美國需要再來一場金融危機(jī)
|
????在大約一個(gè)世紀(jì)前，威爾遜當(dāng)政時(shí)期的美國副總統(tǒng)托馬斯?馬歇爾聽厭了參議員們無休止地談?wù)撨@個(gè)國家的各種需要，于是說了一句讓他不朽的話：“這個(gè)國家需要的是五分錢一支的好雪茄?！比缃?，當(dāng)喋喋不休地說廢話已經(jīng)成為整個(gè)國家的政治消遣時(shí)，讓我把馬歇爾1917年的話改編一下：這個(gè)國家需要的是一場真正的五級(jí)金融危機(jī)，否則還會(huì)繼續(xù)處于一盤散沙狀態(tài)。 ????我的意思是，看看周圍的情況。自從金融危機(jī)爆發(fā)以來，政府做出的唯一真正的改變還是由恐慌引起的。（當(dāng)然美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)不斷努力促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇的行動(dòng)除外，雖然它的一些行動(dòng)也可能是因?yàn)槭苷`導(dǎo)而祭出的。）在2008年9月28日，美國國會(huì)下議院駁回了不良資產(chǎn)救助計(jì)劃（Troubled Asset Relief Program），導(dǎo)致道指暴跌778點(diǎn)，這才使下議院嚇得不得不通過這個(gè)后來在恢復(fù)信心和維護(hù)金融系統(tǒng)穩(wěn)定方面起到關(guān)鍵作用的計(jì)劃。 ????預(yù)算自動(dòng)減支涵蓋的所有內(nèi)容中，只有關(guān)于美國聯(lián)邦航空管理局（FAA）的預(yù)算削減和食品安檢人員臨時(shí)下崗的措施得到修改，前者引發(fā)嚴(yán)重的航班延誤使政客們被迫采取措施改進(jìn)，后者由于肉禽行業(yè)的聲援而得以修訂。自動(dòng)減支根本是不經(jīng)思考的經(jīng)濟(jì)白癡行為。要知道，自動(dòng)減支的前提是假設(shè)人們愿意不惜一切避免這一愚蠢且破壞性的方案，是為了解決2011年債務(wù)上限而設(shè)立的“末日”工具。如今這個(gè)工具已然被動(dòng)用了。 ????現(xiàn)在，我們卻在兩年內(nèi)第三次面臨債務(wù)上限的戲碼。前面的兩次由共和黨表演——2011年夏季和2012年末——他們毀壞了國家的財(cái)政信譽(yù)，自己也沒有得到什么明顯的好處。我不明白為什么他們覺得第三次就能有起色。比起民主黨（我的前前政黨），共和黨（我的前政黨）更應(yīng)對(duì)這場國家僵局負(fù)責(zé)。但民主黨也不值得表揚(yáng)。 ????以預(yù)算赤字為例，這一數(shù)額正在急速縮減。許多民主黨人宣稱勝利，說一切都走向正確的方向，沒必要再減少社會(huì)保障、聯(lián)邦醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)（Medicare）和醫(yī)療補(bǔ)助（Medicaid）計(jì)劃的預(yù)算增長，一切都在掌握之中。但如果去看無黨派立場的國會(huì)預(yù)算辦公室（Congressional Budget Office）最近的分析，你就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)從長遠(yuǎn)來說，美國還遠(yuǎn)未走出困境。 ????預(yù)算赤字減少，一部分是由于今年生效的更高稅率，另一部分歸功于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長。但赤字減少的很大一部分原因來自于即將消失的一次性項(xiàng)目，比如一些公司將2013年的部分股息和紅利提前計(jì)入上一年讓受益人規(guī)避1月份的漲稅，從而使得今年所得稅征收增長。另一個(gè)因素是國債收益率低于此前預(yù)期。但這一情況不會(huì)永遠(yuǎn)持續(xù)，因?yàn)槊缆?lián)儲(chǔ)已經(jīng)開始警告市場未來會(huì)加息。 |
????Almost a century ago Thomas Marshall, Woodrow Wilson's Vice President, got tired of listening to senators blather on about the nation's needs and uttered the words that made him immortal: "What this country needs is a good five-cent cigar." Today, with 24/7 blathering as our national political pastime, let me adapt Marshall's 1917 remark: What this country needs to get its act together is a good five-alarm financial crisis. ????I mean, look around. Except for the Federal Reserve, which has consistently tried to help the economy, misguided though some of its actions may be, about the only real changes our government has made since the onset of the financial crisis were induced by fear. The Troubled Asset Relief Program, which played a vital role in restoring confidence and stability to the financial system, was passed only because the House's rejection of it on Sept. 28, 2008, set off a 778-point plummet in the Dow. That scared the House into reversing itself. ????The only parts of the budget sequester -- an exercise in economic idiocy -- that have been modified are the FAA's cutbacks that caused air-travel delays bad enough to scare politicians into action and the food inspectors who were rescued after the meat and poultry industry spoke out in support of them. The sequester, remember, was a doomsday device created to resolve the debt-ceiling crisis in 2011, on the assumption that sequestration was so stupid and damaging that people would do anything to keep it at bay. Yet here it is. ????Now, for the third time in two years, we're dealing with a debt-ceiling drama. The previous two times Republicans played this game -- the summer of 2011 and year-end 2012 -- they damaged the country's financial credibility for no discernible gain to themselves. Why they think the third time will be the charm is beyond me. I blame the Republicans (my former party) more than I blame the Democrats (my previous former party) for our national gridlock. But the Democrats are no prizes either. ????Take the budget deficit, which is shrinking rapidly. Many Democrats are declaring victory, saying that everything is heading in the right direction; there's no need to cut the growth of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid; it's all under control. But if you read the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's recent analysis, you see that everything is far from fine for the long term. ????Part of the deficit decline comes from the higher tax rates that went into effect this year, and part from the economy's growth. But a good part of the shrinkage is from one-time items that will disappear, such as an increase in this year's income-tax collections because companies accelerated some 2013 dividends and bonuses into last year so recipients could avoid the Jan. 1 tax increases. Another factor is the lower-than-previously-projected interest rates on the national debt. But they won't last indefinitely, because the Fed has already begun warning markets of future rate increases. |
最新文章