日期:2026/01/11 IAE
New Theory of Charity Economicism (V)
Who Has Stolen Your Precious Life?
Correct Economic Understanding Is the Key to Restoring Life Value
Author｜Frank Chen
Founder of GCEDB
GCWPA Think Tank / IAE Global
22 December 2017
(Global Online Publication, NPO)
一、問題的核心：被偷走的不是金錢，而是生命
I. The Core Problem: What Is Taken Is Not Money, but Life
中
在現代社會中，人們往往以為自己承受的只是價格上漲、所得不足或競爭壓力，卻忽略了一個更根本的事實：
真正被偷走的，是人類最寶貴的「生命價值」。
這種剝奪並非來自單一個人，而是來自一套長期被視為理所當然的經濟理論與制度。
EN
In modern society, people often believe that what they endure are merely rising prices, insufficient income, or competitive pressure. Yet they overlook a far more fundamental reality:
what is truly being taken away is human life value itself.
This deprivation is not caused by any single individual, but by an economic theory and institutional structure long regarded as “normal.”
二、慈善經濟主義的基本定性
II. Fundamental Definition of Charity Economicism
中
慈善經濟主義，本質上是一種利他主義的經濟學。
其核心在於重新界定市場供需、均衡價格與需求量的形成邏輯，並指出傳統經濟學忽略了一個關鍵自變數：社會成本（Social Cost, SC）。
EN
Charity Economicism is, in essence, an altruistic economic theory.
It redefines the formation of supply, demand, equilibrium price, and quantity by identifying a critical variable long ignored by conventional economics: social cost (SC).
三、社會成本（SC）的制度性內涵
III. The Institutional Meaning of Social Cost (SC)
中
社會成本不僅是抽象的外部性，而是必須由公權力機構進行微觀估計與制度承擔的真實成本，包括：
-
消費者的生命與健康風險
-
股東、競爭者與供應商的生存機會成本
-
長期生活品質下降的會計成本
-
對社會安全與未來世代的結構性損耗
因此，慈善經濟主義下的市場需求函數應修正為：
Q = F(SC, other factors constant)。
EN
Social cost is not an abstract externality, but a real cost that must be institutionally estimated and addressed by public authority, including:
-
Risks to consumers’ life and health
-
Opportunity costs affecting shareholders, competitors, and suppliers
-
Accounting costs related to long-term deterioration of quality of life
-
Structural damage to social safety and future generations
Accordingly, the market demand function under Charity Economicism should be reformulated as:
Q = F(SC, ceteris paribus).
四、當代資本主義的結構性不正義
IV. Structural Injustice of Contemporary Capitalism
中
在現行全球資本主義體系中，一個被系統性忽視的事實是：
幾乎所有經濟活動產生的社會成本，最終都由消費者單方面吸收。
在自利性價格理論主導下：
-
規模經濟被合理化
-
消費者剩餘被系統性剝削
-
身心傷害被視為無形、不可歸責
其結果是市場失靈與所得分配的結構性不平等。
EN
Under the current global capitalist system, a critically overlooked fact persists:
nearly all social costs generated by economic activities are ultimately borne by consumers alone.
Driven by self-interest-based price theory:
-
Economies of scale are justified
-
Consumer surplus is systematically extracted
-
Physical and psychological harm remains invisible and unaccountable
The outcome is both market failure and structural income inequality.
五、現實案例：被外包的生命代價
V. Real-World Cases: Outsourced Life Costs
中
這種不正義在現實中極為明顯，例如：
-
造紙業造成的森林砍伐
-
早期汽機車無環保裝置的大量生產
-
工業霧霾對人類健康的長期傷害
多數消費者承受無形傷害甚至提早死亡，而工商資本卻僅付出極低代價。
EN
Such injustice is evident in real-world cases, including:
-
Deforestation caused by the paper industry
-
Early mass production of vehicles without emission controls
-
Long-term health damage from industrial smog
Consumers bear invisible harm and premature death, while industrial capital pays minimal cost.
六、文明層級的批判
VI. A Civilizational Critique
中
因此，我提出一項文明層級的批判：
在自利價格理論主導下的現代資本主義，已構成制度性的道德失序。
這不只是經濟失靈，而是文明危機。
人類在無意識中，成為一套不為生命負責制度的執行者。
EN
Thus, a civilizational critique must be made:
modern capitalism governed by self-interest-based price theory represents institutional moral disorder.
This is not merely economic failure, but a civilizational crisis, in which humanity unconsciously becomes an executor of systems that deny responsibility for life.
七、結論：重新奪回生命的經濟位置
VII. Conclusion: Restoring Life to Its Economic Position
中
在人類以資本主義為主導的生活與生存結構中，生命長期被低估、外包與犧牲。
慈善經濟主義的提出，正是為了重新奪回生命在經濟體系中應有的核心地位。
EN
Under capitalism-dominated modes of living and survival, human life has long been undervalued, outsourced, and sacrificed.
Charity Economicism seeks to restore life to its rightful central position within the economic system.
UN 官方可用引文（推薦）
「誰偷走了你的生命？不是某一個人，而是一套不為生命負責的經濟制度。」
— 陳俊吉，《慈善經濟主義新論（五）》
“What has stolen your life is not an individual, but an economic system that refuses responsibility for life.”
— Frank Chen, New Theory of Charity Economicism (V)