|
世界决定视界，视界决定世界 擦亮双眼看世界 Global Perspective See Globally via Global Perspective 本期导读：中央银行（central bank），简称央行，是负责国家、地区（如欧盟）货币政策的主体机构，通常也是一个经济共同体的唯一货币发行机构。正常的发行方式为贷款、买卖外汇，因此它也是外汇市场的参与者之一，另外也会处理政府的债券。 央行同时对于银行、其他金融机构也有赋予监督权，确保它们不会莽撞行事或有欺瞒行为。最高长官是央行总裁（Governor），日本银行、韩国银行亦如此称之，而中国人民银行称为行长（Governor），欧洲中央银行称为主席（President），在香港金融管理局、新加坡金融管理局则是总裁（Chief Executive/Managing Director）。 在大多数国家中央银行均属国有，让政府得以介入货币政策。不过也至少都有一定程度的自主性，而所谓“独立的中央银行”意义是允许央行在免除政治力（如某国的经济部要求该国央行配合）干扰的规范下运作。案例包括美国联邦储备系统、英格兰银行（1997年起）、印度储备银行（1935年）、墨西哥银行（1993年）、日本银行（1998年）、加拿大银行、澳洲储备银行、欧洲央行等。 货币政策（Monetary policy）是一个国家或是经济体的货币权威机构（多数国家由央行来执行）利用控制货币供给量，来达到影响其他经济活动所采取的措施。主要手段包括：调节基准利率、调节商业银行保证金、公开市场操作。利率、信用、资产价格等一系列受货币政策影响的变化，最终导致就业率、生产量的变化的过程，称为货币政策传导机制。一般而言，货币政策的主要目的是防止通货膨胀。多数国家的央行将目标通货膨胀率设定为1%-3%（少数国家例外，如美国、日本）。 按照调节方向划分，货币政策一般分为：激进的－利率被调节为促进经济增长；中性的－保持经济稳定；从紧的－降低通货膨胀却可将提高失业率。 货币权威机构通常指中央银行或是和央行紧密联系的一套银行系统。他们有发行货币，改变货币供给和影响利率的能力。货币理论是经济学中研究货币的性质与功能的一个分支，是各经济体制定货币政策的理论基础。 历史上货币政策常常随着货币理论研究的发展而改变。从1970年代开始，世界各国货币政策通常与财政政策（fiscal policy）分离。即由中央银行控制货币政策，由政府控制财政政策。即使在此之前，布雷顿森林体系已经保证绝大多数的国家这两种政策分离。 财政政策（Fiscal policy）是国家在一定时期内，为了实现社会经济持续稳定发展，综合运用各种财政调节手段，对一定的经济总量进行调节（使之增加或减少）的政策。具体地说，财政政策是由税收政策、财政支出政策、预算政策组成，它包括财政政策目标和财政政策调节手段两部分。 财政政策目标是根据财政的性质、功能、作用和特点，确定调节经济活动时所要达到的目标。主要包括：（1）经济增长速度一般用国民生产总值或国内生产总值的增长率来表示。财政政策运用税收和财政支出来实现经济增长目标。（2）经济稳定的目标。（3）公平分配目标。（4）资源配置的目标。 财政政策是借助各种政策手段来调节宏观经济活动的。主要有四种：（1）国家预算。（2）国家税收。（3）国债。（4）财政补贴。财政政策一般分为自动财政政策（automatic fiscal policy）和衡量式财政政策（discretionary fiscal policy）。
Too fast to land 心急吃不了热豆腐 A stubbornly strong economy is frustrating central banks in their fight against inflation 小编注：译文部分仅供参考；下面共享的信息，整理自相关外媒网站；欢迎分享本公众号优质文章，并推荐给需要的朋友，感谢支持。 You might have expected the fastest tightening of global monetary policy in 40 years to deal a heavy blow to the world economy. Yet in 2023 it seems to be shrugging off the effects of higher interest rates. Not only is inflation stubbornly high, but economic activity also appears to have quickened. Faster growth may sound good, but it is a headache for policymakers, who are trying to bring about a managed slowdown. And it could mean that a recession, when it eventually strikes, is more painful. At the end of last year, according to business surveys, manufacturing and services output were both shrinking around the world. Today manufacturing output is flat and services are rebounding. American consumers are spending freely. Both wages and prices continue to grow fast, even in places where they were long stagnant. Japan looks set for a round of bumper wage rises in the spring. In the euro zone the monthly rate of “core” inflation, which excludes food and energy prices, broke records in February. Labour markets are extraordinarily tight. As we report this week, in half of the members of the OECD, a group of mostly rich countries, employment rates are currently at record highs. From equities to credit, financial markets are priced for global economic growth that is above trend. Not so long ago, investors were debating whether the world economy would face a “hard landing” involving a recession, or a “soft landing”, in which inflation was conquered without any downturn. Today they are asking whether the world economy is landing at all.
There are several reasons for the apparent acceleration. The mini-boom that took hold in the markets late in 2022 stimulated animal spirits. China’s reopening from zero-covid has led to a swift economic recovery which has caused order books in emerging markets to fill up. Falling energy prices in Europe have loosened the screws on its economy. But above all else, consumers and firms in most big economies are in strikingly good financial health. Many households are still flush with savings built up during the covid-19 pandemic; firms managed to lock in low interest rates for long stretches and have yet to suffer much from higher borrowing costs. Only in the most rate-sensitive sectors of the global economy, such as property, is the impact of higher rates clearly visible. In America the economy is so strong that even housing may be recovering slightly. The acceleration means that recession is not imminent. But it also means that central banks will have to raise interest rates further if they are to succeed in returning inflation to their 2% targets. On March 7th Jerome Powell, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, hinted as much, causing stockmarkets to fall. Policymakers now face two difficult judgments. The first is the extent to which monetary tightening to date has yet to have its full effect. Economists often talk up the “long and variable lags” with which interest rates work, but research suggests policy may be working faster today. If the effects of last year’s tightening are already exhausted, much more may be needed. A second judgment is over the persistence of the factors that seem to have immunised much of the economy against rate rises. Eventually, consumers will run out of spare cash and firms will feel the pinch from higher borrowing costs. In Sweden, where interest-rate rises rapidly pass through to households, the economy is suffering. One thing is clear: the ideal path, where inflation falls without growth faltering much, looks narrower than it did even a month ago. Instead, central banks are increasingly likely to have to choose between tolerating higher inflation or slamming on the brakes for a second year running. |
|
|
