
Normal financial-services firms should have been dealing in the safe, middle-of-the road mortgages that Fannie and Freddie specialise in. Except that they were crowded out into subprime mortgages. Fannie and Freddie should never have grown so large. Except that they wanted to exploit the margin between the government-guaranteed borrowing costs and the commercial lending income. They should have been stopped by Congress and their regulator. Except that they spent some of their subsidy on a fierce lobbying machine.
正常的金融服務(wù)商本該經(jīng)營(yíng)二房擅長(zhǎng)的不冒風(fēng)險(xiǎn)、中規(guī)中矩的抵押業(yè)務(wù)——可惜它們被擠入了次貸市場(chǎng);房利美和房地美原本不會(huì)成長(zhǎng)到今天的規(guī)模–可惜它們想賺取政府擔(dān)保的貸款成本和商業(yè)貸款收入之間的差額;二房本該受制于國(guó)會(huì)和監(jiān)理機(jī)構(gòu)——可惜它們將部分補(bǔ)貼用于雇傭強(qiáng)勁有力的游說(shuō)機(jī)器。
Fannie must not
“房”不可倒
In the past, we have argued for privatising Fannie and Freddie completely. But now that the guarantee is explicit, Mr Paulson should seek to secure the gains for taxpayers and treat Fannie and Freddie like one of their own mortgages, by nationalising them, breaking them up and selling them on. That would almost double the public debt-but only in book-keeping terms. The liability is already implicit (as at Northern Rock), and, unlike Treasuries, it is ultimately backed by housing as collateral.
過(guò)去,我們支持對(duì)二房實(shí)行徹底的私有化,但眼下,既然政府的擔(dān)保已經(jīng)明確無(wú)誤,保爾森就該為納稅人考慮,謀求保護(hù)其財(cái)富,并將二房當(dāng)作自身抵押的資產(chǎn)之一,進(jìn)行國(guó)有化,拆分,繼而出售。這么做幾乎要讓國(guó)債翻一番–不過(guò)只會(huì)出現(xiàn)在簿記賬面上。二房的債務(wù)已轉(zhuǎn)入后臺(tái)操作(如同北巖銀行),而且最終有房市的間接支撐,這一點(diǎn)不同于國(guó)庫(kù)券。
It is harder to know what to do about all those other implicit state guarantees-seemingly to any financial outfit. The first instinct should be to make sure someone suffers; shareholders and managers at the very least. It was a valuable lesson when some of IndyMac’s depositors could not get hold of their money because they exceeded the government guarantee.
想知道其它那些擁有國(guó)家暗中擔(dān)保的機(jī)構(gòu)何去何從,這更不容易——對(duì)于任何金融機(jī)構(gòu)似乎都是這樣。依據(jù)本能,第一步應(yīng)該是確保有人承受苦痛,而股東和管理層至少該承擔(dān)責(zé)任。印地麥克的一些存款人由于未受政府擔(dān)保而無(wú)法保住錢財(cái),這是個(gè)寶貴的教訓(xùn)。
If you cannot let firms fail in a bust, then you must contain them in the boom. That helps explain why the investment banks now need more supervision; why financial firms should have to hold more capital as a boom gathers pace; and why monetary policy should lean against rising asset prices. Regulation is necessary, but beware the state being seduced into taking on duties it cannot possibly carry out well. As Fannie and Freddie show, regulators are easily captured and outwitted. The best controls are transparency and competition. When possible the government needs to stand back. Sadly, it failed to do so in the American mortgage market.
如果不能讓企業(yè)完全破產(chǎn),就應(yīng)保證它們業(yè)務(wù)興旺。這有助于解釋投行在眼下為什么需要更多的監(jiān)管;金融機(jī)構(gòu)為什么得在繁榮行將消失時(shí)握有更多的資本;以及貨幣政策為什么應(yīng)向上漲的資產(chǎn)價(jià)格傾斜。監(jiān)管是必需的,但得謹(jǐn)防政府被誤入歧途,承擔(dān)起可能無(wú)法良好履行的職責(zé)。二房危機(jī)表明,監(jiān)理機(jī)構(gòu)的政策容易落后于、受困于時(shí)局。最好的管制手段是透明度和相互競(jìng)爭(zhēng),政府應(yīng)在可能的時(shí)候退居二線。遺憾的是,在美國(guó)的房貸抵押市場(chǎng)中,政府沒(méi)能這么做。
·銀行業(yè)與市場(chǎng):二房颶風(fēng) 08/07/28
·對(duì)房利美與房地美說(shuō)“不” 08/07/28
·美通過(guò)最新房產(chǎn)救助法案 08/07/28
·建行:未持70億美元“兩房”債券 08/07/24
·房地美和房利美財(cái)務(wù)狀況面臨審查 08/07/23
觀點(diǎn)網(wǎng)關(guān)于本網(wǎng)站版權(quán)事宜的聲明:
觀點(diǎn)網(wǎng)刊載此文不代表同意其說(shuō)法或描述,僅為客觀提供更多信息用。凡本網(wǎng)注明“來(lái)源:觀點(diǎn)網(wǎng)”字樣的所有文字、圖片等稿件,版權(quán)均屬觀點(diǎn)網(wǎng)所有,本網(wǎng)站有部分文章是由網(wǎng)友自由上傳,對(duì)于此類文章本站僅提供交流平臺(tái),不為其版權(quán)負(fù)責(zé)。如對(duì)稿件內(nèi)容有疑議,或您發(fā)現(xiàn)本網(wǎng)站上有侵犯您的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的文章,請(qǐng)您速來(lái)電020-87326901或來(lái)函guandian#126.com(發(fā)送郵件時(shí)請(qǐng)將“#”改為“@”)與觀點(diǎn)網(wǎng)聯(lián)系。