寡妇们没有注意到的事情

算数可以很清楚的证明一个事实：通货膨胀是一种税。而且这种税比我们的立法者所制定的任何税种都更具毁灭性。通货膨胀税具有可怕的消耗资本的能力。对于一个依靠存折上5%利息收入的寡妇来说，零通胀时期100%的所得税和通胀时期5%的通货膨胀率是一样的。两种情况都让她没有任何实际收入。任何她所花的钱都直接来自于资本。她会对120%的所得税感到气愤。但她却不会注意到6%的通货膨胀率在经济上就相当于120%的所得税。

如果我对通胀的假设接近正确，不仅市场下跌时业绩会令人失望，市场上升时业绩也会令人失望。上个月早些时候，道琼斯指数是920点，比10年前上涨55点。但是，经过通货膨胀调整后，道指实际下降345点 - 从865到520。道琼斯指数里的公司还必须把属于股东的盈利的一半截流，然后再投资，才能取得这样的结果。

在下一个10年，只要股票有12%的资本回报率，40%的股息分红率和110%的市场价与净资产的比率，道琼斯指数会翻倍。但如果有7%的通货膨胀，10年后在1800点卖出的投资者付出资本利得税后的实际结果还远不如今天的水平。

我几乎都可以听到一些投资者对我悲观想法的反应。他们会认为无论新的投资时代带来何种困难，他们都能巧妙应对，为自己获得出色的结果。他们的成功未必有把握。而在总体上说肯定是不可能的。如果你感觉你可以在股票市场来回买卖来击败通货膨胀税。我愿意做你的股票经纪人，而不是合伙人。

即使那些所谓的免税的投资者，如养老基金和大学捐款基金，也不能逃避通货膨胀税。假设我的7%的通胀率是正确的，一个大学的司库应该把每年的前7%回报看作只是补充购买力。大学捐款基金在超越通胀前没有挣得任何东西。在7%的通胀水平，总体回报8%时，这些机构相信他们是免税的。但是，实际上他们付87.5%的“所得税”。

巴菲特：《通货膨胀如何欺诈股票投资者》（十四）

What widows don't notice

The arithmetic makes it plain that inflation is a far more devastating tax than anything that has been enacted by our legislatures. The inflation tax has a fantastic ability to simply consume capital. It makes no difference to a widow with her savings in a 5 percent passbook account whether she pays 100 percent income tax on her interest income during a period of zero inflation, or pays no income taxes during years of 5 percent inflation. Either way, she is "taxed" in a manner that leaves her no real income whatsoever. Any money she spends comes right out of capital. She would find outrageous a 120 percent income tax, but doesn't seem to notice that 6 percent inflation is the economic equivalent.

If my inflation assumption is close to correct, disappointing results will occur not because the market falls, but in spite of the fact that the market rises. At around 920 early last month, the Dow was up fifty-five points from where it was ten years ago. But adjusted for inflation, the Dow is down almost 345 points - from 865 to 520. And about half of the earnings of the Dow had to be withheld from their owners and reinvested in order to achieve even that result.

In the next ten years, the Dow would be doubled just by a combination of the 12 percent equity coupon, a 40 percent payout ratio, and the present 110 percent ratio of market to book value. And with 7 percent inflation, investors who sold at 1800 would still be considerably worse off than they are today after paying their capital-gains taxes.

I can almost hear the reaction of some investors to these downbeat thoughts. It will be to assume that, whatever the difficulties presented by the new investment era, they will somehow contrive to turn in superior results for themselves. Their success is most unlikely. And, in aggregate, of course, impossible. If you feel you can dance in and out of securities in a way that defeats the inflation tax, I would like to be your broker - but not your partner.

Even the so-called tax-exempt investors, such as pension funds and college endowment funds, do not escape the inflation tax. If my assumption of a 7 percent inflation rate is correct, a college treasurer should regard the first 7 percent earned each year merely as a replenishment of purchasing power. Endowment funds are earning nothing until they have outpaced the inflation treadmill. At 7 percent inflation and, say, overall investment returns of 8 percent, these institutions, which believe they are tax-exempt, are in fact paying "income taxes" of 87½ percent.