[2008.11.01] 世界经济：下一道防线财政政策

The economy
世界经济

The next front is fiscal
财政政策将是下一条防线

Oct 30th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Interest-rate cuts are welcome; but as a global recession looms, the case for fiscal stimulus grows
利率削减广受欢迎；但是随着全球经济衰退的袭近，财政刺激方案的需求与日俱增



THE good news is that the world seems to have dodged a catastrophic banking collapse. It is too early to know for sure-some emerging markets are in trouble and stockmarkets are behaving violently (see article). But interbank and commercial-paper markets suggest that the blind panic is abating.
似乎全球银行系统已经躲过了灾难性的崩溃，这无疑是一个好消息；不过对这个好消息进行确认似乎为时尚早–一些新兴市场仍然深陷困境，全球股市动荡不安（详见文章）。但银行同业市场和商业票据市场预示着此轮的盲目恐慌正在消失。

The bad news is that the world economy is weakening fast. Across the globe falling asset prices, tighter credit and declining confidence have left firms and consumers unable or unwilling to spend and invest. In America consumer confidence has collapsed to its lowest-ever reading (see article). In Germany the Ifo index, a gauge of business confidence, has sunk to a five-year trough. Because the downturn is now global, it is harder for exports to make up for weak domestic demand. The odds of a long, nasty recession are growing. So, too, is the case for more government action to counter weak private demand.
同时还有一个坏消息：世界经济衰弱的速度正在加快。放眼全球，资产价格下跌、信贷紧缩以及民众信心不足使公司及个人消费者无力或不愿进行消费和投资。在美国，消费者信心跌至有史以来的最低点（详见文章）。在德国，衡量商业信心的Ifo指数为5年来最低。由于目前经济衰退是全球性的，出口更加难以弥补内需不足所造成的缺口。长期、严峻的经济萧条出现的概率日益增加。因此，政府应该采取更多的举措应对羸弱的私人需求。

The usual mechanism is through interest rates. Economic orthodoxy looks to central bankers to smooth demand, because short-term interest rates are easier to calibrate than tax and spending and are controlled by technocrats rather than politicians. America’s Federal Reserve cut its policy rate by a further half point, to 1%, on October 29th. Held back by fears of inflation, Europe’s central banks have cut much less-a timidity that ought to be abandoned now that the risk of inflation is evaporating: both the European Central Bank and the Bank of England should cut rates boldly at their meetings next week.
利率调控是常用的机制。经济正统学说指望央行来消除需求障碍，因为较之税收和财政支出，短期利率更易调控，且利率杠杆掌握在技术专家官员而非政客手中。10月29日，美联储将基准利率进一步下调0.5%，降至1% 。欧洲银行担心通货膨胀，因此削减利率的幅度要小很多；现在这种胆怯行为应被抛弃，因为通胀的风险正在消失。欧洲央行和英格兰银行应该在下周会晤时大胆削减利率。

But it would be a mistake to expect too much from rate cuts. The financial system’s stresses have made them less effective, as banks hoard cash and scale back lending. And in America, at least, short-term rates have little room to fall further. So the next policy front should be fiscal (see article).
但对削减利率抱过高期望也是不对的。金融系统的压力使得它们不再行之有效，银行此时正积累现金并缩减贷款。并且至少在美国，短期利率的下调空间已经不多了。因此，下一道政策防线应是财政政策（详见文章）。

When credit markets are dysfunctional, private demand is fading and confidence weak, a fiscal jolt is a good option. Cutting taxes puts extra cash straight into people’s pockets. By stepping up their own spending, governments can directly boost demand and employment. True, stimulus increases short-term government deficits-but the fiscal damage from a prolonged slump would be greater still, as Japan showed in the 1990s. With the private sector unwilling to spend and nervous investors clamouring for safe government bonds, there is little risk of crowding out private investment.
当信贷市场功能失常、私人需求日益缩小、公众信心不足之时，财政政策的突然改变不失为一个很好的选择。减税会直接让民众的收入增加。通过增加财政支出，政府可以直接推动需求和就业。诚然，财政刺激短期内会增加政府财政赤字，不过长期经济衰退所带来的财政损失巨大，正如90 年代的日本那样。私营部门不愿支出，同时紧张的投资者正在高声呼吁更为安全的政府债券，在这种情况下，私人投资被淘汰出局的风险并不高。

Some countries have more scope for fiscal stimulus than others. Many governments in emerging markets, especially those with big external deficits, will be limited by investors’ unwillingness to hold their debt. That is why Hungary tightened its budget this week. At the other extreme lies China-with huge foreign-exchange reserves, and a current-account and budget surplus. Within the rich world, countries such as Italy, with ageing populations and high debt burdens, have less room. So, too, do those with smaller, less liquid debt markets.
不同国家实施财政刺激政策机会并不一样。很多新兴市场国家，特别是外部赤字巨大的国家，由于投资者不愿意持有该国债券而在财政刺激政策的使用上受到巨大限制。匈牙利本周紧缩预算的原因也在于此。而中国则代表着另一个极端–掌握大量外汇储备，经常项目以及预算均处于过剩状态，因此财政刺激空间较小。富裕国家，比如意大利，由于人口老龄化和高额的债务负担，实施财政刺激政策的余地也较小。还有那些债券市场较小且流动性较差的国家境遇也是如此。

America has the greatest scope for short-term stimulus, despite running the world’s biggest current-account deficit. That is because dollars and Treasuries rank as safe havens nowadays. Also, because its taxes are lower and social-safety nets less generous, America has fewer “automatic stabilisers” than Europe, where spending on unemployment benefits automatically rises further in a downturn. America’s fiscal federalism tilts in the opposite direction: most states must run balanced budgets and so cut spending in hard times. It has already had a boost worth $168 billion or just over 1% of GDP (mainly through tax rebates). Sensibly, Congress is planning another, of 1-2% of GDP, soon after the election.
尽管经常项目下的赤字水平居于世界第一，但短期刺激政策在美国的作用余地仍然最大。因为美元和美国国库是当今世人公认的避风港。同时由于美国的税收较低、社会保障体系并不是那么慷慨大方，所以较之欧洲国家，他更缺乏”自动稳定器”；欧洲国家为失业人口提供的福利支出在经济处于停滞期的时候会进一步升高。美国的财政联邦制倾向相反的方向：大部分的州必须保持预算平衡，因此在困难时期需要削减开支。美国已经得到了价值1680亿美元的支持，这相当于略多于GDP的 1%（主要是通过退税获得）。美国国会很明智，正计划在大选之后将该支持提高到GDP的1%-2%。

Europe, too, may need a fiscal stimulus before long. Spain already has a package; Germany is considering one. Britain’s Chancellor, Alistair Darling, paved the way on October 29th by scrapping the government’s old fiscal rules (see article). The next day, Japan unveiled a ¥5 trillion ($51 billion) package, much of it supposed to go directly to families and small firms.
欧洲或许不久后也需要实施财政刺激政策。西班牙已经颁布了一揽子方案；德国正在酝酿解决方法。英国财务大臣达琳在10月29日的会议上废除了政府先前的财政政策（见文章），此举也为财政刺激方案铺平了道路。次日，日本透露了价值5万亿日元（相当于510亿美元）的财政刺激一揽子措施。这些钱大部分都会流向家庭和小型公司。

Let’s get fiscal
让我们实施财政刺激政策吧

A stimulus should be timely, targeted and ideally contain credible plans for long-term fiscal health. But there are no magic recipes. Tax cuts get cash to consumers, but people may choose to save the money or spend it on imports. Government spending, say on infrastructure, might have lasting benefits, but it has a long lead time and is often wasted. Help for particular groups, such as homeowners or car firms, has political appeal and, for over-indebted homeowners, an economic logic. But, in general, helping a specific industry is a bad idea.
财政刺激举措应当适时出现，目的明确，而且要包括值得信赖的计划，以实现一国财政的长期健康效果。不过现实中没有什么神奇配方。减税可以让消费者拥有更多的现金，但是人们可能会选择把这些现金存起来，或者用于进口。类似基础设施建设投资的政府支出也许会有长效的益处，但是这种支出见效慢并且经常引发浪费现象。向房屋业主或者汽车公司这样的特殊团体提供的帮助具有政治诉求的成份，且对于深陷债务的房屋业主来说，在经济上也讲得通。不过总体来说，帮助单一特定的行业不是一个好主意。

The scale and mix of a stimulus will differ by country. In America federal aid to the states makes a lot of sense. In Europe a cut in value-added taxes would be good. China should boost social spending. So far, governments have courageously fended off financial catastrophe. The darkening outlook means that they may soon have to show fiscal courage too.
财政刺激方案的程度和组合方式会因国家而异。在美国，联邦政府对各州提供的救助就非常有意义；而在欧洲，削减增值税就更为合适；中国则应大力提升社会支出。到目前为止，各国政府都勇敢的阻击金融灾难。日益黯淡的前景意味着，或许他们不久后就必须要展现出自己在财政政策方面的果敢止处。

译者：Tidehunter   http://www.ecocn.org/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=15172&extra=page%3D1