亲爱的经济学家，
Dear Economist,
乔治o索罗斯(George Soros)留出了在金融中获得的一部分利润，用于资助教育基金会和做其它善事。鄙人也做了同样的事。我那不多的五位数股票投资组合表现很好，我从利润中拿出500英镑，给了我成年的孩子和当地的教堂。
George Soros sets aside a proportion of the profits from his financial gambles to fund educational foundations and other good works. In a humble way, I do the same. My modest five-figure portfolio of shares has performed well, and I give my adult children and the local church an occasional ￡500 out of the profits.
我本以为自己是在做善事，但是我的满足感最近被打破了。一份左翼报纸上的一篇文章指出，索罗斯每一笔成功的大额交易，都必然导致由大量无辜小投资者分摊的等额损失。换言之，他伤害的人比他帮助的人多。
I had imagined I was doing good, but my satisfaction was recently punctured by an article in a left-wing journal which suggested that every successful mega-deal made by Soros is necessarily set off by an equivalent loss divided between a multitude of innocent little punters further down the line. In other words, he harms more people than he helps.
这样说对么？我是否也是一个伪君子、一个坏人？
Is this correct? Am I also a hypocrite and a bad man?
约翰(John)，德国
John, Germany
亲爱的约翰，
Dear John,
你写得就好像你和索罗斯是在玩儿轮盘赌一样。但是，金融市场不是零和游戏；如果市场运转良好，产生的赢家就会比输家多--或者，更准确地说，赢的比输的多。
You write as if you and Soros have been playing roulette. But financial markets are not a zero-sum game; if they work they create more winners than losers - or, more accurately, more winnings than losses.
想想索罗斯在外汇方面的投机。
Think of Soros's speculations on currencies.
如果说外汇投机为他挣了钱，那是因为他高抛低吸。在高位抛售，可降低货币币值的峰值，在低处吸纳，则会抬高低谷。因此，在挣钱的同时，索罗斯也减少了货币的波动性。有多少央行可以夸口说有同样的（赢利）记录呢？
If they make money for him, it is because he bought low and sold high. Selling high reduces the height of peaks in a currency's value, while buying low makes the troughs more shallow. So, while making money, Soros is also smoothing out currency fluctuations. How many central banks can boast of the same (profitable) record?
从更普遍的意义上讲，金融市场的终极目的，是将资金引向支出或投资价值最高的地方。当它们发挥效力时，整个世界就会更富裕。导致市场不稳定的，是那些不合格的投资者。少担心点你是如何挣的钱，多考虑一下教区牧师把你的利润投到了哪里。
More generally, the ultimate purpose of financial markets is to direct capital to where it is most valued for spending or investment. When they work, the world is better off. It is incompetent investors who destabilise markets. Worry less about how you make the money, and more about where the vicar invests your profits.
