解密美股熔断、比特币暴跌背后的疫情经济政策

London — The people who control money had hoped for so much more. The news that the world’s wealthiest countries were convening to orchestrate a response to the deadly coronavirus outbreak had resonated across economies like the sound of whirring helicopters bringing relief to a disaster zone.

伦敦——掌握金钱的人对此寄予厚望。世界上最富裕的国家召集会议，对致命的冠状病毒暴发做出反应，这个消息在各经济体中回荡着，就像直升机为灾区运送救援物资时发出的嗡嗡声。

But the relief proved underwhelming. As leaders of the Group of 7 nations ended impromptu consultations on Tuesday with only a general expression of solidarity and refrained from concrete action — no pledge to cut interest rates, no promise of coordinated government spending — they underscored an uncomfortable truth animating fears about the virus: Policymakers tasked with limiting its economic damage appear to be laboring under the assumption that their tool kit is nearly empty.

但事实证明，这些行动没多少抚慰的作用。七国集团领导人周二临时磋商结束时只是发表泛泛的团结声明，没有具体行动——没有承诺削减利率，没有承诺政府协调支出——他们突显了一个令人不快的事实，导致人们对病毒的恐惧愈发加深：负责限制病毒的经济损害的政策制定者们，似乎认为他们手上根本就没有什么可用的工具。

In Washington, the Federal Reserve followed the group’s statement with the surprise announcement that it was dropping short-term interest rates by half a percentage point, momentarily delighting stock markets. But investors soon resumed fearful selling amid the realization that cheaper money is of limited use in combating the crisis. Easier loan terms will not restart production at factories whose workers are being kept home to avoid getting or spreading the illness.

在华盛顿，美联储（Federal Reserve）紧随七国集团声明之后，出人意料地宣布将把短期利率下调0.5个百分点，一时间股市欢欣鼓舞。但投资者很快又重新开始了恐慌性抛售，因为他们意识到，更便宜的钱在抗击危机方面作用有限。即使放宽贷款条件，工厂的工人也仍然要困在家中以避免感染或传播疾病，工厂无法开工。

Governments have tools that could limit the costs, but have been reluctant to use them, economists said. They could give cash to employees whose workplaces are shut, provide credit to small businesses and offer rescue packages to industries most affected, like airlines and other tourism-related concerns.

经济学家表示，各国政府拥有能够限制损失的工具，但一直不愿使用它们。他们可以给工作场所被关闭的员工发放现金，为小企业提供信贷，并为受影响最严重的行业（如航空公司和其他旅游相关行业）提供一揽子救助计划。

Their unwillingness to take such approaches appears to reflect a widespread political aversion to increasing public debt.

他们不愿采取这些措施，这似乎反映了政界对增加公共债务的普遍反感。

In the United States, the Trump administration delivered a $1.5 trillion package of tax cuts two years ago — its benefits overwhelmingly directed at the wealthiest households and corporations — and then began warning of the need to shrink budget deficits while seeking to cut programs that provide health care and housing to poor people.

在美国，特朗普政府两年前发布了价值1.5万亿美元的一揽子减税——绝大多数好处由最富有的家庭和公司享有——然后开始警告需要减少预算赤字，并且寻求削减为穷人提供医疗和住房的计划。

In Europe, where the coronavirus has renewed worries about recession, the 19 nations that share the euro currency are restricted in how much debt they can amass.

在欧洲，冠状病毒再次引发了人们对经济衰退的担忧，欧元区的19个国家在举债方面已经多少余地。

The crisis has offered the latest glimpse of an established truth in the world’s largest economies: Public money can frequently be found for tax cuts, but then disappears into a fog of warnings about the dangers of deficits when spending for nearly anything else is discussed.

这场危机让人们再一次看到世界最大的几个经济体的一个既定事实：公共资金经常用于减税，但在讨论几乎其他所有支出时，它们就消失在有关赤字危险警告的迷雾中。

“If you don’t spend money for people put out of work with no fault of their own when there’s a clear public-health virtue in making it in workers’ interests to stay home and not spread the virus, then everything else by comparison is a complete waste,” said Adam S. Posen, a former member of the rate-setting committee at the Bank of England and now the president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

“出于明确的公共卫生原因，让工人为自己的利益留在家里，不去传播病毒，这时候，如果不为那些不是因为自己的过错而失业的人花钱，相比之下，其他一切都是彻底的浪费，”前英格兰银行利率制定委员会成员、华盛顿彼得森国际经济研究所（Peterson Institute for International Economics）所长亚当·S·波森（Adam S. Posen）说。

“We’ve got this notion that we are always overspending,” Mr. Posen continued, “but in the end we do only overspend on things for business, and for very privileged interest groups. We never spend enough for average working people.”

“我们有这样一种观念，就是我们总在超支，”波森还说，“但最终，我们只会在为企业、为特权利益集团做的事情上超支。我们从来没有为普通工人花足够的钱。”

Whatever international leaders propose, they are contending with a nasty feedback loop that appears beyond the traditional economic-policy playbook.

无论国际领导人提出什么建议，他们都要应对一个非传统经济政策手法所能应对的可怕反馈循环。

The fundamental threat to the world economy is the continued spread of the coronavirus. The outbreak initially shut down great reaches of manufacturing in China, threatening the global supply chain for a vast array of goods, from auto parts to electronics. Then it went global, assailing industry from South Korea and Japan to Italy and Germany.

对世界经济的根本威胁是冠状病毒的持续蔓延。疫情最初导致中国制造业大规模停产，威胁到从汽车零部件到电子产品等一系列商品的全球供应链。然后，它走向全球，从韩国、日本到意大利和德国，对工业造成冲击。

Desperate to limit the reach of the virus, governments have imposed quarantines, encouraged workers to stay home and generally frightened people into avoiding travel, restaurants, trade shows and other activities that run the risk of encountering other human beings. All of that has inflicted economic damage, prompting warnings of a potential global recession.

各国政府不顾一切地限制病毒的传播范围，实施隔离，鼓励工人待在家里，并广泛吓阻人们参与旅行、外出就餐、行业展会以及其他可能与他人相遇的活动。所有这些都造成了经济损失，引发了可能出现全球衰退的警告。

In seeking to limit the threat to the global economy — the spread of the virus — governments have imposed policies that have damaged the global economy.

为了限制冠状病毒传播对全球经济的威胁，各国政府实施了损害全球经济的政策。

Despite the mystical aura that seems to surround their undertakings, central banks have no magical powers to cut through this perilous state of affairs. They traditionally wield one potent tool, their influence over short-term interest rates.

尽管各国央行的行动似乎笼罩着神秘的光环，但它们并没有什么神奇的力量来突破这种危险的状态。传统上，它们使用一种强有力的工具，即它们对短期利率的影响。

When economies struggle and workers are threatened with joblessness, central banks nudge interest rates lower, making credit cheaper, encouraging businesses and households to borrow, spend and invest. That is a proven approach when trouble hits the so-called demand side of the economy — that is, when people and businesses lose their appetite to consume out of fear of some looming danger, or when wages fall and unemployment increases, diminishing spending power.

当经济陷入困境，工人面临失业威胁时，央行就会调低利率，降低信贷成本，鼓励企业和家庭借贷、消费和投资。当经济中所谓的需求面出现问题时，也就是当个人和企业因为担心潜在的危险而失去消费欲望，或者当工资下降、失业率上升、消费能力下降时，这是一种行之有效的方法。

But when the problem hits the supply side — that is, when businesses have difficulty making their goods because they cannot secure raw materials, cannot get their products to market or encounter some other impediment — cutting interest rates tends to be futile. It is like handing coupons to shoppers and sending them to a store that is closed.

但是当供应端出了问题——也就是说，当企业因无法获得原材料，无法将产品运送上市或遭受其他方面的困难而难以制造产品时——降息往往是徒劳的。这就好比发购物券给顾客，并让他们去一个关了门的商店。

As an economic event, the coronavirus episode presents an unusual combination: It is a shock to the supply and demand sides of the economy at the same time. It is limiting industrial production, sowing chaos in the supply chain, while also constraining consumer spending by making a trip to a shopping mall or a journey on an airplane feel like a reckless activity.

作为一个经济事件，这次的冠状病毒事件给我们带来一个不同寻常的组合：对经济供应端和需求端的同时冲击。它限制了工业生产，给供应端埋下混乱的种子，同时还限制了消费支出，因为去往购物中心或坐飞机都被看作是危险的行为。

At the same time, central banks are operating with limited options given that they are still positioned to fight the last great threat, the global financial crisis of 2008. From North America to Europe to Asia, central banks dropped interest rates to zero and even below in a bid to spur commerce.

与此同时，各中央银行在运作中的选项是有限的，因为它仍然还在应对上一次的重大威胁——2008年全球金融危机。从北美到欧洲到亚洲，各中央银行已将利息降至零甚至低于零以促进贸易。

In many economies, prominently Europe and Japan, rates remain in that vicinity. When rates are that low — meaning credit is cheap for anyone who can get it — dropping them further does not produce much impact.

在许多经济体中——欧洲和日本尤为明显——利率徘徊在这个范围。当利率已经如此之低——意味着信贷对于任何能获得它的人都是廉价的——继续再降并不会产生多少改变。

“Monetary policy is less effective when it’s already super loose,” said Marie Owens Thomsen, global chief economist at Indosuez Wealth Management in Geneva. “Economic theory doesn’t really give us a template for what to do.”

“如果货币政策已经过于宽松，那么它的效力就会降低，”日内瓦的东方汇理财富管理公司（Indosuez Wealth Management）全球首席经济学家玛丽·欧文斯·汤姆森（Marie Owens Thomsen）说。“经济理论并没有真正为我们提供如何应对的模板。”

The Fed appears to have taken action not out of some misplaced dream that lower interest rates are an antidote to the economic contagion, but in the hope of altering the psychology around it. The rate cut sends the message that grown-ups are looking out with concern.

美联储的降息行动似乎并不是出于某种幻想，即降息是应对传染病蔓延下的经济的良药，而是希望改变人们对此的心理反应。降息传达的信息是，掌权者正在谨慎关注。

“Fear is totally capable of causing a recession on its own,” Ms. Owens Thomsen said.

欧文斯·汤姆森说：“恐惧本身就完全可以导致衰退。”

But psychology plays multiple ways. Some saw in the Fed’s action — its first emergency rate cut since the financial crisis — a sign that matters are even worse than feared.

但是心理影响起到的作用是多种多样的。有些人把美联储的行动——自金融危机以来首次紧急降息——看作是事情比想象中更糟糕的标志。

“This move has the benefit of looking like action, but at first glance smells panicky,” Jeremy Thomson-Cook, chief economist at Equals, a money management firm in London, said in a statement. The move “could easily backfire by hinting that something extremely negative is about to come over the hill, possibly a recession.”

“此举的好处是看上去像是采取了行动，但乍一看让人感到恐慌，”伦敦的资产管理公司Equals的首席经济学家杰里米·汤姆森-库克（Jeremy Thomson-Cook）在一份声明中说。“很容易产生适得其反的效果，因为它会暗示极端负面的情形——很可能是一次经济衰退——即将来临”。

The rate cut was essentially priced into stock values. A failure to fulfill that expectation might have been taken as a sign that world authorities are impotent in the face of the outbreak.

目前的股票价值实质上已经体现了降息的效果。未能达到预期效果，可能会被视为世界各国当局在疫情暴发时无能的标志。

But lifting stock prices is not supposed to be the central bank’s concern （even as that frustrates President Trump, who touts stock market rallies while demanding lower interest rates）. Rather, the Fed is meant to seek stable prices and full employment.

但提升股价并不该是中央银行的关注点（即使这样会令吹捧股市上涨同时要求低利率的特朗普总统不爽）。相反，美联储的目标是寻求稳定价格和充分就业。

For years, prominent economists have warned that the world has become addicted to monetary policy and its crisis spawn, low interest rates, as the appropriate response for nearly every economic concern. In this view, governments must unleash the power of their budgets. They must transcend their aversion to spending money and increase taxes on wealthy people to secure the revenue to build more infrastructure and bolster government programs.

多年来有许多杰出的经济学家警告说，世界已经沉迷于货币政策，其滋生的产物——低利率——成为几乎每次经济问题的适当应对措施。根据这种观点，政府必须释放预算的力量。他们必须克服他们不愿花钱的趋向，并对富人增税以确保收入来建设更多的基础设施，巩固政府项目。

Italy, the epicenter of the outbreak in Europe, has long sought relief from the budget strictures attendant to using the euro. But that has collided with the politics of Germany, Europe’s largest and most influential economy, where a profound cultural abhorrence of debt has prompted the government to enforce budget austerity across the continent.

欧洲疫情中心意大利长期以来一直在寻求摆脱因使用欧元而产生的预算紧缩。但这与欧洲最大、最具影响力的经济体德国的政治相冲突，德国厌恶债务的文化促使德国政府在整个大陆实施预算紧缩政策。

As the members of the Group of 7 wrapped up their meeting with only broad promises to take action as needed, and as the Fed delivered the only substantial policy move in the world’s leading economy, some argued that public spending was again being neglected.

七国集团成员在会议闭幕时仅泛泛地承诺按需采取行动，而在全球主要经济体中只有美联储采取了唯一的重大政策举措，有人认为公共支出再次被忽略了。

“The tools available to the authorities are somewhat limited,” said Richard Portes, an economist at the London Business School. “But a coordinated fiscal stimulus on the expenditure side, and individually targeted at a national level, that would be a good thing.”

“当局能使用的经济工具在一定程度上受到限制，”伦敦商学院（London Business School）的经济学家理查德·波茨（Richard Portes）说。“但是在支出方面采取协调一致的财政刺激措施，并针对每个国家的情况区别对待，那会是一件好事。”

转自外刊精读优选

本文由「华尔街俱乐部」推荐，敬请关注公众号: wallstreetclub

声明：本文仅代表作者个人观点，不构成投资意见，并不代表本平台立场。文中的论述和观点，敬请读者注意判断。

版权声明：「华尔街俱乐部」除发布原创市场投研报告外，亦致力于优秀财经文章的交流分享。部分文章、图片和资料来自网络，版权归原创。推送时未能及时与原作者取得联系。若涉及版权问题，敬请原作者添加WSCHELP微信联系删除。谢谢授权使用！

华尔街俱乐部凝聚华尔街投行的高端资源，为中国民营企业“走出去”提供全方位的顾问服务，包括企业赴美上市、战略投资、并购、私募路演和投资者关系等。在投资理念和技术方面提供华尔街投行专家实战培训，为您进入华尔街铺设成功之路。