全部版块 我的主页
论坛 经济学论坛 三区 国民经济管理
881 6
2020-06-01
  • Under the outbreak, the federal reserve has taken a series of measures.

  • On April 9, 2020, the federal reserve announced a new $2.3 trillion credit rescue program.Purchases of corporate bonds and corporate loans for large corporations are capped at $750 billion (PPMCCF and SMCCF);Asset purchases of loans to smes are capped at $600bn (MSELF and MSNLF);The bond-buying program for local governments is capped at $500 billion in Municipal Liquidity facilities;The asset-backed securities purchase program, which mainly targets loans to families and small businesses (student loans, car loans, credit card loans, etc.), is capped at $100 billion (TALP).The wage protection program for employees, run by the federal small business administration, provides $350 billion.That adds up to just $2.3 trillion.Notably, these assets are outside the traditional Treasury purchases.

  • Even compared with the huge assets already in place, the size of the rescue plan is staggering.But the scope, not the scale, was the main feature of the operation.The credit for the bailout includes households, small and medium-sized enterprises, large enterprises, state and local governments, and basically all entities in the real economy.In terms of tools, the fed's asset purchases this time have expanded to include corporate loans, corporate bonds and municipal bonds.The fed also bought debt issued by fannie mae and Freddie MAC during the 2008 financial crisis. It also bought some mortgage-backed securities (which fannie mae and Freddie MAC are required to guarantee), but most of its purchases were of Treasury bonds.The sale of troubled assets ($700 billion) was made by the Treasury (through TARF), not the federal reserve.It is not hard to see that the fed's asset purchases this time are a big break from the past.

  • Moreover, the fed is no longer restricted to buying from the secondary market, but can participate in the primary market (that is, lending directly to desirable borrowers), giving it the ability to directly feed the real economy.Buying from the secondary market is equivalent to giving blood to financial institutions, but whether financial institutions are willing to give blood to the real economy again, that is, to lend money to the real economy, is beyond the fed's control.From 2008 to 2015 end of quantitative easing, the fed's balance scale to nearly $five trillion, but a slow recovery, the most important reason is that financial institutions after gaining a lot of money from the federal reserve, not to expand credit loans to the real economy, it is mainly from the United States bank assets you can see clearly.It is unprecedented for the fed to reverse course and pump money directly into households and businesses on a massive scale.

  • In many people's minds, the high point of the fed was under Alan greenspan, even though the near-legendary fed chairman took some of the blame for the 2008 financial crisis.But in my view, under successive "boring" fed presidents, the fed's ambitions have changed.Instead of relying on the fed chairman's inspiration, as in "greenspan," it has become capable of lending directly to households and the economy on a massive scale.In a sense, the fed is now both a central bank and a commercial bank.This is a qualitative change, and we are witnessing an unprecedented large-scale experiment by the central bank.

  • Our economic activity can normally be well organized through a spontaneous market order.However, in the face of some huge shocks, it can be severely disrupted, and although markets have a self-healing function, the process of repair can be painful and lengthy, and people may lose confidence in the market economy in the process, as we have seen many times in history.The novel coronavirus forced the suspension of some economic activities. However, people in these industries would be severely affected, and their deteriorating financial situation (such as the inability to pay the mortgage) would affect other sectors, such as the financial system, and then affect the whole economy.At this time, it is necessary to mobilize the national forces to carry out systematic relief.The market economy works well in the product market, but the monetary system and the capital market are highly unstable factors in the process of economic coordination. The modern market economy is inseparable from it, but it sometimes ACTS like a wild beast out of control.We saw its destruction in 2008, with no more than $1 trillion in subprime mortgages, no more than $300 billion in real losses, but it shook up the world economy and took a long time to recover.

  • But the implementation of the fed's plan also faces daunting challenges, not least how to address nepotism in the allocation of funds.Historically, the fed has restricted its purchases of assets to Treasury bonds to avoid interest payments.To lend to thousands of businesses these days, you can imagine the administrative difficulties in the middle.The fed has taken the approach of using private financial institutions, through which the vast majority of its loans are made.On the issues of information disclosure, incentive mechanism, accountability and supervision, congress, the Treasury Department and the federal reserve have set up corresponding agencies and measures.Thanks to better transparency and the rule of law, the plan seems to be working.




二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

全部回复
2020-6-1 22:41:24
很多经济学家认为美联储的“大放水”不会有作用,不少人甚至把本次经济衰退上升到1930年代大萧条的程度。我的看法很不同,我认为美联储的行动不同以往,是必要的,大胆的,并且将是有效的。如果整个系统每个部分的现金流没有遭到毁灭性的破坏,那么它就不会演变成金融危机,而只是实体经济在供给面的一次冲击。随着病毒传播逐渐被控制,有秩序的生产消费活动就会逐渐恢复。但是在实体经济渡过难关之前,经济体每个部门的现金流不能够出现系统性的失衡。美联储发钱是对的,它力图在现金流断裂的地方进行资金注入。实体经济活动在某些部门暂停了,但是现金流不能够暂停,这正是美联储力图避免的。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2020-6-1 22:41:57
理解美联储的行动有必要超越纯粹金融的范畴,而要思考宏观经济运行当中的一些根本性的问题。波兰经济学家卡拉奇(Kalecki)关于收入分配中利润等于投资的理论,是反直觉的,但却是有深刻道理的。凯恩斯把这个思想用生动的语言进行了描述:资本家的财富就像魔壶里的水,它泼出去,又会盈满,永不干涸!不过在现实中,资本家是抽象的,分散的,他们不会集体行动。在现实中,只有中央银行,或者财政部,才可以代表国民全体这样进行系统性的一致行动。当下,美联储迈出了这一步,可能是历史性的一步。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2020-6-1 22:42:13
自由市场派的经济学家,从亚当斯密到哈耶克,对市场经济的伟大论述令人信服。但是,作为一个自发秩序,系统性的协调失灵是存在的。在总量上,存在着一些微观价格理论不能考察的机制,比如上面提到的卡拉奇和凯恩斯的思想。采取大规模的国家行动应对危机,同时保护好市场经济的根基不被破坏,这可能是现代国家面临的巨大难题,这和一个经济学家因为同时信奉哈耶克和凯恩斯所面临的心理冲突一样。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2020-6-1 22:42:36
集体主义对人类,一种喜爱社交的群体动物,可能有本能的吸引力。比如,三个火枪手就说“人人为我,我为人人”。几天前我看了一个美国影片《青山翠谷》,同样令人印象深刻。那里有矿工们和资本家的矛盾,当然还有爱情的痛苦、流言蜚语,以及动人的歌唱。在经济危机面前,集体主义成为有号召力的行动方案,它的思想力量甚至让矿工儿子们成功挑战了老矿工的家长权威,让一个严格的天主教大家庭一度分裂。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2020-6-1 22:42:53
某种程度上,美联储在金融领域塑造了集体主义,它彰显了巨大的威力和严谨性。它在金融领域以集体的名义进行大规模行动,应对外生或内生的系统性冲击。但是美联储也知道集体主义的弱点,它小心翼翼地保证不影响经济体制的开放性和竞争性。这一次,它已经有能力和决心深入到社会的最小单元,中小企业和家庭,不再仅仅是给金融系统做最后借款人。如果我们再把当下的美联储看做传统意义上的中央银行,可能低估了它的意义。
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

点击查看更多内容…
相关推荐
栏目导航
热门文章
推荐文章

说点什么

分享

扫码加好友,拉您进群
各岗位、行业、专业交流群