Ready, aim, fire. Hank Paulson used that bazooka after all. The US government's decision to place Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into “conservatorship” came without a specific cause – such as a failed debt refinancing – but rather a sense they were both failing to provide affordable mortgage debt while also threatening to upend the US financial system. The looming election, combined with increasing reluctance by foreign central banks to buy US mortgage-backed paper, may also have helped prompt his early intervention.

The government is using a belt and braces to hold up the show – and, most important, to get US mortgage rates down. It will recapitalise the government-sponsored enterprises by gradually buying preferred stock – a plan that will also massively dilute all existing shareholders. It will lend the GSEs what they need to continue, while slowly winding down their operations. And it will buy their mortgage-backed securities directly itself. All this is bullish for credit markets. As for the future structure of the US mortgage market – that is a problem for the next guy.

How much might it cost taxpayers? The Treasury can inject as much as $100bn into each GSE to help support their combined $5,400bn portfolio of bonds – although it is unlikely to need to do so. It may even make a profit from the GSE mortgage-backed debt that it buys directly and then holds to maturity.

Even so, the bailout is potentially huge, although it will probably not be the US's biggest: the cost to the taxpayer from the savings and loan crisis was $300bn in today's money. Against that – and billed as saving the global financial system from unimaginable turmoil – the expense of saving the mortgage financiers may even prove moderate. Still, drastically extending the role of the state cannot be what Paulson imagined he would be doing when he joined the Treasury from Goldman Sachs in 2006. But perhaps he is simply behaving like any good banker – he is expanding his balance sheet. The US government's, after all, is pretty much the last one left in town.

译文：

保尔森为何接管“两房”？

预备、瞄准、开火。汉克·保尔森(Hank Paulson)还是用上了“火箭筒”。美国政府接管房利美(Fannie Mae)和房地美(Freddie Mac)的决定，并没有具体的触发原因，比如债务再融资失败，而是出于一种感觉，即这两家房贷机构都未能提供价格可以承受的按揭债务，而且都有可能颠覆美国金融体系。即将到来的美国大选，加上外国央行越来越不愿意购买美国按揭担保的证券，也可能促使保尔森及早干预。

美国政府正在“腰带和背带”的双保险手段来维持局面，最重要的是压低美国房贷利率。它将通过逐步购买优先股，调整政府支持企业(GSE)的资本结构，这一计划也将大幅稀释所有现有股东的权益。美国政府将借给政府支持企业必要资金，让它们得以维持，同时缓慢停止它们的业务。它也将直接购买企业的按揭担保证券。所有这些都是信贷市场的利好消息。至于美国按揭市场的未来结构，那是下一届政府要操心的事了。

这些行动会给纳税人带来多大负担？美国财政部能够向每家政府支持企业(GSE)注资高达1000亿美元，以帮助支持它们总共5.4万亿美元的债券组合，尽管它不太可能需要这么做。它甚至还有可能从直接购买、然后持有至到期日的GSE按揭担保债务中获利。

即便如此，此次纾困行动的潜在规模是巨大的，尽管它很可能不是美国有史以来最大的：按今日币值计算，美国“储蓄与贷款协会”危机给纳税人带来3000亿美元的负担。与此相比，再加上拯救全球金融体系于不可想象之动荡的说法，营救这两家房贷机构的费用甚至可能证明是适中的。不过，大幅度扩大政府的角色，不可能是保尔森2006年离开高盛(Goldman Sachs)出任美国财长时的念头。但也许他只是在做一名好的银行家应该做的，扩大自己的资产负债表。毕竟，美国政府差不多已是人们的最后指望。

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-9-9 10:45:31编辑过]