海外之声｜英国前首相经济顾问：目前通货膨胀形势为哪般（中英双语）

观点速递

本文作者是布莱恩·雷丁，曾任英国前首相爱德华·希思经济顾问，现为货币金融机构官方论坛（OMFIF）顾问委员会委员。原文摘自国际货币金融机构官方论坛（OMFIF）评论，OMFIF是一家总部位于伦敦的全球金融智库。

作者提出，通货膨胀分为需求拉动型和成本推动型。随着社会文化的发展和人口结构与各时代的财政货币政策同时发生变化，通货膨胀的类型也在不断转变。最后作者认为目前的形势与上一期长期熊市存在代际间的相似，存在的问题都是如何抵御成本推动型通货膨胀。

中文译文如下：

熊市面临滞涨的风险

代沟和成本推动型通货膨胀

布莱恩·雷丁

翻译：潘松岑

校对：肖柏高

据英国国家统计署报道，与上一年相比，2015年女性死亡率增加了5%，男性死亡率增加了3%。尽管人们将矛头指向国民保健制度与社会护理，称其在老年人可享受的经费方面有所削减，但统计数字表明，通货膨胀和债券市场的趋势已出现拐点，这将产生长期影响。早期债券的牛市即将结束。而由于滞涨可能在20世纪20年代末再次出现，新时期债券的熊市也可能因此变得持久——这给政府带来了棘手的政策困境。

通货膨胀既可能是需求拉动型，也可能是成本推动型。周期性的通胀属于需求拉动型。当需求超过潜在产出并且／或者失业率低于非加速通货膨胀失业率时，通胀率就会上升。《经济学人》杂志副主编诺曼·麦克雷（Norman Macrae）最近称需求拉动型通货膨胀为“过多的货币追逐过少的商品”。米尔顿·弗里德曼（Milton Friedman）则坚持自己最为著名的那条格言“无论何时何地，通货膨胀都是一种货币现象。”

过高的通货膨胀总是可以通过限制货币供应来阻止,这是一个老生常谈的赘述,也称为“货币数量论”。它适用于需求拉动型通货膨胀。但是当用于应对成本推动型通货膨胀时,它就进退维谷。到底是放任通胀发生以保障就业，还是该阻止通胀高涨，但不得不忍受失业率上升？

成本推动型通货膨胀是长期的。这是由于太多需要领取救济金者追求太少的收入造成 45 33868 45 15231 0 0 2198 0 0:00:15 0:00:06 0:00:09 2861的。在需求周期的每个高峰和低谷,通货膨胀和失业率较高。成本推动型通货膨胀会挤出最弱势的领取救济金者,这抑制了消费和投资。并会导致增长放缓和失业率上升。

成本推动型通货膨胀会导致长期熊市和较为短期的牛市债券市场。随着通胀率达到历史新高,上世纪70年代出现了最为漫长的熊市。上世纪50年代中期,出现了不断要求增加收入的呼声,政府开支占名义GDP的比例上升。低失业率,特别是与上世纪30年代相比,加强了劳动力议价能力。

最初的成本压力来自国内。随后由于1970年第一次石油价格暴涨和布雷顿森林固定汇率体系瓦解而加重。储户和利润遭受损失。除德国外,政策制定者们最初都选择选择通胀以保障就业。凯恩斯主义财政政策缓解了货币主义者强制性的货币紧缩,直至创纪录的失业率抑制了通货膨胀。

全球化产生的影响延长了随后债券市场的牛市。中国的开放以及共产主义思想的退让提供了更多廉价劳动力,也压低了产品价格,进而导致全球储蓄过剩。,它和技术进步这两个因素一起重新平衡国际劳工成本。

发达经济体的非技术工人却因此处境艰难。不再需要文职人员。量化宽松政策和创纪录的低利率导致过多信贷追逐过多商品。资产价格通胀可以补救产品价格的紧缩,但却要以增加不平等为代价。需求拉动型通货膨胀暂时取代了成本推动型通货紧缩,给将来的正常化造成障碍。

最近的一项变化趋势是死亡率有所上升。人口预测将会修改,需要赡养的老人对年轻劳动力的比例也在增加。死亡率上升反映了生活方式的改变以及底层员工面临的经济和心理压力。据英国医学会报道,四分之三的心脏病患者缺乏运动。约有2000万英国人没有运动习惯。大量的垃圾食品也使得情况加剧。

更少的年轻劳动力正在赡养更多的“懒惰劳力”。年长的这代人（人数更多，政治权利更大）、要求增加在公共卫生、福利和养老金方面的公共开支,力求这些开支的增加赶超物价上升幅度。数量相对较少劳动力要求保护工资收入份额。与上一个长期熊市初期时的情况一样,需要领取救济金者的人数太多，而他们可供他们争抢的收入又过少。

英文原文如下：

Bear market risks stagflation

Generation gap and cost-push inflation

by Brian Reading in London

Fri 7 Apr 2017

The ultimate objective of central banks is to increase the welfare of people through designing and implementing monetary and financial regulatory policies. This mandate is captured in different ways in central bank laws. Within the framework of these laws, many of which justifiably set down the doctrine of central bank independence, it's time to consider again the idea of monetary financing of government deficits. As long as this is not practiced excessively, and is carried out as part of agreed co-operation between the central bank and the fiscal authorities, monetary financing has a valid role in promoting growth and employment during downturns.

Some central banks have multiple objectives, like the Federal Reserve, which is required to 'promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates'. No matter how the objectives are written in the primary legislation, central banks must support growth and employment, even if they are primarily pursuing the objective of price stability. Maintaining a prudent balance between these objectives is difficult, shown in many countries' post-2008 experience.

Coordination between monetary and fiscal authorities is crucial, yet this has become weaker with the modern approach to central banks as independent institutions. However, independence in no way precludes such useful co-operation.

The shift to central bank independence was motivated partly by the need to set safe limits on monetary financing of deficits. Unfortunately, post-second world war thinking has progressed to the stage where all monetary financing has been labelled as an evil, to be opposed whatever the circumstances.

It is true that excessive monetary financing has caused hyperinflation in many countries: Germany and Yugoslavia in the 20th century and Zimbabwe in the 21st century are examples. Japan, on the other hand, successfully followed this path in the early 1930s to fight depression.

One possible reason why quantitative easing in Europe and Japan has failed to lift inflation and growth is that the share of (non-debt-creating) monetary financing in total QE is low. In line with the current central bank role as banker to the government, monetary financing results in the accumulation of public debt. However, according to James Buchanan, 1986 Nobel Prize winner in economics, 'The efficient means of purchasing the services of unemployed resources is through inflation of the currency'. Buchanan proposed creating money without increasing the liability of a central bank. This would be controlled by the way resources are transferred to fiscal authorities for undertaking employment-generating development expenditures, and without increasing public debt.

This can be done if government becomes the issuer of currency and the central bank becomes the distributor. Under the existing system, banknotes are issued by central banks, which become their liabilities backed by financial assets like Treasury bills and government bonds that raise public debt. If governments directly issue all denominations of currency notes, these will become assets of central banks, since central banks must purchase these from governments. This mechanism will provide direct nominal seigniorage revenue to the government, instead of increasing government debt.

This approach to financing fiscal deficits is out of fashion, especially in advanced countries. But it is not new. Keynes acknowledged this in A Tract on Monetary Reform in 1923 in these words: 'The method is condemned, but its efficacy, up to a point, must be admitted.'

These important signals cannot be ignored. We need new research to estimate Keynes' 'point' up to which monetary financing is not only harmless, but beneficial. And then we need central banks and governments which are willing to defy convention and implement policies that could help promote growth and jobs at a difficult time for the global economy.

Brian Reading was an Economic Adviser to Prime Minister Edward Heath and is a Member of the OMFIF Advisory Board.

观点整理  田雯

图文编辑  田雯

点击查看近期热文

欢迎加入群聊

为了增进与粉丝们的互动，IMI财经观察将建立微信交流群，欢迎大家参与。

入群方法：加群主为微信好友（微信号：imi605）,添加时备注个人姓名（实名认证）、单位、职务等信息，经群主审核后，即可被拉进群。

欢迎读者朋友多多留言与我们交流互动，推荐好文章可联系：邮箱[e-mail]；电话[phone]

关于我们

中国人民大学国际货币研究所（IMI）成立于2009年12月20日，是专注于货币金融理论、政策与战略研究的非营利性学术研究机构和新型专业智库。研究所聘请了来自国内外科研院所、政府部门或金融机构的80余位著名专家学者担任顾问委员、学术委员和国际委员，70余位中青年专家担任研究员。

研究所长期聚焦国际金融、宏观经济理论与政策、金融科技、财富管理、金融监管、地方金融等领域，定期举办高层次系列论坛或讲座，形成了《人民币国际化报告》《金融机构国际化报告》《中国财富管理报告》《金融科技二十讲》等一大批具有重要学术和政策影响力的产品。

2016年，研究所入围《中国智库大数据报告》影响力榜单列高校智库第4位，并在“中国经济类研究机构市场价值排行榜（2016）”中名列第32位。

国际货币网：www.imi.org.cn

微信号：IMI财经观察

（点击识别下方二维码关注我们）

只分享最有价值的财经视点

We only share the most valuable financial insights.