|
|
【中文标题】政治降级
【原文标题】Downgrading our politics
【登载媒体】经济学人
【来源地址】http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/08/sps-credit-rating-cut
【译 者】Horace0714
【翻译方式】人工
【声 明】本翻译供Anti-CNN使用，未经AC或译者许可，不得转载。
【译 文】
Standard & Poor’s decision to downgrade America’s credit rating on Friday is momentous, but not, I suspect, for the reasons most people will cite. Many worried that interest rates would skyrocket and the markets sell off. This seems unlikely. The news won’t be a surprise and S&P was kind enough to dampen any impact by waiting until after the markets closed. There are very few investors who will be compelled to sell Treasury debt because it’s rated AA+ instead of AAA. Banks will not have to hold more capital against their Treasury holdings, regulators confirmed.
标准普尔于星期五做出降低美国信用评级的决定意义重大，但是，我怀疑，真正促使他们做出此决定的原因并不是被大多数人广泛引用的那条。很多人担心利率飙升和市场抛售。这看上去并不大会发生。这条新闻本身并不劲爆，而且为了抑制可能产生的影响，标普在闭市之后才发布这样的消息，也算仁至义尽。几乎不会有投资者仅仅因为美国国债的信用等级是AA+而不是AAA而去抛售美国债券，监管者们也确认，银行也不会持有更多的资金来对抗其国债持有量。
Another popular interpretation is that this is a wake-up call about our runaway debt. And indeed, S&P, in its decision, did cite the inadequacy of the debt deal agreed to by Congress and Barack Obama this past week:
[T}he fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
另一个被人们广泛接受的解读是：标准普尔的此次行动是对我们债务失控情况的警告。而且，确实，标准普尔在它的决定中，也提到了上个星期美国国会同意，奥巴马签署生效的那个法案所做的还不够：
“国会和政府本周达成的财政整顿计划中，缺乏到2015年前稳定政府债务问题的量化的目标，而这个目标我们认为是必要的。”
Not surprisingly, Republicans seized on this as evidence that their strategy and views have been vindicated. The office of John Boehner, speaker of the House of Representatives, called it the “latest consequence of the out-of-control spending that has taken place in Washington for decades.”
意料之中的是，共和党人抓住了这个机会，以这件事情为证据，证明他们的策略和视角的正确。众议院议长John Boehner办公室称其为“华盛顿数十年来花销失控造成的最新恶果”。
But this interpretation is incomplete and misleading. As S&P’s announcement makes clear, the inadequacy of the deal was only one motivation. As important (to me, even more important) was the the reckless and divisive battle that preceded it:
但是，这种解读并不完全而且误导性强。标普的声明中已经很明确地指出，法案中规定不足仅仅是促使它做出降级决定的一个动因。（对我而言）更重要的动因是，这项法案通过之前的那不计后果、嫌隙尽显的争斗。
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy … [This] weakens the government’s ability to manage public finances …
最近几个月看到的政治冒险行为突出了我们已经认定的一个事实：美国的国家治理和政策制定相对于我们之前所相信的情况，正变得不那么稳定，不那么有效率而且不那么可以预测。法定债务上限和违约风险已经成为了财政政策上双方辩论、讨价还价的筹码。（这）削弱了政府管理公共财政的能力。
This is crucial. Sovereigns aren’t like companies. They can’t go bankrupt, and creditors can’t seize their assets. Their creditworthiness depends as much on their willingness as their ability to pay. As Felix Salmon presciently noted before the announcement was made, it’s not our ability to pay that’s in doubt:
这一点非常重要。主权不像公司。主权国家不会破产，借贷者不能掠走主权国家的资产。它们的偿债能力除了取决于国家是否真的有能力付钱，还取决于它们的偿债意愿，两者同样重要。正如Felix Salmon在标准普尔公布降级决定之前富有远见地所指出的那样，受到怀疑的并不是我们付钱的能力。
America’s ability to pay is neither here nor there: the problem is its willingness to pay. And there’s a serious constituency of powerful people in Congress who are perfectly willing and even eager to drive the US into default. The Tea Party is fully cognizant that it has been given a bazooka, and it’s just itching to pull the trigger. There’s no good reason to believe that won’t happen at some point..
美国还钱的能力不是最重要的，问题出在它的偿债意愿上。而且，在国会里还真的有一伙人愿意看到甚至热衷推动美国违约。茶党已完全意识到这一点，好比给了一名渴望开枪的战士一枚火箭炮。我们没有理由不相信，在某个时刻不会发生违约。
Absent the toxic politics that infected the debate, we could have hammered out a deal that stabilized the debt without squeezing the economy too much in the near term. After all, Britain, Germany and even Italy seem able to do so, and we have in the past, too.
要是没有这样含有毒性的政治斗争影响我们的辩论，我们就可以找到一个在近期无需过度挤压经济而仍然可以稳定债务的方案，毕竟，英国，德国甚至是意大利看上去都可以做到，而且我们在过去也作成过这样的事情。
Investors largely tuned out the debt-ceiling debate until its final days out of a belief based on long experience that for all the antics and rhetoric of the Tea Party, the people who actually run Capitol Hill would never compromise the country’s credit worthiness. After all, it was Mr Boehner who reminded his freshmen colleagues that on the debt ceiling they’d have to act like “adults.”
投资者们出于长期以来的经验，相信，不管茶党人做的多么惊人，说的多么好听，真正控制国会山的人永远不会抛弃美国的债务信用，因而，大多数投资者直到最后时刻才开始关注债务上限的辩论。毕竟，是Boehner提醒的他的那些新手，在债务上限问题上，他们必须要表现得像个“大人”。
That is not what happened. As the fight dragged on, the leadership moved closer to the Tea Party, not the other way around. And they seem happy with the results. Why else would Mitch McConnell have promised on August 1st to do exactly the same the next time the debt ceiling must be raised?
但是，他所说的并不是真正发生的事情。伴随着争斗的继续，领导层越来越趋向于茶党，而非另外的方向。他们看上去对于结果很高兴。否则，为什么Mitch McConnell在8月1日保证，在下一次债务上限必须提高的时候，他还会做同样的事情呢？
It is striking that the proponents of this strategy seem so oblivious to its impact. Our economy is lubricated by a sophisticated and stable credit market whose most vital component is also the most ephemeral: trust. As the crisis amply demonstrated, when trust erodes, the system freezes up. America has built a reputation for responsible and credible management of its finances over the centuries, and that reputation has been reduced to a political football, like a federal judgeship. Henceforth a foreign pension fund or central bank that once mindlessly ploughed his spare cash into Treasurys will have to think twice.
策略的支持者对其造成的影响不被人注意也很令人震惊。我们经济一直都以一个复杂而稳定的信用市场为润滑剂，而对这个信用市场最生死攸关的成分却也是最短命的。正如这次危机所明确显示的，当信任消退的时候，整个系统都会冻结停滞。美国在过去的几个世纪中因为负责和可靠的财政管理制度而建立了良好的声誉，而这样的声誉现在变成了一场政治足球，正如联邦法官地位一样。那些曾经不加考虑就把自己的闲余资金投入到美国财政部的外国养老基金或者中央银行，从今以后，也不得不三思而后行了。
I never had much sympathy for the view that America’s economy was about to be eclipsed by China’s, and the main reason was our political institutions. Those checks, balances and laws provide an orderly means to change course in response to new challenges. China’s authoritarianism deprives the government of a feedback mechanism to tell it when it is meeting the needs and aspirations of its people. That makes its system intrinsically fragile.
我从来不赞同美国经济将被中国赶超的观点，主要原因就是政治体制上的问题。为迎接新的挑战那些支票、余额和法制可以提供稳定有序的变革方法。而因为威权主义体制，中国的政府缺乏一个反馈机制来告诉政府它是否正在响应人们的需求与渴望。正因为此，这套体制本质上就是脆弱的。
Events of the last few weeks have forced me to reconsider. While the crash of a high-speed train highlighted many of China’s ongoing weaknesses, it also revealed, in the vigorous reporting and commentary that followed in print and online, a nascent apparatus of accountability. Conversely, America’s ostensible success in avoiding default in fact highlighted the growing dysfunction of its political institutions. If these events are portents of things to come, then the day when China displaces America as the world’s economic superpower is closer than I thought.
而过去几个星期所发生的事情使我重新思考我的观点。中国的动车事故虽也突出了中国政治发展中许多问题，但它也通过纸媒和线上的报道和评论表现着这个国家初生的负责机制。相反的，美国在避免违约上表面的成功更加显示其政治体制越来越严重的失调症状。如果最近的事件预示着更多这样的事情的到来，那么中国取代美国经济超级大国的地位的时间就会比我预想的还要提前。
My more optimistic take is that the behavior of the markets and record disapproval ratings will force Congress to acknowledge the idiocy of their recent behavior and to adapt by substituting compromise for brinkmanship. Investors won't learn much new from S&P's announcement. Politicians should.
我还有一个比较乐观的观点，市场的行为和评级机构的否定会强迫国会承认他们自己在近期事件中表现出的愚蠢并通过用妥协替代边缘政策来进行调整。投资者也不会从标普的公告中得到什么新的教训。不过，政客们应该从中学到更多的东西。
|
评分
-
1
查看全部评分
-
|
狗仔卡
发表于 2011-8-10 17:33
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2011-8-11 18:57
