Fast growth, huge current account “imbalances”, low real interest rates and risk spreads, subdued inflation and easy access to finance characterise the world economy. Is this party about to end? Probably not. But to identify the risks we must first decide what drives the strange world economy we see around us.
目前全球经济的特点是：增长迅速、巨额经常账户“失衡”、实际利率和风险价差较低、通胀减弱、融资便利。这场盛宴是否就要结束?可能还不会。但要确定风险，我们必须首先确定，究竟是什么造成了这种奇怪的全球经济形势。
The two interesting alternative explanations are the “savings glut” and the “money glut”. Both share common themes lobalisation; the revolution in finance; the rise of China; low inflation; and macroeconomic stability. Beyond this however, they diverge. In particular, they reverse the role of victim and villain: in the savings-glut story, the thrifty are the villains and profligate the victims; in the money-glu story, it is the other way round. This is a contemporary version of the old Keynesian versus monetarist dispute.
有两种解释可供选择：“储蓄过剩”和“资金过剩”。两者的共同主题是：全球化金融革命;中国的崛起;低通胀率;以及宏观经济稳定。但除此之外，它们就背道而驰了。特别是，它们颠倒了受害者和作恶者的角色：在储蓄过剩的说法中，节俭之人是作恶者，挥霍之人则是受害者;而按照资金过剩的说法，情况则完全相反。这是现代版的凯恩斯主义者与货币主义者之争。
The “savings glut” hypothesis is associated with Ben Bernanke, now chairman of the Federal Reserve. But the idea was floated earlier by others. Brian Reading, of Lombard Street Research, lays out the line of argument in a recent note*. A substantial excess of savings over investment has emerged, he says, predominantly in China and Japan and the oil exporters (see chart). This has led to low global real interest rates and huge capital flows towards the world's most creditworthy and willing borrowers, above all, US households. The short-term effect is an appreciation of real exchange rates and soaring current account deficits in destination countries. To sustain output in line with potential, domestic demand in those countries must also be substantially higher than gross domestic product. A country must choose fiscal and monetary policies that bring this result about.
“储蓄过剩”假说与美联储(Fed)现任主席本•伯南克(Ben Bernanke)有关。但这个说法以前就有人提了出来。朗伯德街研究公司(Lombard Street Research)的布赖恩•里丁(Brian Reading)在最近一份报告*中列出了这个论点的理论思路。他表示，储蓄相对于投资的巨额过剩主要出现在中国、日本和石油输出国。这导致全球实际利率偏低，巨额资本流向全球信用最好、意愿最强的借贷者手中，首先是美国家庭。其短期影响是，目的国实际汇率上升，经常账户赤字大幅增长。要使实际产出与潜在产出保持一致，这些国家的内需也必须大大高于国内生产总值(GDP)。一个国家必须选择能够促成这种结果的财政和货币政策。
Not only has the US absorbed 70 percent of the rest of the world's surplus capital, but consumption has accounted for 91 per cent of the increase in gross domestic product in this decade. Thus excess saving in one part of the world has driven excess consumption in another.
本世纪以来，美国不仅吸收了全球其它国家 70%的过剩资本，而且消费占到了增加的GDP的 91%。因此，全球局部的过剩储蓄造成了另一地方的过剩消费。
What Mr Reading calls a “liquidity tsunami” is the result of the savings glut. Low nominal and real interest rates encourage robust credit growth, a worldwide shift into risky assets and compression of risk spreads. Hedge funds and private equity boom as investors seek high returns, though buoyant asset prices and low real interest rates decree the opposite.
里丁所谓的“流动性海啸”是储蓄过剩的结果。低水平的名义利率和实际利率刺激了信贷旺盛增长，全球资产向风险资产转移，以及风险价差收窄。投资者追求高回报，促成了对冲基金和私人股本的蓬勃发展，尽管高涨的资产价格和较低的实际利率预示的是相反的情况。
In the savings-glut world, governments are responsible for much of the capital outflow. This is either because domestic residents are not allowed to hold foreign assets (as in China) or because most of the export revenue accrues to governments (as in the oil exporters). Either way, governments end up with vast foreign currency assets as the counterpart of domestic excess savings.
在储蓄过剩的世界，资本外流的主要责任在各国政府。这要么是因为国内居民不允许持有外国资产(例如中国)，要么是因为多数出口收入流入了政府口袋(例如石油输出国)。不管是哪种情况，最终结果都是，政府拥有与国内过剩储蓄相对应的巨额外币资产。
In this world, the US is passive victim, excess savers are the villains and the Federal Reserve is the hero. In the money-glut world, however, the world's savers are passive victims, profligate Americans are villains and the Federal Reserve is an anti-hero. In this world the US central bank is a serial bubble-blower, has distorted asset markets and visited excess monetary emission on trading partners around the world, above all, on those who seek monetary stability through pegged exchange rates.
在这个世界中，美国是一个被动的受害者，储蓄过剩国是作恶者，美联储则成为了英雄。然而，在资金过剩的世界中，世界上的储蓄国是被动受害者，大肆挥霍的美国人是作恶者，而美联储是个反英雄。在这个世界里，美联储是“连环吹泡沫者”，扭曲了资产市场，造成了世界各地贸易伙伴的资金过剩，特别是那些希望通过盯住汇率维持货币稳定的国家。
This is the line of argument of Richard Duncan, a well-known financial analyst**. The argument is that US monetary excess causes low nominal and, given subdued inflationary expectations, real interest rates. This causes rapid credit growth to consumers and a collapse in household savings. The excess spending floods across the frontiers, generating a huge trade deficit and a corresponding outflow of dollars.
这是著名金融分析师理查德 •邓肯(Richard Duncan)的论证思路**。他认为，美国资金过剩导致名义利率保持在低水平，而且，由于通胀预期减弱，实际利率也处在低位，从而导致消费者信贷迅速增长，家庭储蓄大幅下降。过剩的支出跨越边境，造成了巨额贸易逆差和相应的美元外流。
The outflow weakens the dollar. Floating currencies are forced up to uncompetitive levels. But pegged currencies are kept down by open-ended foreign currency intervention. This leads to a massive accumulation of foreign currency reserves (up $3,445bn between January 2000 and March of this year). It also creates difficulties with sterilising the impact on money supply and inflation.
资金外流削弱了美元。实行浮动汇率制的货币被迫升至不具竞争力的水平。但实行盯住汇率制的货币通过无限制的外汇干预而保持在低位。这导致了外汇储备的大规模积聚(从 2000 年 1 月至今年 3 月之间增加了3.4450 万亿美元)，也造成其难以冲销对货币供应和通胀的影响。
In this view of the world economy, savings are not a driving force, as in the savings-glut hypothesis, but a passive result of excess money creation by the system's hegemonic power. Profits (and so measured corporate savings) rise simply because of increased exports and output under economies of scale. Governments of countries that possess the huge trade surpluses then follow the fiscal and monetary policies that sustain the excess savings needed to curb excessive demand and inflation.
在这种全球经济视角中，储蓄不是推动力(就像在储蓄过剩假说中那样)，而是系统中的霸权国家过度货币创造的被动结果。利润(以及以此衡量的企业储蓄)的上升，只不过是因为在规模经济之下，出口和产出增加。那些拥有巨额贸易顺差的政府因而采用了支撑储蓄过剩的财政货币政策，以遏制需求过剩和通胀。
（责任编辑:allen）
