Just under a year ago, the popular opinion was that the U.S. economy was strong and the Federal Reserve would need to tighten soon to slow the impending inflationary pressure. In fact, much of the commentary at the time was critical ofFed chair Janet Yellenfor being behind the curve.
快进至2016年3月，意见已逆转。需求数据，如零售销售，个人消费支出和消费者信心，似乎已经转身。每月指标在经济增长中显示出广泛的弱点，通胀压力不再是材料。在她的二月的证词中，耶伦对未来的不确定性表达了很大的不确定性，特别是全球经济将如何对三个因素作出反应：全球金融市场的抛售，油价下降的通缩影响slowdown in Chinese growth。在经济条件和消极转变uncertainties that lie ahead have led many economists and investors to call on central banks for another aggressive round of quantitative easing. But bringing back QE in the U.S. is likely to be both ineffective and dangerous. The answer at this stage lies in Washington rather than with the Fed.
If the Fed were to implement liquidity injections, it would continue a 35-year cycle of monetary easing that began in the early 1980s with falling interest rates and continued with the asset purchases implemented by Fed chief Ben Bernanke following the 2009 subprime mortgage crisis. Sitting in her predecessor’s seat, Yellen is largely powerless.
真正的危险是，当经济经历不可避免的下一个大衰退时，维持膨胀股票市场估值越来越困难。Yellen面临着资产价格高度升高的情况，产量曲线是平坦的：一种令人讨厌的结合，具有大量下行风险。想到的比喻正在推动山谷越来越陡峭的山峰。正如Yellen接近峰值的那样，她必须越来越多地努力获得较少和更少的地面。此外，既有可能拖着的机会和巨石的危险落在山上越来越淡化。不成比例的下行风险来自于，资产越来越少的房间通过风险溢价收缩而较少，而且还有更少的房间yield curveto flatten during a sell-off. This downside risk is exacerbated by high debt levels across the economy. Additionally, although banks and households have deleveraged slightly and debt service has come down, total private debt (250 percent of gross domestic product) is still high. The ability of the private sector to take on more debt is low, and there would be substantial risk were it to do so.
虽然扁平产量曲线是可管理的，但具有高债务水平的零利率环境的平均产量曲线是具有挑战性的。自20世纪30年代以来，美国经济并未经历过零利率的扁平产量曲线。在这种情况下，中央银行无法充分降低利率以提高经济活动和资产价格，收益率无法在市场抛售期间降低价格收入比率。对于投资者来说，这意味着上行有限的上行升高波动。
Aggressive quantitative easing also may be problematic for a social reason. So far, QE has given a leg up to the owners of stocks and bonds, who are disproportionately rich, further increasing the wealth gap in the U.S. The divide between rich and poor is at an historical maximum, which can become a substantial source of social volatility. (The top 1 percent’s share of the nation’s net worth has increased from 28 percent in 1985 to 45 percent today.) During Yellen’s testimony to Congress in July 2015, she admitted that there is little that monetary policy can do to address the disparity in unemployment rates among different demographic groups, especially as regards African-Americans, and to narrow the opportunity gap: “There really isn’t anything directly that the Federal Reserve can do to affect the structure of unemployment across groups.”
它是轻率的耶伦开始提高兴趣st rates quickly or to stop rolling over the QE assets already on the Fed balance sheet. A safer course of action would be to continue pumping liquidity into the U.S. economy, until fiscal policy solidly steps in and offsets monetary action.
Let’s examine the interaction of monetary and fiscal policies. Real GDP represents the total production in an economy during a given period. When you plot RGDP over time, you will see that it fluctuates around an upward trend (see chart 1). This trend is the potential output of the economy. When output is above potential, the economy is tight and inflation is rising. When output is below potential, excess capacity puts downward pressure on inflation. One can see this more easily by looking at the output gap, which is the difference between actual and potential GDP (see chart 2).
产出差距，就像失业率一样，近似于经济的严重程度，因此表明工资和通货膨胀的压力。潜在的增长措施每年可以产生多少经济在不通过过剩的情况下进食。虽然我们可以在许多方面测量美国潜在的增长，但它有两个主要成分：劳动力增长（大约0.5％）和生产率增长（约1.5％）。在过去的七年里，美国经历了前所未有的货币刺激，主要经过财富效应（作为消费司机的股票的增加）。增长越来越高于潜力，并且休闲水平几乎标准化。
The Fed’s goal is to maintain a level of economic activity that is neither inflationary nor disinflationary — that is, to target a neutral output gap. The Fed is able to affect the output gap by accelerating or decelerating economic growth through monetary policy, which alters the incentives of the private sector to consume. When the Fed cheapens credit by cutting interest rates, corporations and households lever up. When it boosts asset prices, households spend down savings. Significantly, although the Fed can cause fluctuations in growth around potential, it does not have the tools to directly alter the underlying trend (see charts 3 and 4).
今天不幸的情况 - 情况 - 高债务水平，低生产率和使用过的货币政策工具 - 如果增长持续强劲，高于潜力，并不有问题。当增长低于潜力时，危险会出现，并且经济已经通过（或者失业率获得劳动力市场已经享有的失业）的懈怠开始。在自己的过程中，工资增长不太可能正常化，并且大幅度经济衰退的风险增长。社会上，美国的持续剥夺了中产阶级和下层阶级。在政治上，不难想象为什么唐纳德特朗普和伯尼桑德斯这样的反对候选人已经获得了这种意外和广泛的支持。
与货币方法不同，财政政策可以以有针对性的方式将投资转向实际经济。然而，财政政策更难实施：政府将不得不克服华盛顿的政治网格，并以智慧的方式投资。有效的政府支出有先例，如富兰克林德拉诺罗斯福的新交易恢复计划，但也有多个拙劣的政府干预的例子。
如果成功，财政政策可能有许多福利。首先，它可以抵消私营部门增长的下降，以至于货币政策变得越来越少，导致对GDP增长的短期提升。当私营部门不愿借用时，政府可以提供信贷创造，政府支出可以替代货币促进的私营部门消费。
The second effect of fiscal policy is the long-term boost to productivity and the change in the slope of GDP growth. Focused, smart investments that increase the productive capacity of the economy generally boost real wages. The list of government-sponsored projects that would add long-term productive value to the developed-world nations is lengthy. In the U.S., a significant portion of the infrastructure is in need of an upgrade. Investments in roads, transport and municipal facilities can materially support future productivity. Investments in alternative sources of energy would decrease dependence on oil-producing nations as well as lay the groundwork for sustainable future growth. Investment in education would go a long way to normalizing the wealth and income polarities that currently plague the U.S. and other nations.
The third effect of fiscal policy has to do with its capacity for precision. Intelligent fiscal projects allow the country to direct resources to specific problems, rather than increasing the wealth of the holders of financial assets across the board. For example, the New Deal put thousands of the unemployed poor to work, giving them both livelihood and dignity after the start of the Great Depression.
With very little fuel in the tank to implement effective monetary policy, fiscal stimulus must pick up the slack. Not only will fiscal action fill the hole left by increasingly ineffective monetary easing, but it will also give developed-world governments an opportunity to invest in the future and narrow the income and wealth gaps that have accelerated over the past ten years.
Katina Stefanova is the CIO and CEO of Marto Capital, a New York–based multistrategy asset manager. From 2005 to 2014, she served as an executive at Bridgewater Associates, holding both investment and senior management roles. During her tenure, the Westport, Connecticut–based hedge fund firm grew from $20 billion to $150 billion in assets under management.