or my daughter's first job.

但事实上，由于大量移民涌入，现在这些工作大多由移民来做。

But actually now, we've had such a large influx of immigration that most of these jobs now are being done by immigrants.

因此，服务体验也发生了变化。

And so the experience has changed as well.

这种本地化的氛围已经消失了。

And so that kind of localism has gone.

这一切都是因为最低工资上涨了。

All because the minimum wage has gone up.

雇佣一名16岁少年和一名有经验的30岁成年人之间的区别，值这额外的一英镑每小时。

The difference between hiring a 16 year old and a 30 year old with experience is kind of worth that extra pound an hour.

荒谬的是，如果你雇一个18岁的年轻人，按最低工资标准，我得付他们大约10.50英镑。

And the mad thing is, is like, if you take on a young person, 18 year old, and I've got minimum wage, I've gotta pay them of don't know what it says, £10.50.

我还得给他们工作天数的12.3%作为假期工资。

I have to give them 12.3% of the days worked in holiday.

我第一份工作的时候，不管是去商店打工，根本没假期津贴。

Now when I had my first job, whether it was when I worked in a shop, didn't get holiday allowance.

我并不

I don't

没有假期工资。

no holiday pay.

你有假期津贴。

You get holiday allowance.

你还得加上病假工资。

You've gotta throw in sick pay.

你还得加上雇员权益。

You've gotta throw in employment rights.

你还得加上产假。

You've gotta throw in maternity.

你得把这些全都算上，这本质上就是对企业的征税。

You gotta throw all this stuff in, which it basically is a tax on the business.

那能源价格现在怎么样了？

Now what's happened to energy prices?

我认为我们有着全球最高的能源价格。

We have the highest energy prices, I think, in the world.

把这些全都加在一起。

Put that all in together.

有多少中产阶级企业、本地企业能撑得住而不倒闭？

How many businesses could exist, middle class businesses, local business could exist that don't?

所以当你开车经过城镇中心，发现所有店铺都关门上锁，但你走到城镇边缘，却看到一些小型商业区有必胜客、麦当劳和星巴克，这就说得通了。

And so when you drive around a town center and everything's closed and boarded up and shit, but you go to the edge of a town and you see one of these little pods of there's a Pizza Express, McDonald's, a Starbucks, it makes sense.

因此，回到更广泛的观点，我们通过不断攫取而使国家衰落了。

And so going back to the broader point is that we have decayed our country by taking more and more.

政府不断攫取更多。

The government takes more and more.

他们剥夺了权利。

They take rights.

他们通过税收拿走金钱。

They take money through taxation.

他们通过通货膨胀拿走金钱。

They take money through inflation.

他们还通过繁文缛节剥夺了人们的能力，你怎么说呢？

And they take, how do you put it, ability through red tape.

所以如果这种情况持续恶化、变得更加艰难，那么能完成的事情就会越来越少。

So if that constantly gets worse, harder, more difficult, you have less of it being done.

因此，你正在消耗中产阶级。

And so you are burning through the middle class.

当你耗尽中产阶级后，你还剩下什么？

And when you burn through the middle class, what do you have left?

你只剩下工人阶级和精英阶层。

You have a working class and an elite.

在这种情况下会发生什么？

And then what happens in that scenario?

工人阶级依赖国家，而精英则赢得一切。

The working classes depend upon the state and the elite wins whatever.

想想那些精英吧，他们在任何该死的环境中都能赢。

Will Think about the elites, they win in every fucking environment.

所以我一直反复强调，扎克·波兰斯基和加里·经济学的问题在于，他们都不愿意以应有的方式谈论通货膨胀。

So I keep going back to I've been hammering Zach Polanski and Gary Economics on because of them would neither of them will talk about inflation in the way it should be talked about.

因为他们两人都支持通胀型经济政策。

Because both of them support inflationary economics.

因为他们两人都希望延续我们当前的局面，即货币创造。

Because both of them want a continuation of what we have, which is money creation.

因为他们从意识形态上都无法接受必须平衡财政收支的理念。

Because neither of them ideologically can come to the table with an idea where we must balance the books.

因此，他们所有关于向富人征税、必须照顾穷人的演讲、YouTube视频和推特视频都是胡说八道，因为对富人最有效的税收和对穷人最有效的减负，就是消除通货膨胀。

Therefore, all their speeches and YouTube videos and Twitter videos about tax the rich and we must look after the poor is all bollocks because the biggest tax you can put on the rich and the best tax relief you can put on the poor is getting rid of inflation.

就是这样。

That's it.

富人赚取大部分收入

The rich make the majority of their money

通过通货膨胀。

Through inflation.

通过资产通胀。

Through asset inflation.

而最贫穷的人则因生活成本上涨和工资停滞而遭受最大打击，但他们俩都不愿正视这个问题。

And the poorest get crushed most through inflation of cost of living and stagnated wages, but neither of them would deal with it.

所以，我最终得出的结论是：我们国家的问题，以及西方自由民主国家——美国、整个欧洲，某种程度上包括澳大利亚，也许还有新西兰（我对后者了解不多）——的问题在于，进步主义计划已经失败了。

So to get to the main point on this is where I've come to is that the problem of our country and the problem of Western liberal democracies, US, all of Europe, to an extent Australia and maybe New Zealand, I don't know enough, is that the progressive project has failed.

K？

K?

进步主义项目已经彻底失败，我认为我们无法轻易通过投票解决这个问题。

The project progressive project has completely and utterly failed, and I don't think we can vote our way out of this easily.

那你认为必须发生什么？

So what do think has to happen?

嗯，我认为目前的选择非常明确。

Well, I think the choices on the table are quite clear.

我认为接下来会发生的是，我们会持续在左右之间剧烈摇摆，每一方都将对方视为生存危机。

I'll tell you what I think is gonna happen is we're going to keep having this extreme swing from left to right, where each side treats each other as an existential crisis.

在美国，卡玛拉·哈里斯被视为生存危机，因为她代表了那些极端左翼的觉醒主义立场，所以我们选了特朗普。

In The US, Kamala Harris was an existential crisis because of the, like, crazy left wing woke stuff, so we get Trump.

但如今特朗普对左派来说也成了生存危机。

But Trump is now an existential crisis to the left.

所以下一次选举，如果是在加文·纽森和J.之间对决的话。

So their next election, if it's Gavin Newsom v J.

D.

D.

万斯，如果你输了，这将被视为一场生存危机。

Vance, it will be treated as an existential crisis if you lose.

你选一边，政府最终还是会赢。

You pick a side, and government still wins.

最终，政府还是会赢。

In the end, government still wins.

在英国，我们正朝着某种左翼联盟（绿党和自由民主党）和右翼联盟（改革党与保守党）的方向发展。

In The UK, we're heading to that through possibly and probably some kind of left wing coalition between the Greens and the Lib Dems, and then a right wing coalition between reform and Conservatives.

你认为会发生这种情况吗？

Is that what think will happen?

是的。

Yeah.

因为改革党开始有些下滑，而保守党正在回升。

Because reform are starting to slip a bit and Conservatives are coming back a bit.

如果你无法获得议会多数席位，你就没有权力推动变革。

And if you cannot get a parliamentary majority, you don't have the power to make changes.

而你需要这一点。

And you need that.

你需要你的三百五十个席位。

You need your three fifty seats.

但目前的情况是，双方都将对方视为一场生存危机。

And so but what's happening is both sides are treating each other as an existential crisis.

无论谁获胜，都将掌握权力的杠杆。

Whoever wins has the levers of power.

在这种情况下，我会相信奈杰尔·法拉奇和改革党能拯救这个国家吗？

And in that scenario, it's like, do I believe that Nigel Farage and reform can fix this country?

我相信他们能够谈论如何拯救这个国家，足以让支持他们的选民相信他们会实现改变，而且确实会做一些事情。

I believe they can talk about fixing this country to a point where people who vote for them think they will fix it and certainly will do some things.

而在左翼，也完全是同样的论点。

And it's the exact same argument on the left.

所以如果他们解决不了这个问题，我认为他们谁都解决不了，因为我觉得一旦改革党上台，他们会说：‘操。’

And so if they can't fix this, which I don't think any of them can because I think once, say, reform get into power, they're like, fuck.

看看这烂摊子。

Look at this mess.

我们承担不起这个。

We can't afford this.

我们承担不起这种狗屁事。

We can't afford that shit.

我们可能不得不加税，或者直接借钱。

We might have to raise taxes or just borrow them.

这简直是一团糟。

Like, this is such a mess.

我们只是继续陷入问题，因为问题在于制约和权力。

We just get a continuation of the problem because the problem is constraints and power.

就是这样。

That's it.

但联盟只是问题的延续。

But a coalition is a continuation of the problem.

所以，我不太关注政治。

Like, the the only so I don't pay any attention to politics.

我对它并不在意。

I don't really care for it.

而且我也不太清楚改革派具体代表什么。

But and I don't know exactly I definitely don't know everything reform stand for.

但从局外人的角度看，改革这个想法让我感到兴奋，因为至少从外部来看，它似乎意味着英国将发生真正的变革——在我整个有生之年，政党只是在中间偏左和中间偏右之间摇摆，从未真正改变过什么。

But from as an outsider looking in, the idea of reform is exciting to me because it's like it looks at least from the outside as meaningful change for The UK, where it's really since in my entire lifetime, the parties have just been swinging like center left, center right, nothing's ever actually changed.

这只是

It's just

政府变得越来越大。

government growing bigger.

而改革则像是那种外部候选人，就像特朗普第一次在美国当选时那样，传递出某种重大变革即将发生的信号。

Whereas reforms seem like that kind of outside candidate that can be like, almost like when Trump was elected the first time in The US and like, it's a signal that something meaningful is about to change.

但你们规模小。

But you're small.

他们就会

They get

与保守党组成联合政府。

into a coalition with the Conservatives.

那对我来说没什么意思。

That is not interesting to me.

这取决于联盟中的权力平衡。

It depends the balance of power in that coalition.

这可能意味着他们拥有完全控制权，或者他们让首相来主导。

It might mean they have full control or they let the prime minister.

保守党得以提出一些议题。

Conservatives get to put some things on the table.

在这种情况下，你需要的是一个比改革党更右翼的保守党，这样它就不会阻止改革党想做的事情，而不是更偏向自由民主党的保守党版本，那会稀释他们的目标。

In that scenario, what you want is a conservative party that's more right wing than reform, so it doesn't stop them doing what reform wants to do, rather than the more lib den version of conservative, which will dilute what they want to do.

但你是个小写的保守派，对吧？

But you're small c conservative, right?

经典的自由派。

Classic liberal.

经典的自由派。

Classic liberal.

好吧。

Okay.

一样的事情。

Same thing.

是的。

Yeah.

你认为改革令人兴奋的地方，左派会认为扎克·帕兰特津·格林是这样的。

What you see as exciting about reform, a lefty sees about Zach Palantzin Greene.

因为

Because

在他们的世界观中，改革是一场生存危机。

in their world view, reform is an existential crisis.

他们相信多元文化主义。

They believe in multiculturalism.

他们相信移民。

They believe in immigration.

他们认为多样性使我们更强大。

They think diversity makes us stronger.

扎克·波兰斯基前往加来，拍摄人们乘船抵达的视频，解释原因，而他是个好人。

And Zach Polansky is going to Calais and making videos of people coming over on the boats and why, and he's the good guy.

他是那个主张向富人征税的人。

He's the guy saying tax the rich.

他们看到的正是你所看到的，但从他们的视角来看。

They see exactly what you see, but from their vantage point.

这正是政府的生存危机，而不是政党的危机。

And that's the existential crisis of government, not party.

这就是为什么我在这件事上不隶属于任何政党。

This is why I'm not aligned to any party in the matter.

目前我不会参加下一次选举投票。

I'm not gonna vote in the next election as it is.

我肯定不会投票支持改革。

I certainly won't vote for reform.

我乐于批评改革。

I'm happy to criticize reform.

我会批评保守派。

I'll criticize the conservatives.

我永远不会投给左派，因为我不认为左派是这样的。

I never will vote for left because I don't think the left I think look.

如果你问我希望生活在一个怎样的世界，我总是会选择保守主义，而不是那种进步的左翼理念。

If you ask me for a version of world I want to live in, I'm always gonna choose conservatism over kind of progressive left ideas.

但目前我不会投票给任何人，因为我认为无论你投给谁，最终都会走向衰败。

But I'm not voting for anyone at the moment because I don't I think whoever you vote for, you get decay.

嗯。

Mhmm.

在改革下，你可能会得到更慢的衰退。

You might get slower decay under reform.

在绿党与自由民主党联盟下，你可能会得到更快的衰退，但我不会投票支持衰退，因为没有人解决我个人认为的核心问题——权力的制约。

You might get faster decay under a green Lib Dem coalition, but I'm not voting for decay because nobody is dealing with what I personally see as the problem, which is constraints on power.

你知道我有多热爱美国历史，我读了多少美国历史。

You know how much I love American history and how much I read American history.

我现在已经读了美国宪法至少三十遍了。

I must have read the US constitution 30 times now.

但我最近一直在深入研究革命战争之后发生了什么。

But I've been researching I've been going a bit deeper in what happened after the revolutionary war.

十三个殖民地后来怎么样了？

What happened with the 13 colonies?

所以我不确定你对此了解多少，但之后他们制定了《邦联条例》，这就是各殖民地协作的方式。

They're the so I don't know how much of this you know, but afterwards, they had the articles of confederation, which was how the colonies would work together.

顺便说一下，如果任何正在听的美国人研究过这段历史，而我哪里说错了，请务必纠正。

And by the way, if anyone listening is American who's studied this, and I get anything wrong, please do correct them.

但为了论证方便，他们当时有《邦联条例》。

But for the sake of the argument, they had the articles of confederation.

它们被认为有点软弱。

They were seen as a bit weak.

各殖民地之间——也就是这13个州——存在一些问题，因为州际贸易是个难题，大家纷纷征收关税。

And there were issues between the colonies, essentially the 13 states, in that interstate commerce was a problem because people were putting tariffs on.

并不是每个人都使用同一种货币，每个人都使用不同的货币，所以你并不总是愿意接受其他州的货币。

Not everyone had a singular Everyone had different currencies, So you didn't kind of always want the other state's currency.

此外，还存在一种弱点，即小州容易受到其他国家的影响。

And also there was a weakness whereby like a small state could be influenced by other countries.

比如说，英国卷土重来，去找特拉华州说：嘿，你是个小州，日子不好过。

Say Britain came back over and went to Delaware and went, Hey, you're a bit of a small state here, you're struggling.

我们借你点钱吧。

We'll lend you some money.

我们会帮助你重建自己。

We'll help you rebuild yourself.

我们只是想参与其中。

We just wanna be part of this.

因此，你可能会受到其他国家的渗透。

So you could get that infiltration from other countries.

因此，联邦主义者主张需要一个强大的联邦政府，以让各州更好地运作并保护自己。

And so the federalists made the argument that you need a strong federal government to make the states work better and defend themselves.

因此，他们主张制定一部建立强大联邦政府的宪法。

And so they argued for the constitution for a strong federal government.

你还有一群反联邦主义者，顺便说一下，我第一次听说时，霍德尔告诉我：‘去读读反联邦主义者的文献吧。’

You also had the anti federalists, which by the way, when I first heard about the I think it Hoddle said to me, gotta go and read the anti federalist papers.

我原本以为他们只是反对建立联邦政府的人。

I assumed they were just people who were against the creation of federal government.

但实际情况比这更深刻。

But it was deeper than that.

这更多是关于保护自由。

It was more about preserving liberty.

他们刚刚反抗了一个专制的英国政府，该政府在没有代表权的情况下向他们征税。

They just fought out a tyrannical British government who wanted to tax them without representation.

他们不想回到那种状态。

And they didn't wanna return to that.

他们的观点是，一个强大的联邦政府总会集中权力，总会变得专制。

And their views was that a strong federal government would always centralize, would always become tyrannical.

因此，你面临一种紧张关系：一方面是一个能够保卫国家、让国家更好运作的强有力联邦政府，另一方面是各州的独立权利。

So you had this tension between federal government of a strong federal government that could defend the country and make the country operate better, but with states' rights independent.

然后你有主张自由的反联邦主义者，这两种观点之间存在着张力。

And then you had the anti federalists who were all about liberty, and you had this tension of the two.

而正是在这种张力中，你最终得到了宪法。

And that's where you ended up getting the constitution.

这是一件非常有趣的事情。

This is a really interesting thing.

你能说出宪法中的某一部分吗？

Name me one part of the Can you name me a part of the constitution?

我的意思是，可以。

I mean, yes.

持枪权。

The right to bear arms.

好的。

Okay.

酷。

Cool.

所以这是我了解到的一件事。

So this is something I learned about it.

这其实并不是宪法本身。

It's not really the constitution.

宪法本身是关于联邦政府如何运作的，比如权力分立、行政机构等。

So the constitution itself is how the federal government works, the separations of powers, the executive office, etcetera, etcetera.

当时关于宪法的辩论中，反联邦主义者希望有一份权利法案，也就是说，如果我们同意这个宪法，我们希望保障个人的权利。

What happened was when these debates happened regarding the constitution, the anti federalists wanted a bill of rights, which was to say, okay, if we agree to this, we want individual rights for us.

因此，第一修正案、第二修正案等等，我认为最初一共有十项修正案，被制定为权利法案。

And so the first amendment, second amendment, and so on, I think there were 10 amendments to begin with, were created as a bill of rights.

所以这实际上并不是宪法本身，而是权利法案。

So that's it's actually not the constitution, it's the bill of rights.

非常有趣。

Very interesting.

但权利法案被附加在宪法上，因此它们合为一份文件。

But the bill of rights is appended into the constitution, so it's one document.

但它实际上是一份权利法案。

But it's actually a bill of rights.

它们被制定出来是为了保障个人的自由。

And they were created to create the protection of liberty of the individual.

因此，当你回望那段历史时，那正是在追求一个强有力的联邦政府与同时保护个人自由之间的张力。

And so when you look back at that, it was that tension between having what you want from a strong federal government while at the same time protecting the liberty of the individuals.

你可以争辩说联邦党人赢了，因为他们想要一个中央政府，而他们确实得到了。

You you could argue that the federalists won because they wanted a central government, they got it.

但如果你现在来看，反联邦党人才是对的。

But if you look now, the anti federalists were right.

因为他们本质上喜欢集权。

Because essentially They did like centralized power.

集权，而你现在面临着严重的派系问题；当我听到持枪权是为了保护人民免受暴政政府侵害时，我想说，如果当年英国的暴政足以引发美国独立战争，那么现在的政府比当年的英国更加暴政。

Centralized power, and you have now got this factionalism problem whereby you know, when I hear about the right to bear arms is there to protect against a tyrannical government, I mean, I think if Britain was tyrannical and deserved a revolutionary war, then the current government is even more tyrannical than what Britain was to The US.

是的。

Yes.

我们是的。

We yes.

我们从三千英里之外进行统治，以前坐船要花三个月才能到达。

We govern from distance, from 3,000 miles away, and it takes three months on a ship or whatever to get there.

但实际上，我认为现在的政府更加暴政，但你不可能让人们拿起枪来对抗这种暴政，因为拥有枪支的人正是这个政府本身。

But actually, I think it's way more tyrannical now, but you're not going to get people raise their guns and fight a tyrannical this form of tyrannical government because the people it's their government, the people with the guns.

我们对这个专制的政府感到满意。

And we're okay with our tyrannical government.

对吧？

Right?

如果之后出现一个专制的左翼政府，过度侵犯权利，他们可能会拿起枪反抗，那才是真正意义上的内战。

They might raise their guns if they get a tyrannical left wing government afterwards, which infringes too much, which really is civil war.

因此，我开始意识到，我看不到任何枪支权利能促使全国团结起来对抗政府的情景。

So I've started to see, I don't see any scenario where the right to bear arms and leading to the country united to fight against the government.

我看到的唯一可能性是内战，因为双方的分歧已经太过严重。

I see it as the only scenario is there's a civil war because the sides are so far apart.

你可能想知道我接下来要说什么。

And you'd probably wanna know where I'm going with this.

关键是，如果你对政府缺乏足够的制约，政府就会变得专制。

The point is is that if you don't have enough constraints on government, government will become tyrannical.

我会认为美国现在就是专制的，我也会说英国是专制的。

I will argue that The US is tyrannical now, and I'll argue The UK is tyrannical.

我会说欧洲是专制的，因为我们现在本质上成了农奴。

I'll argue that Europe is tyrannical because we are now essentially serfs.

他们不为人民服务，而是我们为政府服务。

They don't serve the people, we serve government.

我们去工作是为了服务政府，我们的权利受到官僚体系的限制，最终能拿到的钱也由他们决定。

We go to work to serve government and we are constrained by the limited rights we have in the bureaucracy within them and the money they let us have at the end.

政府不应该是这样的。

That's not what government should be.

所以，如果你认为反联邦主义者是对的，那么对我个人而言，唯一的解决办法就是搬到一个能实施新权力制约的地方。

And so if you believe the anti federalists were right, the only solution for me personally is that we have to move to a place where we implement new constraints of power.

因此，我认为在英国，我们需要一部成文宪法。

So I believe in The UK, we need a codified constitution.

我们是有宪法的。

We have a constitution.

但它不是成文的，这意味着我无法起诉政府。

It's not codified, which basically means I can't sue the government.

他们想干什么就干什么。

They can do what the fuck they want.

议会是至高无上的。

Parliament's sovereign.

这没问题。

That's okay.

像在一百或两百年前，当时我们都是正人君子，贵族阶层为人民的利益管理国家，那种不成文的宪法是可以接受的。

Like, a non codified constitution is okay a century or two ago where we were good chaps and the aristocracy ran the place for the benefit of the people.

我们现在没有好政客了。

We don't have good politicians anymore.

我能大概说出三个我认为有骨气的政客。

Like, I could probably name you three that I think are decent to have a backbone.

但重点其实不在于你有好政客还是坏政客。

But the point doesn't really matter whether you have good politicians, bad politicians.

权力的激励机制已经存在。

The incentives are there for power.

因此，如果没有一部限制他们行为的成文宪法，这种情况将永远持续下去。

And so without a codified constitution, which limits what they can do, it's always gonna be this way.

这就是人性的本质。

This is the nature of man.

所以我只对一个明确表态的政党感兴趣：我是议员。

So I'm only interested in a party that comes out and says, I'm an MP.

我将成为你们的首相。

I'm gonna be your prime minister.

你们首先需要知道的是，我和我的政党的激励机制是损害你们国家的利益，就像过去每个政党都做过的一样。

The first thing you need to know is the incentives for me and my party are to damage you as a country, as every party has done in the past.

我们希望建设一个更强大的国家。

We want to build a stronger country.

因此，我们唯一能实现这一点的方式，就是对权力和我们的行为施加约束。

So the only way we can do that is within, with having constraints on power and what we can do.

所以我们不能让激励机制促使我们为了政党自身的短期利益而做出损害国家的行为。

So we can't, so the incentives aren't for us to do short term things that damage the country for the benefit of us as a party.

我们应当在严格限制下为你执政。

We should be here to govern you within strict limitations.

顺便说一下，我们应该有一部权利法案来保护你作为个人的权利。

And by the way, we should have a bill of rights which protects you as individuals.

你应该享有言论自由。

You should have free speech.

我们不应该能够监视你。

We shouldn't be able to surveil you.

你应该享有陪审团审判的权利。

We should have you should have the right to a jury trial.

我们应该建立一切机制来保护你。

We should put everything in place to protect you.

一个公开宣称这一点的政府，我会说：我投你一票。

A government who comes out and says that, I'm like, you got my vote.

是的。

Yeah.

但这永远不会发生。

But that's never gonna happen.

除非你竞选议员，否则这永远不会发生。

Unless you run for MP, that's never gonna happen.

或者你发起了一场大众运动，这正是我正在做的——我不再同意。

Or you've created a popular movement, which I'm trying Which is this I do not consent.

我不再同意。

I no longer consent.

我不再同意。

I no longer consent.

但我对这一点有些问题。

But so I have some issues with this.

好的。

Okay.

因为我们解释过这是什么吗？

Because we explain what it is?

嗯。

Yeah.

嗯。

Yeah.

你来解释一下那是什么。

You you explain what it is.

所以我自己得出了这个结论。

So so I've come to that conclusion on my own.

那我们来谈谈什么是同意。

So so let's talk about what consent is.

有一种明确的同意，嗯。

There's explicit consent in a yeah.

有一个网站。

There's a website.

有明确的同意。

There's explicit consent.

我们举行选举。

We have an election.

我们投票给工党。

We vote for labor.

他们得到了全国的明确同意，并且拥有议会多数席位。

They have the explicit consent of the country, and they have parliamentary majority.

他们可以做出决定。

They can make decisions.

我认为假定同意是一种错误。

I believe assuming consent is a mistake.

我认为同意是流动的，我可以撤回我的同意。

I think consent is fluid, and I can withdraw my consent.

那这到底意味着什么？

Now what does that actually mean?

作为一个独立的个体，这意味着什么都没有。

As an individual on my own, it means fuck all.

我不再同意政府的统治，那又怎样？

I no longer consent to the government, so what?

滚开。

Fuck off.

我们还是会照做。

We're doing this anyway.

如果一百万人说我不再同意，那我们就像工会一样成为一个投票群体。

If a million people say I no longer consent, well, we're a voting block like the unions are.

没错。

Yeah.

如果你想让我们投票给你，那你就该放一下尼克·富恩特斯的视频，康纳。

If you want us to vote for you you should play that Nick Fuentes video in a minute, Connor.

但如果你真想让我们投票给你，这些就是我们的要求，也许我们能争取到一些东西。

But if if you want us to vote for you, these are our demands, and maybe we get something.

这有点像看看美国的自由意志主义运动，他们根本没有权力。

It's a bit like if you look at the libertarian movement in America, they have no power.

嗯。

Mhmm.

但他们让罗斯·乌布里克获释了。

But they got Ross Ulbrich released.

这是个开始。

That's a start.

自由意志主义者在那里做了一件大事。

The libertarians did something big and important there.

他们让罗斯·乌布里克获释了。

They got Ross Ulbrich released.

他们对特朗普说：你想得到自由意志主义者的选票吗？

They said to Trump, you want the libertarian vote?

你就释放罗斯·乌布里克。

You release Ross Ulbrich.

他们得到了自由意志主义者的选票。

They got the libertarian vote.

他们释放了罗斯·乌布里希。

They released Ross Ulbrich.

现在我们知道有安吉拉·麦卡洛，我们听到了，不是吗？

Now we know there are As Angela McCullough, we heard it, didn't she?

她是个自由意志主义者。

She's a Libertarian.

她现在作为政府的一部分，开始以自由意志主义理念施加影响。

She's now in there as part of the government starting to influence with Libertarian ideas.

好吧。

Okay.

所以我是个支持自由的人。

So I'm pro liberty guy.

如果我能建立一个足够多人参与的运动，仅仅说改革正在获胜，我就可以说：你们得不到这张选票。

If I can build a movement that has enough people and just say reform are winning, I can say, you do not get this vote.

除非你们通过一项权利法案，否则这张选票不会投给你们。

This vote is not gonna vote unless you do a bill of right one thing.

给我一件事。

Give me one thing.

我希望有一项权利法案，保护这个国家的言论自由，就像它在美国受到保护一样。

I want a bill of rights that protects speech in this country like it's protected America.

所有目前因言论罪而入狱的人，都必须释放。

Every single person that's currently in jail for a speech crime is released.

所有历史上因言论罪被起诉的人，他们都应被撤销指控——我不知道具体术语是什么，但他们都应被清除，并且我们未来要建立一套成文且具有约束力的言论保护机制。

Everybody who's been historically prosecuted for a speech crime, they all now we I don't know what the term is where you revoke the the but they all get removed, and we have a codified, binded protection in the future for speech.

如果我们只赢得这一点，我们就为国家做了一件重大而重要的事。

If we win just that, we've done something big and important for the country.

但你能做得更多吗？

But can you do more?

如果你能让国家相信，掌握权力的是我们，而不是政治，不是白厅那650个人，也不是那些正在摧毁国家的数千名公务员。

If you make the country believe that we are in charge, not the politics, not the 650 people in Whitehall or the thousands working in the civil service who are destroying the country.

如果你能让国家相信我们掌握着权力，他们会问：我们如何掌握权力？

If you if you make the country believe we are in charge, and they'll ask, how are we in charge?

这就像，政府之所以能够运作并存在，是因为每天有数百万普通人照常生活。

It's like, well, government only operates and gets to exist because millions of us go about our daily business every day.

但如果我们停止这样做呢？先假设一个幻想场景：一千万人报名加入‘我不再同意’运动。

But if we stop doing that, maybe the starting point, let's go in fantasy world, say 10,000,000 people sign up to I No Longer Consent.

好吧。

Okay.

我们想要为这个国家制定一部权利法案。

We want a bill of rights for the country.

在2月1日，举行全国性罢工。

On the February 1, it's a national strike.

我们谁都不去上班。

None of us are going to work.

会发生什么吗？

Does anything happen?

也许会，也许不会。

Maybe, maybe not.

好的。

Okay.

两天罢工，三天罢工。

Two day strike, three day strike.

国家必须相信，足够多的人必须相信他们能够迫使政府做出改变，因为政府随风而动。

The country has to believe, and enough people have to believe that they can force government to make change because government goes with the wind.

我从未想过工党会变得如此反移民，但这个问题在国家里变得如此热门，他们不得不如此。

I could never have imagined as a scenario where a Labour Party became so anti immigration, but it became such a hot topic in the country, they had to be.

所以，如果你能向政客们表达全国的意愿，他们就必须顺应国民的意愿。

And so if you can express the will of the nation to the politicians, they will have to go with the will of the nation.

我知道这全是幻想，但还能怎么办呢？

And look, I know this is all a big fantasy, but what else?

你还有什么其他选择？

What are your other options?

嗯，我有两点异议：不认同到底意味着什么？

Well, this is The two things that I have an issue with are, what does not consenting actually mean?

因为你并没有要求人们采取实际行动，比如停止缴税或停止缴纳道路税之类的。

Because you're not asking people to take action here as in stop paying their taxes or stop paying road tax or whatever it might be.

这仅仅是报名加入这个团体。

This is just signing up to be part of this group.

我现在要说的是，你们只需要做两件事。

I am saying right now, all to you do is say two things.

这个国家已经不再运转了。

This country doesn't work anymore.

我不再同意了。

I no longer consent.

你必须明白一点，单独来看，这毫无意义。

And you have to understand one thing is that individually, it means nothing.

但集体来看，这就意味着一切。

Collectively, it means everything.

如果我们能建立起一个集体，就能形成一场运动。

If we can build a collective, we can build a movement.

本集由Anchor Watch赞助播出。

This episode is brought to you by Anchor Watch.

让我夜不能寐的是我的比特币冷钱包出现严重错误，而这就是Anchor Watch的用武之地。

The thing that keeps me up at night is the idea of a critical error with my Bitcoin cold storage, and this is where Anchor Watch comes in.

使用Anchor Watch，您的比特币将由您自己拥有的A+评级伦敦劳合社保险单承保，所有比特币均存放在其时间锁定的多重签名保险库中。

With Anchor Watch, your Bitcoin is insured with your own a plus rated Lloyd's of London insurance policy, and all Bitcoin is held in their time locked multisig vaults.

因此，您可以在不放弃托管权的情况下，安心知道您的比特币已获得保险。

So you have the peace of mind knowing your Bitcoin is insured while not giving up custody.

无论您担心继承规划、勒索攻击、自然灾害，还是自己犯的愚蠢错误，Anchor Watch都能为您提供保障。

So whether you're worried about inheritance planning, rent attacks, natural disasters, or just your own silly mistakes, you're protected by Anchor Watch.

全额保险托管的费率低至0.55%，面向美国境内的个人和企业客户开放。

Rates for fully insured custody start as low as point 55% and are available for individual and commercial customers located in The US.

联系Anchor Watch获取报价，并了解您的安全选项和保障详情。

Speak to Anchor Watch for a quote and for more details about your security options and coverage.

立即访问anchorwatch.com。

Visit anchorwatch.com today.

这就是 anchorwatch.com。

That is anchorwatch.com.

如果你能同时降低税单并积累比特币呢？

What if you could lower your tax bill and stack Bitcoin at the same time?

通过使用 Blockware 挖矿，你可以做到。

Well, by mining Bitcoin with Blockware, you can.

根据《大美法案》发布的新税收指南，美国矿工可以在一个纳税年度内全额抵扣其挖矿硬件的成本。

New tax guidelines from the big beautiful bill allow American miners to write off a 100% of the cost of their mining hardware in a single tax year.

没错。

That's right.

100% 的全额抵扣。

A 100% write off.

所以，如果你有 10 万美元的资本收益或收入，你可以购买价值 10 万美元的矿机，并完全抵消这笔支出。

So if you have a $100,000 in capital gains or income, you can purchase a $100,000 of miners and offset it entirely.

Blockware 的挖矿即服务让你无需动手即可立即开始挖矿。

Blockware's mining as a service enables you to start mining Bitcoin right now without lifting a finger.

Blockware 负责从保障矿机安全、采购低成本电力到配置矿池的所有事宜。

Blockware handles everything from securing the miners to sourcing low cost power to configuring the pool.

他们包办一切。

They do it all.

你每天都能以折扣价积累比特币，同时在报税季大幅节省开支。

You get to stack Bitcoin at a discount every single day while also saving big come tax season.

立即前往 mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd 开始吧。

Get started today by going to mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd.

当然，这些都不是税务建议。

Of course, none of this is tax advice.

请咨询你的会计师或税务顾问，了解这些规定如何适用于你，然后前往 mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd，每购买一台托管矿机，你将获得一周的免费托管和电力服务。

Speak to your accountant or tax adviser to understand how these rules apply to you, and then head over to mining.blockwaresolutions.com/wbd, and you'll get one week of free hosting and electricity with each hosted miner purchased.

购买。

Purchased.

上一次选举有多少人投票？

How many people voted in the last election?

大约是60%左右吗？

Is it about 60% or something like that?

60%。

60%.

是的。

Yeah.

所以实际上有40个人不认同这个政府。

So there's essentially 40 people that don't consent to this government.

但我主要的问题是，作为比特币爱好者皮特，你为什么没有把比特币引入这个话题？

But the big issue I have is why you haven't brought Bitcoin into this, as Pete the Bitcoiner.

我有个非常简单的答案。

I got a really easy answer.

但我猜我不会喜欢你的答案，因为我觉得你会说这会让人们却步。

But I think I'm not gonna like your answer because I think you're gonna say it's gonna put people off.

不会。

No.

我已经把比特币带入了这个话题。

I have brought Bitcoin into this.

好的。

Okay.

怎么做？

How?

比特币是这个的核心。

Bitcoin is central to this.

我只是不说比特币这个词。

I just don't say Bitcoin.

为什么？

Why?

因为这会分散注意力，让我们称之为一个A/B测试。

Because it distracts from let's call it an AB test.

每次我跟一个不懂比特币的人交谈，向他们解释货币的问题时，他们都能理解。

Every time I talk to somebody who doesn't understand Bitcoin and I explain to them the problems with the money, they get it.

当我谈到比特币时，我会失去一半以上的人。

When I get to Bitcoin, I lose more than half of them.

但我的问题是，比特币本身就可以是一种行动。

But my problem is, like, Bitcoin can be the action.

你并不是在要求人们停止缴税之类的，但比特币实际上是尼克·卡特的文章，一场最和平的革命。

You're not asking for people to stop paying taxes or whatever, but Bitcoin is actually Nick Carter's article, the most peaceful revolution.

这就是你从政府手中夺取权力的方式。

This is how you take power from the government.

它与这场运动如此契合，我不明白为什么比特币不成为其中的一部分。

And it fits so well with this movement that I don't know why Bitcoin is not a part of it.

但它确实是。

But it is.

我只是不去提起它。

I just don't bring it up.

但如果你不提它，那就没人知道它是这场运动的一部分。

If But you don't bring it up, then no one knows it's part of the movement.

如果你有一百万人、一千万人注册了这个系统，并开始用比特币储蓄，那么他们实际上就是在切断政府的这部分收入。

If you get a million people, 10,000,000 people sign up to this thing and they start saving in Bitcoin, then they're essentially starving the government from that income.

但他们并没有让政府断粮。

Well, they're not starving it.

他们只是不花这笔钱而已。

They're just not spending it.

但比特币仍然融入了税收和消费体系。

But Bitcoin is still integrated within the tax system, the spend system.

你谈的是储蓄。

You're talking about saving.

但是

But

不，还不止如此。

No, it's not even that.

而是你把资金从他们控制的法币体系中抽离了。

It's that you're taking that out of the fiat system that they control.

当然。

Sure.

他们 anyway 通过监管来控制比特币系统。

They kind of control the Bitcoin system through regulation anyway.

我们得现实一点。

Let's just be real about that.

但它并没有为他们支撑起这种以债务为基础的法币体系。

But it's not fueling the debt based fiat system for them.

当然。

Sure.

这可能意味着，加速主义者的论点是：如果我们抽走它，他们就得印更多钱来制造恐慌，从而加速这一过程。

It might mean essentially, is that the accelerationist argument in that if we take it out, they have to print more fear, accelerates the yeah.

当然。

Sure.

让我换一个角度来谈这个问题。

Let me let me come at this a different direction.

你为什么现在坐在桌子的那边？

Why are you sat that side of the table right now?

因为比特币就是这样做的。

Because this is what Bitcoin did.

好的。

Okay.

那我是谁？

And so what am I?

客人。

The guest.

好的。

Okay.

那我现在该做什么？

And so what do I do now?

你告诉我一些事情。

You tell me stuff.

不，不，不。

No, no, no.

但我的工作是什么？

But what's my job?

你什么意思？

What do you mean?

你是《What Bitcoin Did》的主持人，

Like, you're the host of What Bitcoin Did,

你是《Pete McCormack Show》的主持人。

what You're am the host of the Pete McCormack show.

你全程都参与了。

And you were there through everything.

我为什么选择这么做？

Why did I choose to do it?

嗯，有几个原因，你对谈论比特币感到厌倦了。

Well, I mean, a few reasons, you got sick of talking about Bitcoin.

你想在贝德福德做出改变，想在英国做出改变吗？

You wanted to make a change in Bedford, you wanna make a change in The UK?

是的。

Yes.

我 personally 已经把比特币能做的都做到了极致。

I personally went as far as I could with Bitcoin.

你的播客是比特币领域最重要的播客。

Your podcast is the most important podcast in Bitcoin.

你做得太棒了。

You've absolutely crushed it.

你在比特币中承担着至关重要的工作，就是当人们进来想学习时，他们在那里，而你把观众留下来。

You do the necessary important job in Bitcoin, which is when people come in and they want to learn, they're there, but you keep the crowd in.

你管理着比特币的受众，不断吸引新的人加入。

You manage the Bitcoin crowd and accumulate people in.

我属于比特币之前的群体，不做这个播客后，我走出了这个泡沫。

I'm for the pre Bitcoin crowd, and in not doing the podcast, I came out of the bubble.

所以，我的生活不会再和你一起去纳什维尔，和哈里·苏多克共进晚餐，也不会去拉斯维加斯和霍德尔一起打枪，只谈论比特币。

So my life isn't now going to Nashville with you and having dinner with Harry Sudock or going to Vegas and shooting guns with Hoddle and just talking about Bitcoin.

离开这个泡沫后，我现在进入了真实世界，这里几乎没人谈论比特币。

By leaving the bubble, I'm now in the real world where hardly anyone is talking about Bitcoin.

而教育他们、让他们接受比特币所需的时间，会拖慢我必须做的事情——即向他们解释为什么金融体系行不通。

And the time it will take to educate and get them into Bitcoin will slow what I need to do, which is educate them why the financial system doesn't work.

我昨天发了一篇帖子，批评扎克·波兰斯基和加里·政府在这件事上的观点。

I put up a post yesterday criticizing Zach Polansky and Gary Government about this exact thing.

我一旦去买比特币，就会失去一大批人，他们会说：‘哦，你只是在推广那个该死的骗局。’

The minute I go buy Bitcoin, I lose a bunch of people that go, oh, you're just promoting that fucking scam.

比特币是个骗局。

Bitcoin's a scam.

它是个庞氏骗局。

It's a ponzi.

就是会失去人。

Just lose people.

我不需要说服他们相信比特币。

I don't need to convince them of Bitcoin.

他们会自己明白的。

They will get there.

我需要团结一群意识到国家运转失灵、金融体系失效的人，让他们明白你不能靠投票暂时摆脱这个问题。

I need to get a coalition of people who realize the country doesn't work, realize the financial system doesn't work, realizes you can temporarily vote your way out of this.

你可以选出一个布克尔那样的强硬CEO、铁腕人物，看起来专制、有点吓人。

You can get a bukele, that tough CEO, strong man who comes in, looks authoritarian, little bit scary.

很多人会觉得：太好了。

A bunch of people are like, great.

他正在做我想做的事。

He's doing what I want.

但有些人吓得要命。

Other people are shit scared.

但在英国这样的国家，如果这个人过于右倾，最终只会导致选民转向左翼。

But in a country like The UK, if that person swings too far to the right, you're just gonna get a swing back to the left.

我们需要将政府的权力限制在一定范围内。

What we need is to bind government to limitations.

萨菲廷当时是怎么说的？

What was it Safetine said?

对比特币最大的威胁，是一个实行负责任货币政策的政府。

The biggest threat to Bitcoin is a government that has a responsible monetary policy.

明白吗？

Okay?

某种程度上，我所做的事情实际上是在对 Bitcoin 构成威胁。

In some ways, I'm doing is kind of operating a threat to Bitcoin.

也就是说，我们需要给政府设定某些约束。

In that, what I'm saying is we need to bind government to certain constraints.

其中一个约束，比如，我们来随便想想一些点子。

One of those constraints would be, for example, let's spitball some ideas here.

政府的支出增长不能超过GDP的增长。

Government cannot grow faster than GDP.

所以把它设为一个百分比。

So set it as a percentage.

比如说，我们现在是40%。

Say we look, I don't know, say we're 40% now.

我们知道这太糟糕了。

We know that's terrible.

当它是28%的时候，我们状态很好。

We were great when it's 28%.

好吧。

Okay.

它必须是28%。

It has to be 28%.

就像你的家庭预算一样。

Bit like your home budget.

就是28%。

It's 28%.

这必须是这样。

That's what it has to be.

比如说，人们非常反感工党的一点是，他们的宣言明确表示：不会提高工薪阶层的税收。

Let's say like, one of the things that people really hate about the Labour Party is their manifesto explicitly said, we will not raise taxes on working people.

他们上台后，发现财政状况糟糕透顶，根本无力支付他们想做的所有事情。

They got into power, realized financially, they're the fuck, couldn't pay for all the things they wanted to do.

因此，他们制定的第一个预算案就提高了雇主的国民保险缴费。

And so the first budget they did, they raised national insurance employers' national insurance.

任何有点脑子的人都知道，根本不存在企业税。

Now anyone with half a brain knows that there are no corporate taxes.

你知道‘不存在企业税’这个论点吗？

Do you know the argument there are no corporate taxes?

这是里根说过的话。

So this is what Reagan said.

如果康纳，你能找到那段采访，那简直太棒了。

If Conor, if you can find that interview, it's brilliant.

没有企业税，因为公司必须盈利。

There are no corporate taxes because companies have to make a profit.

一旦对他们征收新税，这部分成本就会转嫁到产品价格上，由消费者承担。

The minute you put a new tax on them, that goes into the cost of the product to the people.

所以最终总是消费者在支付这笔税。

So the end consumer always pays for that tax.

所以，对我咖啡店征收雇主国民保险税，意味着我必须提高咖啡的价格。

So a tax working sorry, employer's national insurance on my coffee shop means I have to raise the price of the coffee.

所以这实际上是对消费者的征税。

So it's a tax on consumers.

他们撒了谎，向劳动者征了税。

So they lied, and they put a tax on working people.

他们确保所有商品都变得更贵，更多公司倒闭。

They made sure all products were more expensive and more companies closed down.

好吧。

Okay.

我们来看第二个预算。

We get to the second budget.

请注意，他们已经说过不会对工薪阶层加税。

Bear in mind, they've already said they're not gonna raise taxes on working people.

好的。

Okay.

我们来看第二个预算。

Get to the second budget.

他们到底加了哪些税？

What what were the taxes they did?

我正努力回想呢。

I'm trying to fucking remember.

学校，提高了国民保险，没错。

Schools, increased national Yeah.

那是第一个预算。

That was the first budget.

第二个预算，我为什么就是想不起来？

The second budget, they why can I not remember this?

因为我最近本该知道这个的。

Because I should know this recently.

去查一下。

Look it up.

但在上一次选举中，他们又提高了税收。

But they raised taxes again in the last election.

哦，不。

Oh, no.

他们就是这么做的。

That's what they did.

他们冻结了起征点。

They froze the thresholds.

所以起征点是基于通货膨胀来设定的，你会根据通胀上调不同税率的起征点。

So the thresholds are based on knowing there's inflation, you raise the thresholds for the different tax rates.