AT&T有更多快乐

受到成功的鼓舞，一些公用事业公司设计出了进一步的捷径。公司宣布分红，股东交税，然后马上增发新股。虽然没有现金交易，但对股东的损害一如既往。

比如AT&T在1973年推出了一个分红再投资计划。这个公司一定被描述成非常为股东利益着想。采用这种计划，按照通常的财务做法，也一定被认为是可以理解的。但是，计划的内容却好似来自于艾利斯漫游仙境中一样神奇。

1976年，AT&T给约290万普通股东支付了23亿美金的现金分红。在年底，64万8千股东（上一年是60万1千）再投资了4亿3千2百万美金（上一年是3亿2千7百万美金）购买公司直接增发的股份。

让我们假定所有的AT&T股东都最终加入这个计划。在这种情况下，不会有现金寄给股东。这就像Con Ed一样不付现金分红。但是，290万股东中的每个人都应该注意到，他应该为这种被改称做“分红”的存留盈利交所得税。假定“分红”总额为23亿美金，1976年股东平均交30%的税。由于这个伟大的计划，股东最后要交7亿3千万美金给税务局。如果公司董事们决定把分红增加一倍，想象一下在这种情况下，股东该有多欢乐。

政府将试着投资

随着公司在真实资本积累问题上的挣扎，我们将会看到更多伪装起来的减少分红的做法。但是从股东那里截流不会完全解决问题。7%的通胀率和12%的回报率加在一起，会减少公司赖以支持真实增长的资本。

所以，当传统的私人资本积累方式在通胀条件下失效，我们的政府将会更多的尝试影响资本向工业的流动。这样做可能像英格兰一样失败，也可能像日本一样成功。但是美国缺少日本式积极的政、商、劳工结合所必须的文化和历史基础。如果我们幸运，我们会避免重蹈英格兰的覆辙。在英格兰，所有的各方争夺自己的份额，而不是合力把蛋糕做大。

总的来讲，在未来一些年，我们会听到更多有关投资不足、滞胀和私人部门无法满足需求的失败的事情。

全文完

More joy at AT&T

Encouraged by such success, some utilities have devised a further shortcut. In this case, the company declares the dividend, the shareholder pays the tax, and - presto - more shares are issued. No cash changes hands, although the spoilsport as always, persists in treating the transaction as if it had.

AT&T, for example, instituted a dividend-reinvestment program in 1973. This company, in fairness, must be described as very stockholder-minded, and its adoption of this program, considering the folkways of finance, must be regarded as totally understandable. But the substance of the program is out of Alice in Wonderland.

In 1976, AT&T paid $2.3 billion in cash dividends to about 2.9 million owners of its common stock. At the end of the year, 648,000 holders (up from 601,000 the previous year) reinvested $432 million (up from $327 million) in additional shares supplied directly by the company.

Just for fun, let's assume that all AT&T shareholders ultimately sign up for this program. In that case, no cash at all would be mailed to shareholders - just as when Con Ed passed a dividend. However, each of the 2.9 million owners would be notified that he should pay income taxes on his share of the retained earnings that had that year been called a "dividend". Assuming that "dividends" totaled $2.3 billion, as in 1976, and that shareholders paid an average tax of 30 percent on these, they would end up, courtesy of this marvelous plan, paying nearly $730 million to the IRS. Imagine the joy of shareholders, in such circumstances, if the directors were then to double the dividend.

The government will try to do it

We can expect to see more use of disguised payout reductions as business struggles with the problem of real capital accumulation. But throttling back shareholders somewhat will not entirely solve the problem. A combination of 7 percent inflation and 12 percent returns with reduce the stream of corporate capital available to finance real growth.

And so, as conventional private capital-accumulation methods falter under inflation, our government will increasingly attempt to influence capital flows to industry, either unsuccessfully as in England or successfully as in Japan. The necessary cultural and historical underpinning for a Japanese-style enthusiastic partnership of government, business, and labor seems lacking here. If we are lucky, we will avoid following the English path, where all segments fight over division of the pie rather than pool their energies to enlarge it.

On balance, however, it seems likely that we will hear a great deal more, as the years unfold about underinvestment, stagflation, and the failures of the private sector to fulfill needs.

About Warren Buffett

The author is, in fact, one of the most visible stock-market investors in the U.S. these days. He's had plenty to invest for his own account ever since he made $25 million running an investment partnership during the 1960's. Buffett Partnership Ltd., based in Omaha, was an immensely successful operation, but he nevertheless closed up shop at the end of the decade. A January, 1970, FORTUNE article explained his decision: "he suspects that some of the juice has gone out of the stock market and that sizable gains in the future are going to be very hard to come by."

Buffett, who is now forty-six and still operating out of Omaha, has a diverse portfolio. He and businesses he controls have interests in over thirty public corporations. His major holdings: Berkshire Hathaway (he owns about $35 million worth) and Blue Chip Stamps (about $10 million). His visibility, recently increased by a Wall Street Journal profile, reflects his active managerial role in both companies, both of which invest in a wide range of enterprises; one is the Washington Post.

And why does a man who is gloomy about stocks own so much stock? "Partly, it's habit," he admits. "Partly, it's just that stocks mean business, and owning businesses is much more interesting than owning gold or farmland. Besides, stocks are probably still the best of all the poor alternatives in an era of inflation - at least they are if you buy in at appropriate prices."