一定要成功！

The world economy

 

 

 

Nov 13th 2008
From The Economist print edition

 

 

IT IS tempting to dismiss the upcoming G20 meeting as a piece of political theatre. Presidents and prime ministers from a score of rich and emerging economies will descend on Washington, DC, ostensibly to remake the rules of global finance. Several have talked grandly of a sequel to the 1944 Bretton Woods conference, which created the post-war system of fixed exchange rates and established the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. That is nonsense. The original Bretton Woods lasted three weeks and was preceded by more than two years of technical preparation. Today’s crisis may be the gravest since the Depression, but global finance will not be remade in a five-hour powwow hosted by a lame-duck president after less preparation than many corporate board meetings. Yet for three reasons it is still a meeting worth having.

 

人们很想把（不禁会把）即将举行的20国集团金融峰会贬低为一场政治演出。许多发达和新兴国家的总统（主席）和总理将云集华盛顿首府，表面上这些领导人准备重新制定全球金融体系的规则。有些人甚至已经夸下海口，声称此次峰会将成为布雷顿森林会议的延续。布雷顿森林会议于1944年召开，会议制定了战后固定汇率体系，并成立了国际货币基金组织和世界银行。那纯属无稽之谈。先前的布雷顿森林会议持续了三个星期，并且是在长达两年的技术准备后召开的。眼下的危机或许是自大萧条以来最严重的一场危机，美国的跛脚总统举行的五个小时的商谈会议，比许多公司的董事会准备得还不充分，因此要奢望在这短短的五个小时之内重新制定全球金融体系是不可能的。然而，此次峰会还是有意义的，原因有三。

 

The first is that this could mark the beginning of a better multilateral economic system. The G20, created after the emerging-market crises a decade ago, is not perfect for today’s problems. It excludes a big economy with an admired system of financial regulation (Spain) but includes a mid-sized country that has become irrelevant to global finance because of its own mismanagement (Argentina). Still, the G20 includes most of the key parts of the rich and emerging world, making it a better forum for global economic co-operation than the G7 group of rich countries, which has until now held the stage.

 

第一个理由就是这场峰会可能将开启一个更好的多方经济体系。成立于10年前新兴国家那场危机后的20国集团不是解决眼下问题的良方。20国集团把西班牙这个较大的且拥有令人羡慕的金融规范体系的经济体拒之门外，却招进来了阿根廷这个因为自身的错误管理而变得与全球金融毫无相关的中型面积国家。然而，20国集团还是包括了大部分重要的发达国家和新兴国家，这使得它成为比至今依然控制世界舞台的七国集团更为完善的全球经济合作论坛。

 

 

 

In the short term that co-operation, and this weekend’s meeting, should focus on the second good reason for the Washington summit: crisis management. Although the panic in the credit markets shows signs of abating, the economic news gets ever grimmer. Global demand is slumping as rich economies plunge into what, collectively, could be their deepest recession since the 1930s. Pernicious deflation, though still unlikely, is no longer an idle risk (see article). Emerging economies are being hit hard by weakening exports and the collapse of private capital flows. The G20 summiteers cannot prevent this, but they can stave off a slump with zealous and co-ordinated action to prop up domestic demand and provide resources to cash-strapped emerging economies.

 

在短期内，前面提到的合作和本周末的会议应该把精力放在召开华盛顿峰会的第二个理由上：危机管理。尽管信用市场上的恐慌呈现消退的迹象，经济前景却变得更加暗淡。随着富裕国家一起陷入一场可能是自20世纪30年代以来的最严重的经济衰退中，全球需求正急剧下滑。尽管出现恶性通货紧缩的可能性仍然不大，但不意味着毫无风险。新兴的经济体正因出口的日益削弱和私人资本流动的奔溃而遭受严重的打击。20国集团的与会者无法阻止这一切，但他们可以通过采取积极一致的行动来刺激国内消费，为那些手头紧的新兴国家提供资源，从而暂时避免经济萎靡。

 

Some countries understand the urgency. China’s stimulus plan, even if it is a little less dramatic than first trumpeted, is an important step (see article). Others, such as Germany, are being woefully timid (see article). A collective commitment by those who can afford it will pack more punch than individual initiatives. Useful too, would be a pledge to cushion the slump in private capital flows to emerging economies, through both central-bank swap lines and the IMF. Countries with ample reserves, particularly China, Japan and the oil exporters, should promise now, and without preconditions, that they will lend to the IMF if it needs cash in the coming months. The G20 should also pledge its unequivocal support for free trade—a pledge that would gain credence if the leaders made a commitment to complete the Doha round of trade talks.

 

一些国家领悟到了紧迫感。中国出台的经济刺激方案尽管不如起初宣扬的那么激动人心，却迈出了重要的一步。而其他国家，如德国，还在瞻前顾后。有能力的国家集体承诺并行动比个别国家采取的单独行动要有力得多。同时通过央行间的互换限额和国际货币基金组织来承诺为流向新兴经济体的私有资本流动的剧减提供缓冲也有利于新兴国家。那些拥有丰富的外汇储备的国家，特别是中国，日本和那些石油出口国，眼下应该毫无条件地答应如果接下来的几个月里国际货币基金组织需要现金时将慷慨解囊。另外，20国集团应保证将毫不含糊地支持自由贸易—如果各国领导承诺完成多哈回合贸易谈判的话，这一保证将变得更加可信。

 

But what of the larger ambitions of “fixing” global finance? Here the temptation for hollow promises is greatest of all (see article). The summiteers can make progress, but only if they temper their hyperbole with realism and humility.

 

但是如果更加大刀阔斧地修正全球金融的话又会怎样呢？最有可能的就是陷入夸夸其谈。金融峰会的与会者只有实际和谦逊来调和他们的夸大之词才能取得进展。

 

International finance cannot just be “fixed”, because the system is a tug-of-war between the global capital markets and national sovereignty. As cross-border financial flows have expanded and big financial institutions have far outgrown their domestic markets, finance has become one of the most globalised parts of the world economy. At the same time, finance is inherently unstable, so the state has to play a big role in making it safer by lending in a crisis in return for regulation and oversight. Governments broadly welcome the benefits of global finance, yet they are not prepared to set up either a global financial regulator, which would interfere deep inside their markets, or a global lender of last resort. Instead, regulated financial firms are overseen by disparate national supervisors (in America they are sometimes state-based). The IMF helps cash-strapped countries, but the fund was conceived in an era when capital flows were restrained. It is puny relative to the size of global markets today.

 

国际金融体系不可能一下子就确立起来，因为该体系是全球资本市场和国家主权之间的一场拔河。随着跨境资本流动的扩张以及大的金融机构的发展已经超出其国内需求，金融已成为经济全球化最明显的部分之一。同时，金融本身就不稳定，所以政府得发挥其重要的作用，通过引进危机来换取规范和监督使之更加安全。全球金融体系的利益得到了各国政府的广泛欢迎，但它们却没准备好要确立一个全球金融规范者深入其市场进行干预，或是一个能够在最后关头伸出援助之手的全球放贷者。相反，规范的金融公司接受各自国家监管人的监督（在美国这些金融机构有时是国有的）。国际货币基金组织援助那些缺乏现金的国家，但这些资金却产生于一个资本流动受限制的时代。相对于当今全球市场的规模来说，这比资金是微不足道的。

 

This tug-of-war helped create today’s mess. Disparate rules led to loopholes and “regulatory arbitrage”. Many emerging economies sought to protect themselves against sudden outflows of foreign capital by building up vast foreign-exchange reserves. That fuelled the global credit bubble. Given today’s crisis, the incentives to amass reserves have only grown.

 

这场拔河之争造成了今日混乱的局面。五花八门的规则使得各国金融市场漏洞百出并且导致了“监管套利”。许多新兴的经济体通过积累巨大的外汇储备来抵御外资突然撤离来带的风险。这无疑又助长了全球的信用泡沫。鉴于目前的经济危机，各国增加外汇储备的动机只会愈发加强。

 

The contradictory desires for national sovereignty and global capital markets limit the room for an overhaul. For all the grand rhetoric, no politician is proposing to cede sovereignty to a global regulator, let alone create a true global lender of last resort. Nor is anyone proposing a wholesale effort to curb capital flows (which is just as well). With no great design on the drawing board, it is better to concentrate on the more modest goal of improving the current muddled contraption through a series of politically feasible enhancements that together could amount to a third justification for this meeting.

 

维护国家和建立全球资本市场这两种欲望互相抵触，导致了金融改革的空间受限。尽管政客们嘴上功夫了得，他们当中没有一个愿意将国家主权拱手让给一位全球监管者，更不用说确立一个紧急贷款者。也没有一个人提出遏制基本流动的整套措施（这同时也是个可行的办法）。在伟大的方案还没设计出来的情况下，我们应该把精力放在更加适当可行的目标上，那就是通过一系列政治上可行的增强其功能来改善目前混乱的系统。

 

 

 

One example is Gordon Brown’s idea of a “college of supervisors” to oversee the biggest financial firms. Another is a global set of norms on what should be regulated and how: from hedge funds to leverage limits, national regulators would do a better job if they acted in concert. By all means start to look at schemes to revamp the IMF by scaling back Europe’s presence and enhancing emerging economies’ clout. But it would be a mistake to rely only on the IMF. The Fed’s new swap lines with other central banks are an important reassurance for countries that face a liquidity squeeze; those swap lines deserve to be systematised and broadened.

 

举个例子，戈登布朗提出建立“督查院”来监督那些最大型的金融公司。另外一个例子就是制定一套的全球规范，规定要管什么和应该怎么管：从对冲基金到杠杆极限，如果互相合作的话，各国监管者的工作将会更加完善。目前要尽一切办法研究重组国际货币基金组织的方案，减少欧洲的席位而增加新兴经济体的影响力。如果仅仅依靠国际货币基金组织，那就错了。美联储和其他央行新开通的互换限额对那些面临流动性紧缩的国家来说是件令人宽心的事；那些互换限额应该变得更加系统和广泛。

 

Modest as they sound, such repairs will be difficult and time-consuming. This summit should get them off to a start. It won’t earn anyone a place in the history books alongside John Maynard Keynes and Harry Dexter White. But it would be a lot more useful than more gusts of grandiose rhetoric.

 

尽管这些措施看起来比较适度，但修复过程将会艰巨又耗时。此次峰会应尽快将这些措施付诸实践。该峰会不会使任何人与凯恩斯和怀特一起被载入史册，但总比大放阙词要有意义的多。