现在是创业的黄金时代吗？数据显示并不是这么回事 | 双语阅读

编者按：在各科技巨头的强领头作用下，越来越多心怀梦想的年轻人怀着创业的理想进入市场。对成功案例的宣传，创业精神的标榜，让我们自以为处在一个创业的黄金时代，但事实真的是这样吗？这篇原题为 Is This The Golden Age Of Entrepreneurialism? The Statistics Say No 的文章向我们列举了一些统计数据，并且指出，虽然创业在大众文化中流行，但现今经济的活力已经大不如前，资源更多地集中在历史悠久的业内大公司，留给创业公司的发展空间被挤压了。虽然这篇文章说的是美国的情况，但美国是当前科技行业的领军者，一定程度上对全球经济有着指导意义，因此值得我们认真阅读和思考。

Given the prominence of Uber, Facebook, and other tech super-brands in our lives, the current moment may seem like a golden age for startups. These companies’ success in rising from nothing would seem to indicate that we’re living in an economy that embraces change and continues to innovate.

鉴于Uber、Facebook和其他科技超级品牌在我们生活中的突出地位，对创业公司来说，似乎正处于一个黄金时代。这些公司从无到有的成功，似乎表明我们生活在一个拥抱变革，不断创新的经济体系中。

Right? Well, look at the statistics and the prospects for entrepreneurialism seem less healthy. America is producing fewer startups now than previous eras. Fewer jobs are being created by new businesses. And what new companies do exist are hopelessly concentrated among certain industries and geographies. Metros like Los Angeles and New York dominate the scene; most other cities are largely stagnant.

真是这样吗？然而看看统计数据，创业的前景看起来似乎没有想象中那样好。美国现在的新创公司跟从前比要少，提供的工作岗位也更少。而且这些新创公司集中在某些行业和地区之间。像洛杉矶和纽约这样的大城市处在主宰地位，其他城市则大都停滞不前。

In 2014, the economy hatched 154,000 fewer new companies than in 2006, despite the economy being almost 10% larger. [Illustration: wacomka/iStock]

2014年，尽管美国经济增长了近10％，孵化的新公司相比2006年却减少了154,000家。

The lack of new business groups is a big reason for a lack of new job growth, a new report shows. In 2014, the economy hatched 154,000 fewer new companies than in 2006, despite the economy being almost 10% larger. If you assume, based on history, that each new business creates six new positions in its first year, that means 3.4 million fewer jobs in the 2006-2014 period than we might have expected.

新的报告显示，缺乏新创公司导致了疲软的就业增长。根据历史情况假设，每个新创公司在头一年能创造六个新职位，这意味着2006-2014年期间的就业人数比预期的减少了340万。

“In the popular consciousness, startups have never been more celebrated or focused on,” says John Lettieri, co-founder of the Economic Innovation Group (EIG), a centrist think tank supported by several Silicon Valley Illuminati, in an interview. “We’ve never had a more entrepreneur-friendly popular culture. Tech companies have brought startups to the forefront. It’s just that overall, across the American economy as a whole, there’s a lot less dynamism than we’ve seen.”

“在流行认知中，创业公司从未如此受到重视。”经济创新集团（EIG）的联合创始人John Lettieri在接受采访时表示：“我们的大众文化从来没有比现在更适合企业家的发展。 科技公司把创业公司带到了人们的视线中。只是就美国经济总体来说，活力比我们所看到的要少得多。”

With the depressing title of Dynamism in Retreat, EIG’s report shows that fewer people are moving across state lines for work, that new companies account for a lower percentage of job hires than traditionally, and that job turnover rates are declining (from a high of 12.4% annually in 1999 to a low of 7.2% in 2015). These are all indications of decreasing “churn”–the process that has driven the economy in the past. Since the recession, firm closures have outpaced firm births, on average. In 2014, more than 200 metro areas had higher death than birth rates for companies.

EIG的一篇题为“消退的活力”（Dynamism in Retreat）的报告显示，跨州就业的人数变少了，新公司的就业比例低于传统水平，人员流动率下降（从1999年12.4%降至2015年的7.2％）。 这些都是经济周转下降的迹象，而周转正是驱动经济发展的动力。自经济衰退以来，初创公司的消亡的速度已经超过了出生。2014年，二百多个都会区的初创公司消亡率高于出生率。

“The recession led to this huge wiping out of one-industry towns, particularly in those places that were heavily dependent on the industrial or manufacturing economy,” says EIG cofounder Steve Glickman. “We’re asking: What’s around the corner for them? And we’re seeing a shockingly low rate of new businesses that can become the new employers for those regions of the country.”

 “经济衰退导致单一工业城镇在竞争中被大量淘汰，特别是在那些严重依赖工业或制造业经济的地区。” EIG联合创始人Steve Glickman说：“我们要问：他们的未来在哪里？然而我们却看到，只有很少一部分新公司能够担负起重拾地方经济的重任。”

As the internet took off in the 1990s, evangelists proclaimed that the businesses of the future could be anywhere–even in people’s bedrooms or basements. But the report shows that new firms tend to be congregated in fewer and fewer places. Between 2010 and 2014, New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Houston, and Dallas produced the same net increase in companies (births minus deaths) than the rest of the country put together. Half the country’s metro areas saw falls in companies numbers over the period.

随着互联网在九十年代腾飞，互联网的笃信者相信未来的公司可以在任何地方成立——甚至可以在人们的卧室或地下室。但报告显示，新公司的集中地越来越少，这些地区里新公司的密度越来越大。在2010年至2014年期间，纽约，迈阿密，洛杉矶，休斯敦和达拉斯，新创公司的净增长率（出生数减去消亡数）是全国其他城市加起来的总和。  

The economy is increasingly concentrated in the type of innovation it pursues. “The increase in patenting in the information technology and health sectors masks a steep decline in the innovation intensity of the rest of the economy,” the report says. Today, the U.S generates only two non-health and non-IT patents for every $1 billion in gross domestic product, compared to the 1980s when it was more than four. Less innovation, says the report, means less disruption, as older companies tend to be more risk-averse than new ones. And it could be a factor explaining why substantially fewer companies are coming to IPO these days.

经济追求创新，资源因此集中在这一领域。报告说：“信息技术和卫生领域的专利申请数量的增加掩盖了经济中其他行业创新下降的事实。”如今，美国每10亿美元GDP只产生两项非健康和非IT专利，而在二十世纪八十年代，这个数字至少是四。报告还说，创新的减少意味着更少的分裂，因为老牌公司往往比新公司更厌恶风险。这就可以作为一个原因解释为什么如今上市的公司要比之前少得多。

In 2014, companies 16 years and older accounted for 74% of jobs in 2014, compared with 60% in 1992. 

2014年，成立16年及以上的公司提供的工位在当年占74％，而1992年为60％。

In many industries, longer-running incumbent companies are increasingly powerful. Between 1997 and 2012, two-thirds of industries saw an increase in market concentration, measured by the sales going to top-four companies. Highly concentrated sectors include logistics, wireless communications, and book publishing, and the effect seems to be to limit employment opportunities. New businesses produce higher rates of job creation on a per dollar of wealth created basis than larger companies. In 2014, companies 16 years and older accounted for 74% of jobs in 2014, compared with 60% in 1992.

在许多行业，长期运营的公司越来越强大。在1997年至2012年间，从行业四名公司的销售额来看，三分之二的行业市场集中度有所上升。高度集中的行业包括物流、无线通信和图书出版，造成的结果是限制就业机会。新公司在同等基础上比大公司创造更多的就业机会。

Lettieri and Glickman want to see markets opened up to more vigorous rivalry. For example, we could do away with onerous occupational licensing requirements. Currently, you need a certificate from a regulatory authority before you can sell flowers in Florida or become a cosmetologist in Minnesota (which probably stops people becoming either). Or we could stop companies from forcing employees into non-compete agreements, even for relatively low-skill work. These stop workers setting up their own firms, or moving to other companies. Or, we could support tax changes that encourage investment in struggling areas. The EIG is a strong advocate for the Investing in Opportunity Act, which proposes favorable tax treatment for investors putting money into distressed “opportunity zones,” and has supporters on both sides of Congress.

Lettieri和Glickman希望看到市场向更加激烈的竞争开放。例如，我们可以消除过于严苛的职业许可要求。目前，您需要获得监管机构的证书才能在佛罗里达州销售鲜花，或成为明尼苏达州的美容师（现有的条件下人们可能一样也做不成）。 或者我们可以阻止公司迫使员工签署非竞争协议，即使是对于那些对技能要求相对较低的工作，这些协议会促使工人放弃自建公司或跳槽。或者，我们可以支持在艰苦地区投资的税收改革。 EIG是“投资机会法案”的强力倡导者，该法案呼吁为不景气的“机会区”投资者提供优惠税收待遇，在国会双方都有一定的支持者。

Lettieri argues that an economic dynamism agenda can receive cross-party support where more controversial policies struggle. “There’s a lot of debate in Congress about the future of the economy, but there’s broad bipartisan and empirical support for restoring historic levels of dynamism and really restoring power to entrepreneurs and workers over incumbents and entrenched interests,” he says.

Lettieri认为，旨在提高经济活力的议程可以得到跨党派的支持。他说：“国会对经济的未来有很多讨论，但是要使经济恢复往日的活力，真正恢复企业家和工人的权力，还需要在现任者和既得利益者方面广泛的两党和实证支持。”

重点词汇

• entrepreneurialism：创业

• golden age：黄金时代

• startup：创业公司

• hatch：孵化

• patent：专利

• recession：经济衰退

编译组出品。译者：吴高菲，编辑：郝鹏程