金融得到修缮了吗？世界并未从金融危机中吸取教训 [美国媒体]

Has finance been fixed?

金融得到修缮了吗？

The world has not learned the lessons ofthe financial crisis

世界并未从金融危机中吸取教训

Banks are safer, but too much of what hasgone wrong since 2008 could happen again

银行更加安全，但2008年以来出现的许多问题可能再次发生



WHEN historians gaze back at the early 21st century, they will identify two seismic shocks. The first was the terrorist attacks of September 11th 2001, the second the global financial crisis, which boiled over ten years ago this month with the collapse of Lehman Brothers. September 11th led to wars, Lehman’s bankruptcy to an economic and political reckoning. Just as the fighting continues, so the reckoning is far from over.

当历史学家回顾二十一世纪初时，他们将发现两次地震式冲击。第一次是2001年9月11日发生的恐怖袭击，第二次是十年前的这个时候爆发的全球金融危机，雷曼兄弟公司随之倒闭。911事件导致战争，雷曼兄弟破产带来经济和政治报应。斗争仍在继续，报应远未结束。

Lehman failed after losing money on toxic loans and securities linked to America’s property market. Its bankruptcy unleashed chaos. Trade fell in every country on which the World Trade Organisation reports. Credit supplied to the real economy fell, by perhaps $2trn in America alone. To limit their indebtedness, governments resorted to austerity. Having exhausted the scope to cut interest rates, central bankers turned to quantitative easing (creating money to buy bonds).

雷曼兄弟在与美国房地产相关的坏账和证券方面遭受损失后破产，由此引发乱局。世贸组织在报告中提到的所有国家都出现贸易下滑，供应给实体经济的信贷锐减，仅美国就可能减少了2万亿美元。各国政府为了限制债务而采取紧缩政策，各国央行已没有削减利率的余地，于是付诸于量化宽松（创造货币来购买债券）。



A better test is whether the likelihood and size of crises can be reduced. On that, the news is both good and bad.

更好的检验标准是能否减小危机爆发的可能性和规模，这方面喜忧参半。

First, the good. Banks must now fund themselves with more equity and less debt. They depend less on trading to make money and on short-term wholesale borrowing to finance their activities. Even in Europe, where few banks make large profits, the system as a whole is stronger than it was. Regulators have beefed up their oversight, especially of the largest institutions that are too big to fail. On both sides of the Atlantic banks are subject to regular stress tests and must submit plans for their own orderly demise. Derivatives markets of the type that felled AIG, an insurer, are smaller and safer. Revamped pay policies should prevent a repeat of the injustice of bankers taking public money while pocketing huge pay-packets—in 2009 staff at the five biggest banks trousered $114bn.

先说好的方面。现在银行必须增加净资产和减少债务，减少依赖交易来获利，减少依靠短期批发借款来维持经营活动。即使在很少有银行利润丰厚的欧洲，整个银行体系比以往更加坚固。监管机构加强了监管力度，尤其对太大而不能倒的大型机构。大西洋两岸的银行定期接受压力测试，它们必须提交有序破产计划书。曾经导致保险公司AIG（美国国际集团）破产的那种衍生品市场变得更小更安全。修改的薪酬政策应避免再次上演银行家拿公款中饱私囊的不义之举：2009年，五家最大银行的职员捞取了1140亿美元。

Yet many lessons have gone unlearned. Take, for example, policymakers’ mistakes in the aftermath of the crisis. The state had no choice but to stand behind failing banks, but it took the ill-judged decision to all but abandon insolvent households. Perhaps 9m Americans lost their homes in the recession; unemployment rose by over 8m. While households paid down debt, consumer spending was ravaged.

然而，很多教训没有被吸取。例如：危机爆发后决策者所犯的错。国家别无选择只能拯救破产的银行，但做出欠妥的决策，几乎抛弃了无力偿还债务的家庭。在那场经济衰退中，可能有900万美国人失去住房；新增失业人口超过800万。虽然美国家庭偿还了债务，但消费性开支严重下滑。

It has taken fully ten years for the countervailing economic stimulus to restore America’s economy to health. Many of Europe’s economies still suffer from weak aggregate demand. Fiscal and monetary policy could have done more, sooner, to bring about recovery. They were held back by mostly misplaced concerns about government debt and inflation. The fact that this failing is not more widely acknowledged augurs badly for the policy response next time.

补偿性经济刺激用了整整十年才使美国经济恢复健康，许多欧洲经济仍受到总需求疲软的困扰。财政和货币政策本可以更好更快地使经济复苏，但政府债务和通货膨胀引起大部分无谓的担忧，使这些政策受到阻挠。这种过错没有得到广泛的认识，对于下次对策来说不是个好兆头。

Stagnation has, inevitably, fed populism. And, by looking for scapegoats and simplistic solutions that punish them, populism has made it harder to confront the real long-term problems that the crisis exposed. Three stand out: housing, offshore dollar finance and the euro.

经济萧条不可避免地滋生出民粹思潮。通过寻找替罪羊和简单的惩罚方案，民粹使人们更难以应对危机暴露出的真正长远问题。三个突出问题：房地产、离岸美元资产、欧元。

To share divine

分享神圣



The rise of nationalism also hinders Europe from solving the euro’s structural problems. The crisis showed how a country’s banks and its government are intertwined: the state struggles to borrow enough to support the banks, which are dragged down by the falling value of government debt. This “doom loop” remains mostly intact. Until Europe shares more risks across national borders—whether through financial markets, deposit guarantees or fiscal policy—the future of the single currency will remain in doubt. A chaotic collapse of the euro would make the crisis of 2008 look like a picnic.

民族主义的兴起也阻碍着欧洲解决欧元的结构性问题。这场危机展现出一国的银行和政府是如何紧密相连的：国家奋力借钱去帮助银行，银行因政府债务贬值而受连累，这种“厄运循环”至今未被打破。除非欧洲分担更多的跨境风险，例如金融市场、存款担保、财政政策，否则单一货币的未来仍受到质疑。如果欧元崩溃引发混乱，那么2008年那场危机只能算是小打小闹。

Policymakers have made the economy safer, but they still have plenty of lessons to learn. And fracturing geopolitics make globalised finance even harder to deal with. A decade after Lehman failed, finance has a worrying amount to fix.

决策层已经使经济变得更加安全，但还有很多教训值得吸取。四分五裂的地缘政治使全球金融更加难以应对。雷曼公司倒闭十年后的今天，金融的修缮工作任重而道远。

Kremilek2Sep 6th, 15:19
Of course, the world has not learned the whole lesson because there are vested interests of bankers and financiers who like to continue in past model with the state guarantee, i.e. moral hazard. So we can here speculate when and how the next financial crisis hits. I bet that it will be in two years at the lastest. The source is yet unknown but there are several options as already mentioned in the article.

世界当然没有吸取全部教训，因为银行家和金融家这些既得利益者希望延续由国家担保的旧有模式，也就是道德风险。所以我们可以预测下一次金融危机何时到来，将会是什么样子。我敢打赌最快也就两年，爆发危机的原因尚不清楚，但正如文中提到的多个原因都有可能。

Hedgefundguyin reply to Kremilek2Sep 6th, 16:31
the world has not learned the whole lesson because there are vested interests of bankers and financiers who like to continue in past model with the state guarantee, i.e. moral hazard.
Also they devise new products (MBSs) and then mass produce them to sell to greedy investors seeking a higher rate of return.
Remember, one cannot borrow money if there is no lender.

回复贴：世界当然没有吸取全部教训，因为银行家和金融家这些既得利益者希望延续由国家担保的旧有模式，也就是道德风险。
另外，他们还设计出新的产品：住房抵押贷款债券（MBS），然后大量卖给寻求高收益的贪婪投资者。
记住，一个人要想借钱，必须有放款人才行。



HedgefundguySep 6th, 16:19
The state had no choice but to stand behind failing banks, but it took the ill-judged decision to all but abandon insolvent households.
Those households were insolvent before the crisis.
Remember all of the NINJA loans?
Housing prices had gotten too high in many markets, and the foreclosures allowed prices to come back down.
Weren't there tax cuts involved for individuals?
Businesses were allowed net loss carryback so they deduct their losses against previous years profits and got a rebate.
Didn't the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act extend state unemployment benefits?
How about all of those "super train" projects?

“国家别无选择只能拯救破产的银行，但做出欠妥的决策，几乎抛弃了无力偿还债务的家庭。”
这些家庭在危机爆发之前就没有偿还能力，还记得“忍者贷款”吗？
许多市场的房价攀升太高，房屋止赎使房价回落。
当时个人没享受减税吗？企业享有净亏损前抵，所以亏损与前几年的利润相抵扣，还得到退税。《美国复苏与再投资法案》没延长国家失业救济的期限吗？
那些“超级列车”项目又怎么说？

Obama's Stimulus Package and How Well It Worked
ARRA had three spending categories. It cut taxes by $288 billion. It spent $224 billion in extended unemployment benefits, education, and health care. It created jobs by allocating $275 billion in federal contracts, grants, and loans.

奥巴马的刺激方案和显着效果
《美国复苏与再投资法案》共有三个支出类别：减税2880亿美元；在失业救济、教育、医疗保健上支出2240亿美元；为了创造就业，拨款2750亿美元用于联邦合同、津贴、贷款。

Five myths about Obama’s stimulus
1. The stimulus didn’t create jobs.
2. The stimulus was full of waste, pork and fraud.
3. The stimulus should have been much bigger.
4. Unlike the New Deal, the stimulus will leave no legacy.
5. The stimulus showed that Obama can’t legislate.

奥巴马刺激政策的五大谜团
1.刺激未能创造就业；
2.刺激造成大量浪费、政治分肥、诈骗；
3.刺激规模本应该大得多；
4.不同于罗斯福的“新政”，刺激政策没留下任何遗产；
5.刺激表明奥巴马立法无能。



guest-ojmseemSep 7th, 10:34
I respectfully disagree, the world has learned the lesson very well. If you're big enough you can be as reckless as you want. When things start to turn ugly you'll get reimbursed in full with real currency while the government just prints IOU's. Has there been a single conviction related to the last financial crisis?

我尊重但不赞同这种观点，世界很好的吸取了教训。如果你的规模够大，可以鲁莽的任意所为。当事情变糟时，你能得到真实货币补偿，而政府只需打欠条。有哪项罪名与上次金融危机有关吗？