億萬富翁唐納德?特朗普目前在共和黨初選中遙遙領(lǐng)先，讓人覺得美國超級(jí)富豪們對(duì)公共生活的影響力似乎達(dá)到了新的高度。雖然特朗普自稱是億萬富翁（到目前為止，他仍未公布自己的納稅記錄），但他那些反建制派、反華爾街、反自由貿(mào)易的言論，卻讓他成為超級(jí)富豪階層中的“背叛者”。

一個(gè)由超級(jí)富豪組成的松散聯(lián)盟正在試圖抑制特朗普的崛起，最近出頭的是前共和黨總統(tǒng)候選人米特?羅姆尼，但到目前為止，這些努力均以失敗告終。

事實(shí)上，有許多跡象表明，超級(jí)富豪們正在失去對(duì)權(quán)力和影響力的掌控。收入不平等的情況確實(shí)在日益加劇。但許多凈資產(chǎn)過10億的富豪并沒有獲得他們習(xí)以為常的滿足感。

或許，超級(jí)富豪們的影響力已經(jīng)見頂。

這種現(xiàn)象在政治界最為明顯。如今，私人企業(yè)的大佬們?cè)絹碓诫y以左右大選走勢(shì)。

With billionaire Donald Trump the Republican frontrunner, it may seem like the impact of the ultra-rich on our public life is reaching new heights.A self-proclaimed billionaire (Trump still hasn’treleased his tax records), Trump’s anti-establishment, anti-Wall Street, anti-free-trade rhetoric has him running as a traitor to his class, though. A loose affiliation of the super rich has been scheming to halt his rise — most recently, Mitt Romney –but so far, without any success.

In fact, there are plenty of signs that plutocrats are losing their grip on the levers of power and influence. Yes, income inequality continues to rage. But plenty of people with ten-figure net worths simply aren’t getting the satisfaction to which they have become accustomed.

We may have reached Peak Plutocrat.

The phenomenon can best be seen in politics, where the kings of private enterprise are having a tough time playing kingmaker this time around.

布隆伯格競(jìng)選總統(tǒng)

還記得這件事嗎？你或許稍不注意便會(huì)錯(cuò)過這則消息。1月下旬，前紐約市市長(zhǎng)邁克爾?布隆伯格短暫考慮過參加總統(tǒng)競(jìng)選。布隆伯格擁有一家以其名字命名的公司，其個(gè)人財(cái)富預(yù)計(jì)在360億美元至480億美元之間。哪怕美國歷史上還沒有出現(xiàn)過以無黨派候選人身份角逐總統(tǒng)寶座的成功先例，哪怕布隆伯格的選民群體（居住在東西海岸，信奉自由派立場(chǎng)的富有階層）早已投入希拉里?克林頓的陣營(yíng)，他都不在乎。

然而，這位深受億萬富翁喜愛的億萬富翁候選人（對(duì)沖基金巨頭比爾?阿克曼在《金融時(shí)報(bào)》上發(fā)表了一篇熱情洋溢的評(píng)論文章，支持邁克爾?布隆伯格），最終選擇放棄。

Bloomberg for President

Remember that? If you blinked, you missed it. In late January, the former Mayor of New York Michael Bloomberg, proprietor of the eponymous company, whose fortune is estimated at $36 billion to $48 billion, briefly considered jumping into the race. Never mind that third-party candidacies don’t do well in the U.S., or that Bloomberg’s constituency (coastal rich people who are socially liberal) are generally in the Hillary Clinton camp already.

The candidacy of Mike Bloomberg, the billionaire candidate beloved by billionaires (hedge fund giant Bill Ackman wrote a passionate pro-Mike op-ed in the Financial Times), failed to launch.

還有杰布?布什！

在退選之前，前佛羅里達(dá)州州長(zhǎng)杰布?布什已經(jīng)花掉了建制派捐助的1億美元競(jìng)選資金。

已退休的對(duì)沖基金億萬富翁斯坦利?德魯肯米勒現(xiàn)在支持另一位共和黨候選人約翰?卡西奇。

And then there was Jeb!

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush blew through$100 million of the establishment’s money before bowing out.

Stanley Druckenmiller, the retired hedge fund billionaire, is backing. . . . John Kasich.

阿德爾森的影響力今不如昔

2012年，拉斯維加斯博彩業(yè)巨頭謝爾頓?阿德爾森在共和黨黨內(nèi)預(yù)選和大選中，扮演了非常重要的角色。但到了2016年，他已不復(fù)當(dāng)初的影響力。阿德爾森最近收購的《拉斯維加斯評(píng)論報(bào)》一直支持馬克?盧比奧，但盧比奧截至目前只贏得了一個(gè)州的黨團(tuán)會(huì)議。阿德爾森尚未表明自己的態(tài)度。

The dealmakers from 2012

In 2012, Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino magnate, played an immensely influential role in the Republican primary and general election. In 2016? Not so much. The Las Vegas Review Journal,the newspaper (!) Adelson recently purchased, has endorsed Marco Rubio, a victor in precisely one caucus. And Adelson has yet to put his card on the table.

科赫兄弟感覺“被剝奪了選舉權(quán)”

科赫兄弟投入數(shù)十億美元，建立了一個(gè)高效的政治運(yùn)作機(jī)構(gòu)，與共和黨并行運(yùn)作。但他們卻感覺自己被剝奪了投票權(quán)。共和黨并沒有采納科赫兄弟關(guān)于自由貿(mào)易或移民的主張，而是走上了完全相反的方向。查爾斯?科赫對(duì)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》抱怨稱：“你或許認(rèn)為我們應(yīng)該有更大的影響力。”

3月3日，路透社報(bào)道稱，科赫兄弟已經(jīng)決定不動(dòng)用其籌集的競(jìng)選資金來阻止特朗普。路透社指出：“科赫兄弟之所以做出這一決定，是因?yàn)樗麄儞?dān)心拿出數(shù)以百萬計(jì)的資金攻擊特朗普，這筆錢最終可能打水漂，因?yàn)榈侥壳盀橹梗麄冞€沒有看到任何針對(duì)特朗普的攻擊奏效。”

The Koch brothers feel ‘disenfranchised’

For their part, the Koch brothers, who have used their billions to build a highly effective political operation that runs in parallel to the Republican party, are feeling disenfranchised. Far from adopting the Koch Brothers’ line on free trade, or immigration, the Republican field is running in the opposite direction. “You’d think we could have more influence,” Charles Koch groused to the Financial Times.

On March 3, Reuters reported the Koch brothers had decided not to use any of their war chest to fight Trump’s candidacy. As Reuters notes, “the brothers made the decision because they were concerned that spending millions of dollars attacking Trump wouldbe money wasted, since they had not yet seen any attack on Trump stick.”

比爾?阿克曼收入縮水

在股市上，億萬富翁們也風(fēng)光不再。潘興廣場(chǎng)基金的老板比爾?阿克曼，在2013年和2014年獲得傲人業(yè)績(jī)；阿克曼富有激情的維權(quán)主義作風(fēng)，以及愿意在高知名度股票下重注的投資態(tài)度，令他的基金收益頗豐。但去年，扣除收益后，他的主要基金下跌了20.5%，2016年到目前為止，其基金再次下跌15%。哇哦！對(duì)沖基金經(jīng)理約翰?鮑爾森因?yàn)樽隹辗康禺a(chǎn)市場(chǎng)而取得驕人業(yè)績(jī)，他也因此一度被封為投資大師，但該公司的資產(chǎn)如今已縮水近一半。

億萬富豪們依賴和喜愛的市場(chǎng)正在陷入低迷，如股市、垃圾債券、科技初創(chuàng)公司、自然資源等，他們的消費(fèi)能力和公共影響力也隨之開始下降。（但他們自負(fù)的性格卻沒有改變。）

房地產(chǎn)價(jià)值縮水

倫敦的高端房地產(chǎn)一直被全球超級(jí)富豪們視為安全的“保險(xiǎn)箱”，如今這些房產(chǎn)的價(jià)值正在下跌。去年，曼哈頓價(jià)值超過1000萬美元的獨(dú)戶公寓簽約數(shù)量下降了16%，從270套減少到227套。

所以，向超級(jí)富豪銷售名貴物品的行業(yè)，境況恐怕不容樂觀。佳士得拍賣行報(bào)告稱，2015年，藝術(shù)品銷售額下降了11%，而蘇富比拍賣行表示，本季度到目前為止，其銷售額下降了33%。

No longer minting money, either

Billionaires are not doing so hot in the stock market, either. Bill Ackman, the proprietor of Pershing Square, shot the lights out in 2013 and 2014; Ackman’s brand of dramatic activism and willingness to go all-in on high-profile stocks gave his fund a impressive returns. But last year, his main fund was off 20.5 percent, net of returns; it’s off more than 15 percent so far in 2016. Whoops! John Paulson, the hedge fund manger who shot to prominence on the backs of bearish bets on the housing market and was thus elevated into the market sage, is literally half the asset manager he used to be.

As air comes out of the markets that Plutocrats rely on and love — the stock market, yes, but also junk bonds, tech start-ups, natural resources — their spending power and public influence are starting to deflate. (The egos, not so much.)

Real estate values wane

High-end real estate in London, which has functioned as a sort of safety deposit box for the globe’s ultra wealthy, is starting to fall. In Manhattan last year, the number of contracts signed on condos worth more than $10 million fell 16 percent, from 270 to 227.

So if you’re in the business of selling trophy properties to ultra-rich people, you may be struggling. Christie’s reported that its sales of fine art were down 11 percent in 2015 and Sotheby’s said that so far this quarter, sales are off 33 percent.

電視，滯后指標(biāo)

別誤會(huì)我的意思。盡管有各種跡象表明，富豪們對(duì)我們的文化和經(jīng)濟(jì)的影響力正在下降，但我們身邊永遠(yuǎn)都會(huì)有超級(jí)富豪和窮人存在。他們的存在通常是不可避免的事實(shí)。今年的電視季，Showtime電視臺(tái)推出了一部不錯(cuò)的新劇《億萬》，由達(dá)米安?里維斯飾演一位類似史蒂夫?科恩的人物——對(duì)沖基金經(jīng)理鮑比?阿克塞爾羅德。《億萬》已經(jīng)續(xù)訂了第二季。

然而，即使這樣一部以人性化和戲劇化的方式描繪超級(jí)富豪的電視劇，也證明這一群體的影響力已經(jīng)見頂。在預(yù)測(cè)商業(yè)趨勢(shì)方面，電視劇一直都是非常滯后的指標(biāo)。2000年秋天，一部講述牛市的美劇《欲望華爾街》的首映預(yù)示著即將到來的市場(chǎng)崩潰。2005年，ABC電視臺(tái)播出了一部由索菲亞?范蓋拉主演的情景喜劇《地產(chǎn)嬌娃》，它展現(xiàn)了加州一群房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀(jì)人的生活。次年，房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)便陷入崩潰。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：劉進(jìn)龍/汪皓

審校：任文科

TV, the lagging indicator

Don’t get me wrong. While signs are everywhere that their influence on our culture and economy are declining, the Plutocrats — like the poor — will always be with us. And they will often be unavoidable. One of the better new shows to debut this TV season is Showtime’s Billions, featuring Damian Lewis as Bobby Axelrod, a Steve Cohen-esque hedge fund manager. Billions has been picked up for a second season.

But even a show that humanizes and dramatizes plutocrats is a sign of their peak. When it comes to business trends, television shows are always an extremely lagging indicator. In the fall of 2000, the debut of a show about the bull market, The$treet, presaged the impending market crash. In October 2005, ABC aired Hot Properties, a sitcom starring Sofia Vergara about a group of realtors in California. The housing market began to crash the following year.