立即打开
美国知名经济学家对未来感到悲观

美国知名经济学家对未来感到悲观

Shawn Tully 2022-10-01
拉里·萨默斯认为,美联储目前的加息过于激进。

美国财政部前部长拉里·萨默斯。图片来源:ROBIN MARCHANT—GETTY IMAGES

美联储的加息太过火,太迅速?这就是美联储9月21日最新一次加息后股市暴跌时,一些投资组合经理所抱怨的。Infrastructure Capital Management公司的首席执行官杰伊·哈特菲尔德在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示:“我们仍然认为,美联储正在犯另一个政策错误。”他认为,美联储目前的加息过于激进。

但哈佛大学(Harvard University)的经济学教授、美国财政部的前部长拉里·萨默斯的看法却截然不同。他在位于波士顿郊外的家中接受了《财富》杂志的长时间专访。他认为,要想给失控的通胀降温,美联储将需要持续激进加息。事实上,他最担心的是美联储会过早退缩。这太痛苦了——太多人失去工作,太多401(k)养老金计划崩溃,太多意料之外的不良后果。他将其比作对抗感染。“我们大多数人都知道,[当]医生给你开了一个疗程抗生素,而你在感觉好转而不是疗程结束时停止服用,你的病情很可能会复发。而且下一次根除可能会更加困难,因为细菌变得更有抵抗力。”萨默斯担心,如果美联储退缩,“通胀预期将变得根深蒂固”,最终的治愈成本将远高于承担未来几个月可能出现的更短暂、更轻微的衰退。据彭博社(Bloomberg)报道,萨默斯在英国伦敦的一次演讲中重申了他在今年6月所说的话:“我们需要长达五年超过5%的失业率来遏制通货膨胀——换句话说,我们需要两年7.5%的失业率,或者五年6%的失业率,或者一年10%的失业率。”

萨默斯从不相信通胀是“暂时的”论点,即通胀是由供应链瓶颈和与新冠疫情相关的停工引起的短暂现象。

在萨默斯看来,当今高通胀的主要来源是过多的货币追逐过少的商品所导致的过度需求。因此,为了遏制失控的消费者价格指数,美联储必须持续收紧货币政策,直至需求大幅下降。萨默斯认为美联储需要走多远?

通胀还会持续多久?

萨默斯认为,经济学的核心是算术,要弄清这些问题的答案只是入门。他认为,不包括食品和能源在内的“潜在通货膨胀”在4%到4.5%之间,与指导美联储的个人消费支出价格指数(PCEPI)非常接近(该指数由美国经济分析局计算,被联邦政府广泛使用,包括用于调整社会保障支出)。在萨默斯的剧本中,抑制通胀需要“实际”联邦基金利率比基础通胀率高1.0%到1.5%。

据他估计,联邦基金利率要达到5.0%到5.5%。这远高于当前联邦基金利率的中间值3.1%。当然,市场和大多数观察人士预计,美联储将在接下来的几次会议上再次采取激进措施。但联邦基金期货市场和联邦公开市场委员会(Open Market Committee)的成员在最近的民意调查中预计,明年这一数字最高将达到4.6%。因此,与投资者或美联储预期的相比,萨默斯呼吁要实现的联邦基金利率要高得多,要实施的政策也更紧缩。(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

美联储的加息太过火,太迅速?这就是美联储9月21日最新一次加息后股市暴跌时,一些投资组合经理所抱怨的。Infrastructure Capital Management公司的首席执行官杰伊·哈特菲尔德在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示:“我们仍然认为,美联储正在犯另一个政策错误。”他认为,美联储目前的加息过于激进。

但哈佛大学(Harvard University)的经济学教授、美国财政部的前部长拉里·萨默斯的看法却截然不同。他在位于波士顿郊外的家中接受了《财富》杂志的长时间专访。他认为,要想给失控的通胀降温,美联储将需要持续激进加息。事实上,他最担心的是美联储会过早退缩。这太痛苦了——太多人失去工作,太多401(k)养老金计划崩溃,太多意料之外的不良后果。他将其比作对抗感染。“我们大多数人都知道,[当]医生给你开了一个疗程抗生素,而你在感觉好转而不是疗程结束时停止服用,你的病情很可能会复发。而且下一次根除可能会更加困难,因为细菌变得更有抵抗力。”萨默斯担心,如果美联储退缩,“通胀预期将变得根深蒂固”,最终的治愈成本将远高于承担未来几个月可能出现的更短暂、更轻微的衰退。据彭博社(Bloomberg)报道,萨默斯在英国伦敦的一次演讲中重申了他在今年6月所说的话:“我们需要长达五年超过5%的失业率来遏制通货膨胀——换句话说,我们需要两年7.5%的失业率,或者五年6%的失业率,或者一年10%的失业率。”

萨默斯从不相信通胀是“暂时的”论点,即通胀是由供应链瓶颈和与新冠疫情相关的停工引起的短暂现象。

在萨默斯看来,当今高通胀的主要来源是过多的货币追逐过少的商品所导致的过度需求。因此,为了遏制失控的消费者价格指数,美联储必须持续收紧货币政策,直至需求大幅下降。萨默斯认为美联储需要走多远?

通胀还会持续多久?

萨默斯认为,经济学的核心是算术,要弄清这些问题的答案只是入门。他认为,不包括食品和能源在内的“潜在通货膨胀”在4%到4.5%之间,与指导美联储的个人消费支出价格指数(PCEPI)非常接近(该指数由美国经济分析局计算,被联邦政府广泛使用,包括用于调整社会保障支出)。在萨默斯的剧本中,抑制通胀需要“实际”联邦基金利率比基础通胀率高1.0%到1.5%。

据他估计,联邦基金利率要达到5.0%到5.5%。这远高于当前联邦基金利率的中间值3.1%。当然,市场和大多数观察人士预计,美联储将在接下来的几次会议上再次采取激进措施。但联邦基金期货市场和联邦公开市场委员会(Open Market Committee)的成员在最近的民意调查中预计,明年这一数字最高将达到4.6%。因此,与投资者或美联储预期的相比,萨默斯呼吁要实现的联邦基金利率要高得多,要实施的政策也更紧缩。(财富中文网)

译者:中慧言-王芳

Too far, too fast? That’s what some portfolio managers griped as the stock market plunged following the Fed’s latest rate hike on September 21. “We continue to believe that the Fed is making yet another policy mistake,” Jay Hatfield, CEO of Infrastructure Capital Management, told Fortune, arguing that the central bank’s interest rate hikes are now overly aggressive.

But Larry Summers, the cerebral Harvard economics professor and former Treasury secretary, has a very different view. In a long sit-down interview with Fortune at his home outside of Boston, he argued that the Fed will have to go much higher than most are expecting to cool runaway inflation. In fact his greatest worry is that the Fed will back off too soon. It will simply be too painful—too many lost jobs, too many 401(k)s crashing, too much blowback. He compares it to fighting an infection. “Most of us have learned that [when] the doctor prescribes you a course of antibiotics and you stop taking the course when you feel better rather than when the course prescribed is over, your condition is likely to reoccur. And it’s likely to be more difficult to eradicate the next time because the bacteria have become more resistant.” Summers worries that if the Fed backs off, “inflationary expectations will become entrenched,” and the eventual cure will be far more costly than shouldering what could be a shorter, shallower downturn in the months ahead. This reiterates what he said in June: “We need five years of unemployment above 5% to contain inflation—in other words, we need two years of 7.5% unemployment or five years of 6% unemployment or one year of 10% unemployment,” Summers said in a speech in London according to Bloomberg.

Summers never bought the “transitory” argument, that inflation was a passing phenomenon caused by supply-chain bottlenecks and COVID-related shutdowns.

For Summers, the chief source of today’s heavy inflation is over-the-top demand caused by too much money chasing too few goods. So to throttle a runaway consumer price index, the Fed must keep tightening monetary policy to the point where demand falls—sharply. Just how far does Summers think the Fed needs to go?

How long will inflation continue?

Getting to the answers is a primer in Summers’ view that the heart of economics is arithmetic. He reckons that “underlying inflation,” excluding food and energy, is running at 4% to 4.5%, pretty close to the PCEPI (personal consumption expenditure price index) numbers that guide the Fed. (The PCEPI is calculated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis and widely used by the federal government, including to adjust Social Security payments.) In the Summers playbook, taming inflation requires a “real,” Fed funds rate that’s 1.0% to 1.5% higher than the pace of bedrock inflation.

By his reckoning, the right number is 5.0% to 5.5%. That’s far above the current Fed funds benchmark which is at a midpoint of 3.1%. Of course, the markets and most observers expect the Fed to go big again at the next several meetings. But the Fed funds futures markets, and the members of the Open Market Committee in their most recent poll, expect the number to max out at 4.6% next year. So Summers is calling for much higher Fed funds rate, and tighter policies, than investors or the Fed itself are anticipating.

热读文章
热门视频
扫描二维码下载财富APP