創作內容

1 GP

[克魯曼專欄] 小嘍囉與大財閥 (原文載於10/03/28)

作者:首領八奇│2010-04-22 15:31:21│巴幣:0│人氣:505
Health reform is the law of the land. Next up: financial reform. But will it happen? The White House is optimistic, because it believes that Republicans won’t want to be cast as allies of Wall Street. I’m not so sure. The key question is how many senators believe that they can get away with claiming that war is peace, slavery is freedom, and regulating big banks is doing those big banks a favor.


如今健保改革已經定案,下一步就是金融改革了。可是改革會成真嗎?白宮方面樂觀其成,相信共和黨不會冒著被指「華爾街同路人」的風險而阻擋改革。我就沒那麼肯定了,關鍵點在於有多少參議員自認可以把戰爭辯稱為和平,把奴役辯稱為自由,把管制大銀行辯稱為幫銀行大忙,而且不會因此受到懲罰。


Some background: we used to have a workable system for avoiding financial crises, resting on a combination of government guarantees and regulation. On one side, bank deposits were insured, preventing a recurrence of the immense bank runs that were a central cause of the Great Depression. On the other side, banks were tightly regulated, so that they didn’t take advantage of government guarantees by running excessive risks.


來點背景說明吧:我們以前有個可行的系統用來阻止金融危機,綜合了依靠政府擔保與規章管制。一方面,銀行的存款也有保險,避免重蹈民眾到大銀行擠兌的覆轍,因為這點是造成大蕭條的危機主因。另一方面,銀行受到嚴格規範,所以不能拿政府的存款保證來進行高風險投資。


From 1980 or so onward, however, that system gradually broke down, partly because of bank deregulation, but mainly because of the rise of “shadow banking”: institutions and practices — like financing long-term investments with overnight borrowing — that recreated the risks of old-fashioned banking but weren’t covered either by guarantees or by regulation. The result, by 2007, was a financial system as vulnerable to severe crisis as the system of 1930. And the crisis came.


然而在1980年代後,這套系統漸漸土崩瓦解,一部分是導因於對銀行解除管制,不過主因是「影子銀行」的興起:如以隔夜貸款辦理融通長期投資的機構與業務的出現,再造出了傳統銀行風險,可是這些機構和業務都未能受到政府保證或監管。最後呢,到了2007年,整個金融體系已經脆弱到承受不起任何嚴重傷害,緊接著危機就發生了。


Now what? We have already, in effect, recreated New Deal-type guarantees: as the financial system plunged into crisis, the government stepped in to rescue troubled financial companies, so as to avoid a complete collapse. And you should bear in mind that the biggest bailouts took place under a conservative Republican administration, which claimed to believe deeply in free markets. There’s every reason to believe that this will be the rule from now on: when push comes to shove, no matter who is in power, the financial sector will be bailed out. In effect, debts of shadow banks, like deposits at conventional banks, now have a government guarantee.


好了,那現在咧?事實上我們已經建立起了新的保障制度:一但金融體系深陷危機,政府就會進場救援出包的金融公司,避免全面的經濟崩潰。請銘記在心,史上規模最大的救助行動是共和黨保守政府發起的,雖然他們自稱是自由市場的信徒。因此可以深信只要又捅婁子,不管執政當局是誰,財政部門一定會登板救援。其實現在影子銀行的負債,已經像傳統銀行一樣都有政府擔保了。


The only question now is whether the financial industry will pay a price for this privilege, whether Wall Street will be obliged to behave responsibly in return for government backing. And who could be against that?


現在唯一的疑問在於金融業界是否該為特權付出代價?華爾街是否該更負責以感謝政府的大力支援?有誰會想反對這兩點呢?


Well, how about John Boehner, the House minority leader? Recently Mr. Boehner gave a talk to bankers in which he encouraged them to balk efforts by Congress to impose stricter regulation. “Don’t let those little punk staffers take advantage of you, and stand up for yourselves,” he urged — where by “taking advantage” he meant imposing some conditions on the industry in return for government backing.


嗯~眾院少數黨領袖伯納怎麼樣?伯納先生前一陣子與銀行家們會談,鼓勵他們堅決反對由國會提案的更嚴格管制條例。「銀行臭了嗎?難道銀行臭了嗎?」伯納如此的大力主張。「別讓那些小嘍囉職員吃你們豆腐,要挺身捍衛自己的權益。」「吃你們豆腐」這點顯然是指推動一些管理條例來報答政府救助。


Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, promptly had “Little Punk Staffer” buttons made up and distributed to Congressional aides.


聽聞此事,眾議院金融服務委員會主席法蘭克馬上製作了「小嘍囉職員」徽章,分發給國會助理。


But Mr. Boehner isn’t the problem: Mr. Frank has already shepherded fairly strong financial reform through the House. Instead, the question is what will happen in the Senate.


不過伯納先生也不是什麼大問題,法蘭克先生已經成功領導強勢的金融改革法在眾院過關。真正的麻煩出在參議院。


In the Senate, the legislation on the table was crafted by Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut. It’s significantly weaker than the Frank bill, and needs to be made stronger, a topic I’ll discuss in future columns. But no bill will become law if Senate Republicans stand in the way of reform.


參院內已由康乃迪克州參議員陶德起草法案,此版本要比法蘭克版弱化的多,需要再加以強化,這點我會在未來的專欄裡討論。然而只要參院共和黨團阻撓,一切改革法案都是空談。


But won’t opponents of reform fear being cast as allies of the bad guys (which they are)? Maybe not. Back in January, Frank Luntz, the G.O.P. strategist, circulated a memo on how to oppose financial reform. His key idea was that Republicans should claim that up is down — that reform legislation is a “big bank bailout bill,” rather than a set of restrictions on the banks.


可是反對改革,難道不擔心會被指為壞蛋的幫兇嗎(雖然他們真的是)?也許不會喔。時間到回一月,共和黨策士倫茲發了份備忘錄,提醒要如何反對金融改革。他的關鍵概念在於共和黨要把白的說成黑的,說改革法案是「大銀行救援法」,而不是什麼銀行規範法。


Sure enough, a few days ago Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, in a letter attacking the Dodd bill, claimed that an essential part of reform — tougher oversight of large, systemically important financial companies — is actually a bailout, because “The market will view these firms as being ‘too big to fail’ and implicitly backed by the government.” Um, senator, the market already views those firms as having implicit government backing, because they do: whatever people like Mr. Shelby may say now, in any future crisis those firms will be rescued, whichever party is in power.


果不其然於幾天前,阿拉巴馬州參議員薛比寫了封信抨擊陶德的法案,稱這改革法的關鍵核心(嚴加看管龐大且在金融體系舉足輕重的公司)是徹頭徹尾的紓困法,因為「市場會把這些公司視為『太大了不能倒』,而且此舉也暗示政府會在背後撐腰。」呃......參議員先生,市場早就這麼認為了好嗎。不管薛比先生之類的人怎麼說,未來不論是誰執政,遇到危機都一定會搭救的。


The only question is whether we’re going to regulate bankers so that they don’t abuse the privilege of government backing. And it’s that regulation — not future bailouts — that reform opponents are trying to block.


所以只剩下一個問題啦,就是要不要監督銀行來避免他們濫用政府援助呢?然而改革法案的反對者偏偏不是針對未來紓困,而是對管制這點舉起抗議大旗,力阻過關。


So it’s the punks versus the plutocrats — those who want to rein in runaway banks, and bankers who want the freedom to put the economy at risk, freedom enhanced by the knowledge that taxpayers will bail them out in a crisis. Whatever they say, the fact is that people like Mr. Shelby are on the side of the plutocrats; the American people should be on the side of the punks, who are trying to protect their interests.


於是一場小嘍囉VS大財閥之戰開打了,一方想嚴加控制這脫韁野馬,另一方的銀行家則想要有置經濟於險境的自由,反正危機發生是由納稅人去救援。不論薛比先生等人吹的多天花亂墜,他們都是大財閥的好碰友。美國人民應該團結、奮鬥、救僂囉,因為正是這群人在努力保障人民的利益。
引用網址:https://home.gamer.com.tw/TrackBack.php?sn=979601
All rights reserved. 版權所有,保留一切權利

相關創作

同標籤作品搜尋:|克魯曼|經濟|翻譯|

留言共 1 篇留言

給我凱特
有看有推, 五銀鉤再來, 甘溫蛤~~~

04-22 16:07

首領八奇
一直很努力希望加些國內時事梗...好難呀04-22 17:38
我要留言提醒:您尚未登入,請先登入再留言

1喜歡★mengskstalin 可決定是否刪除您的留言,請勿發表違反站規文字。

前一篇:[爆料]首領八奇書房的書... 後一篇:[爆料] 首領八奇同人誌...

追蹤私訊切換新版閱覽

作品資料夾

leo25127更新至1210回
穿越奇幻日常系小說『公爵家的獨生子』更新囉,來看看我們無厘頭的ㄎ一ㄤ少爺怎麼在異世界作威作福吧!看更多我要大聲說2小時前


face基於日前微軟官方表示 Internet Explorer 不再支援新的網路標準,可能無法使用新的應用程式來呈現網站內容,在瀏覽器支援度及網站安全性的雙重考量下,為了讓巴友們有更好的使用體驗,巴哈姆特即將於 2019年9月2日 停止支援 Internet Explorer 瀏覽器的頁面呈現和功能。
屆時建議您使用下述瀏覽器來瀏覽巴哈姆特:
。Google Chrome(推薦)
。Mozilla Firefox
。Microsoft Edge(Windows10以上的作業系統版本才可使用)

face我們了解您不想看到廣告的心情⋯ 若您願意支持巴哈姆特永續經營,請將 gamer.com.tw 加入廣告阻擋工具的白名單中,謝謝 !【教學】