拿
出泰瑞•杰克斯（Terry Jacks）的老唱片吧，因为上世纪70年代似乎正在加速回归。
Reuters
中国采取物价稳定措施以粉碎初露端倪的通胀。
摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）旗下的全球货币分析师小组公布的报告目前认为，全球可能出现的滞胀在某种程度上类似上世纪70年代的情况。该报告还说，70年代的滞胀不是受油价高涨带动的，而是由宽松的货币政策推动的。
这一观点当然支持了这样的看法，即美联储（还有日本央行、欧洲央行和英国央行等）执行的超级宽松货币政策将产生不太好的结果，滞胀可能就是一个结果。
摩根士丹利的基本观点如下：
*金融危机“损害了”许多潜在产出，因此减少了经济的增长潜力。这降低了经济的增长限速。（另一个投资银行的经济学家上周刚刚向我提出了类似的观点。）
*美联储宁可过于谨慎，也不想重复1937年的悲剧，当时“过早紧缩政策”导致经济急速下滑。现任美联储主席贝南克（Ben Bernanke）知道这次大萧条，所以上述所言也不是什么古怪的想法。
*较之通缩威胁，各央行更喜欢通胀威胁。有人可能会说，这是因为人们知道如何应对（通胀）这家伙。让（美联储前主席）保罗•沃尔克（Volcker）回来吧，但不是现在！（沃尔克以高通胀的克星闻名。）
*由于有太多公共和民间债务，因此全球各央行愿意引发或默许通胀。
这么说滞胀即将来临吗？像华尔街任何一个狡猾的人一样，摩根士丹利分析师说，滞胀不是已知的结论。对于是否增加更多举措，他们说还没有出现太多通胀，但各种通胀因素正在累积。
Dave Kansas
（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）
Get out your old Terry Jacks albums, because it seems the 1970s comeback is gathering momentum.
Last week, we noted rising inflation pressures among troubled, no/slow-growth, high-unemployment euro-zone countries. This morning, China appears to be taking a page out of the Nixon economic playbook by imposing price controls in order to squash non-incipient inflation that we’ve warned about here and here, among other places.
Morgan Stanley’s Global Monetary Analyst report is now seeing possible stagflation around the globe in a manner similar to the 1970s. It also says (in a non-CW way) that the 1970s stagflation was driven not by soaring oil prices, but by loose monetary policy.
That view, of course, supports the idea that super-super-super-super-duper easy monetary policy by the Federal Reserve (and the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank and the Bank of England and I could go on) will have not-so-good consequences, and stagflation is one possible outcome.
The basic MS thesis is as follows:
* The financial crisis has “destroyed” a lot of potential output, thereby reducing the economy’s growth potential. This “lowers the economy’s speed limit.” (Another investment bank economist made a similar point to me just last week.)
* The Fed wants to err on the side of caution to avoid a repeat of 1937 when a “premature tightening” led to a sharp downturn. Big Ben Bernanke knows his Depression, so not an outlandish thought.
* Central banks “prefer the threat of inflation to the one of deflation.” The devil you know how to slay, one might say. Kind of economic Augustinianism. Bring back Volcker ─ but not yet!
* With so much public and private debt, there are “incentives to generate or acquiesce to inflation” among the global central banks.
So, is stagflation around the corner? Like any good Wall Street sharpie, the MS folks say stagflation is not a foregone conclusion. And for added measure, they say there’s not much inflation around. But, the elements are gathering.
Dave Kansas
Last week, we noted rising inflation pressures among troubled, no/slow-growth, high-unemployment euro-zone countries. This morning, China appears to be taking a page out of the Nixon economic playbook by imposing price controls in order to squash non-incipient inflation that we’ve warned about here and here, among other places.
Morgan Stanley’s Global Monetary Analyst report is now seeing possible stagflation around the globe in a manner similar to the 1970s. It also says (in a non-CW way) that the 1970s stagflation was driven not by soaring oil prices, but by loose monetary policy.
That view, of course, supports the idea that super-super-super-super-duper easy monetary policy by the Federal Reserve (and the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank and the Bank of England and I could go on) will have not-so-good consequences, and stagflation is one possible outcome.
The basic MS thesis is as follows:
* The financial crisis has “destroyed” a lot of potential output, thereby reducing the economy’s growth potential. This “lowers the economy’s speed limit.” (Another investment bank economist made a similar point to me just last week.)
* The Fed wants to err on the side of caution to avoid a repeat of 1937 when a “premature tightening” led to a sharp downturn. Big Ben Bernanke knows his Depression, so not an outlandish thought.
* Central banks “prefer the threat of inflation to the one of deflation.” The devil you know how to slay, one might say. Kind of economic Augustinianism. Bring back Volcker ─ but not yet!
* With so much public and private debt, there are “incentives to generate or acquiesce to inflation” among the global central banks.
So, is stagflation around the corner? Like any good Wall Street sharpie, the MS folks say stagflation is not a foregone conclusion. And for added measure, they say there’s not much inflation around. But, the elements are gathering.
Dave Kansas
没有评论:
发表评论