移民资讯网

首页 > 对话@高端访谈 > 正文

独家专访前美国前财长 :祭奠金融危机十年
2019-03-21 07:55:04   来源:看见网·羊说 原创   作者:看见网·羊说   编辑:纪许光
“救赎先生”鲍尔森:关于金融危机的反思与祭奠。

对话鲍尔森财长 | 祭奠金融危机10年

本内容为看见网·羊说 独家访谈;未经授权,严禁转载或部分使用

核心提示:

  危机来去汹涌,记忆却未必清澈如水。华尔街昔日巨头雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)10年前大厦倾塌,全球拉响金融危机警报,到处一地瓦砾。
 

本期看见网·羊说对话前美国财政部部长、前高盛首席执行官亨利·鲍尔森(Henry Paulson),这位金融危机期间的“救赎先生”和另一位金融监管重要人物,前美国参议院银行委员会主席,《多德弗兰克》法案起草者克里斯·多德(Chris Dodd)讲坐话金融危机10年,回应我们的提问。

雷曼兄弟破产是美国历史上最大的破产案,也标志着2008年金融危机全面爆发。哀鸿声中,繁荣时期不被人注意的致命隐患暴露无遗:金融市场对有毒资产的依赖——房地产市场次级贷款及其各色衍生产品。

 

惠泽全球多年的经济扩张期嘎然而止。国际货币基金组织(IMF)数据显示,新兴经济2009年急剧减速,增幅只有2.8%,而发达工业国家出现负增长,-3.4%。

经济增长数据(IMF)

 

 

美欧政府冲出来拯救深陷困境的金融机构,买单的是各自的纳税大众。风浪略有减弱后,20国集团(G20)国家首脑聚到一起开峰会,一致认为世界经济需要大家协力推举支持,遂签字同意采纳一系列刺激政策维持和推动增长。

 

值此危机爆发10周年之际,我们首先透过巴菲特的双眼,来回顾10年前的金融海啸。马2009年宣誓就职,入主白宫。他在就职演说中提到:“经济状况堪忧,迫切需要我们采取大胆、果断的行动。”

 

担心金融机构过度依赖不良贷款,美国金融业的资产渐次蒸发,一个雷曼兄弟倒下去,更多同行业未能幸免。美国政府接手联邦住房贷款抵押机构房利美(Fannie Mae)和房地美(Freddie Mac),花1820亿美元的天价赎救美国国际集团(AIG),国会还批准了7000亿美元专款用于救助深陷泥潭难以自拔的银行。

 

时任美国财长鲍尔森(Henry Paulson)甚至有了个绰号,“救赎先生”。

“救赎先生”鲍尔森

 

 

联邦政府开始大举抛美元买债券,为经济注入资金,6年内注资总共达4.5万亿美元。就职后头几天,奥巴马总统便签署了复苏法案,拨款8000亿美元用于拯救行动并投资于基础设施、教育、医疗和可再生能源。他说:“我知道此时此刻被视为在帮助银行有多么不得人心... 我是要让那些银行为得到的救助承担全部责任。这次,首席行政官们将无法再用纳税人的钱来给自己付工资,或者买华丽的窗帘,或者干脆开着私人飞机消失了。那种日子一去不返了。”

 

美国踏上了漫长的复苏之路:数据公司Corelogic统计显示,到2017年的10年里,将近780万套住宅被放贷公司没收,专业术语叫“丧失抵押品赎回权”。

 

 

2008年1月到2010年2月间,730万工作职位化为乌有,失业率徘徊在10%上下。经济刺激迅速推高联邦政府的预算赤字。国际货币基金组织(IMF)数据显示,2009年美国联邦预算赤字占国民经济总产值GDP的将近12%,2015年降到2.5%。失业率也回落到危机爆发前的水平。

 

2012年,奥巴马宣布政府用于援助银行的“每一分钱”都回收了。针对金融业专设的执法部门宣布,迄今为止已经把251人送进了监狱,其中包括59位银行家,但没有一个是华尔街的公司首席行政官。下面奉上《大空头》的电影解说,一起体会金融危机爆发前华尔街的“非理性繁荣”(Irrational Exuberance)。

 

本期看见网·羊说对话前美国财政部部长、前高盛首席执行官亨利·鲍尔森(Henry Paulson),这位金融危机期间的“救赎先生”和另一位金融监管重要人物,前美国参议院银行委员会主席,《多德弗兰克》法案起草者克里斯·多德(Chris Dodd)讲坐话金融危机10年,回应我们的提问。

 

对话文本

 
 

 

Seebadnews YANG XIANG: Hi, my name's Yang. I'm a third year in Sociology. Thank you for this conversation. So my question is two-fold: with political populism, economic nationalism, and the lack of multilateral thinking, exemplified by Trump’s playing hardball on tariffs, what better options, wherewithal, or conviction [can] the next generation of global policymakers have to remedy the next possible financial crisis than the last one. And to what extent will China be able to offer a remedy again, say, by sacrificing some relative gain in exchange for some relative power, a capacity this administration may not be happy to see, if not undermine it now?

看见网向杨:你好,我叫向杨,社会学三年级博士生。感谢你们今天的对话。我的问题有两个方面:鉴于当前政治民粹主义泛起,经济民族主义抬头,而多边主义的考量有所示弱,以此为典型的就是特朗普在关税上的强硬主张。那么对于下一代全球的政策制定者们,相对于你们,有哪些更好的选项、可用的资源或是坚守的信念,能够让他们修复下一场可能发生的金融危机呢?(注:这里的下一代政策制定者,是相对于鲍尔森财长和参议院银行委员会主席多德,后者是应对上一次全球金融危机的重要政策制定者;同时也暗示他俩在2008年拯救华尔街大银行过程中消耗的政治资源会对下一次救市造成影响。)在多大程度上中国能够再次提供一个修缮方案,比如牺牲一些“相对利益”来换取一些“相对权力”,当然这种“利益”置换“权力”的能力本届美国政府并不乐见,甚至可能要马上压制这种能力。(注:与绝对利益不同,相对利益指利益的分布,比如自由贸易对A、B两国绝对利益都是“正”的,但存在贸易出超的A国比贸易入超的B国在相对利益上占优;如果权力(Power)的反面是依附(Dependence),那么放弃相对利益(relative gain)也许能够换来其他国家更多的对自己的依赖,从而形成相对权力(relative power)的增加 ,比如中国的一带一路)

 

CHRIS DODD: Hank, you take that one, will ya? [LAUGHTER]

克里斯·多德:汉克,你来回答吧,你说呢?[笑]

 

HANK PAULSON: So I'm gonna make this—I’m gonna go very simple and very big on this, because I think you always have to assume that, you know, the world is a much more uncertain place today than it ever was. And the world is increasingly smaller, because it's interrelated, and what happens in one part happens in another. And so to me, I start with the U.S., and I do think we need to fix our problems here. We've got less economic problems than any other major country, but we will be able to withstand a future crisis if we've got a strong, resilient economy. And so all the things I'd want to do here are, you know, rather than getting into all of the policy prescriptions, you know, we need–we have an economy that's growing at a good pace, but a good portion of the people are being left behind. Wages have been flat for a long time.

汉克·鲍尔森:我要说的是——我对此的观点会很简单,也很宏观,因为我觉得大家总应该假设,当前的世界比以往要变幻莫测得多。而且世界越变越小,因为各地紧密联系在一起。一个地方发生的事也会影响到另一个地方。我也是这么想的。我先说美国。我的确认为我们需要修复一些国内的问题。美国的经济问题比其他任何国家都少,但我们要想经得起未来的危机,前提是我们得有一个即强劲又有韧性的经济。所以我想要做的一切无非就是,并不是说开一堆经济药方,我们需要一个保持良好增长势态的经济。但是一大部分人却没有尝到经济增长的甜头。薪资已经很久没有涨过了。

 

You know, I look at it–when I say, what was one of the causes of the crisis, you know, for years before the crisis hit, productivity had been declining, you know, wages had been flat for years, household borrowing—people were borrowing more than they could afford because, you know, to try to keep up and maintain a standard of living. So I happen to think the kinds of things we need to fix are things that let more people participate in the success of our economic system. If we don't do that, our political system isn't going to work and we're not going to be well-served. I also happen to believe we have to lead and be open outside of the U.S., because if the U.S. doesn't help shape the world we live in, it's going to be a very dangerous place and it's going to hit us.

看到这一点,我觉得,导致08年那场危机的一个原因就是,危机前的好几年,生产力一直在下降,薪资一直没有上涨过。住房贷款——人们借的钱超出了他们的偿还能力,因为他们想赶上或维持一定的生活标准。我正好认为,我们需要修复的事情就是让更多的人能从经济发展中分一杯羹。如果我们不做这一点,我们的政治体制也不会发挥作用的,自然也过不上好生活。我还想到,我觉得我们得领导美国之外的地方,对它们开放,因为如果美国不帮助塑造这个世界,世界肯定会变得危险,且最终我们也会遭殃。

 

I get asked a lot about China and financial risks coming from China. That was one of the questions you asked, or was it are we going to lose ground to China? Which was it—were you concerned about financial–? I happen to believe, for what it's worth, you can't predict where the next crisis will come from, but I don’t think we want to fight the last war. I don't think it's going to come from our banking system. The danger may be if banks are too regulated, we force the risk out into other areas, but I think it's more likely to come from outside of our country. But when I look at China, I look at, you know, a lot of issues that we had in the U.S. in terms of shadow banking markets, you know, lack of transparency, short-term debt financing long-term investments, and so on. But there—that is all in their local currency, they don't have an open capital account, I think they've got plenty of room to deal with these issues,

我多次被问及有关中国和中国金融风险的问题,你刚才也问到了,还是说我们是不是会落后于中国,是那个吗?还是说你问的是金融方面的?我认为,这只是个人观点,你无从得知下一次危机会从哪儿来。但我不觉得人类会乐见这场争斗。我认为危机不会来自我们的银行体系;反而危机可能来源于,银行被监管得太严了,导致风险转移到了其他领域。我认为危机更可能来自美国之外的国家。当我审视中国时,我看到了很多美国之前也存在的问题,如影子银行,透明缺失,短期信贷为长期投资等等。但那些都是以本国货币交易结算的,他们(中国)也没有开放的资本账户,所以他们应该有很多辗转腾挪的空间来解决问题。

 

and you know, in China, their situation is the opposite of ours. It takes political courage to do a bailout in the U.S.—it's unpopular. In China, that's their go-to move, you know, so it takes political courage not to do a bailout. So, you know, you create all kinds of moral hazard. So I'm not predicting a crisis coming from outside of the U.S., but I think for younger people today, the key is to get a political system in this country that works, is not dysfunctional. It's got to be bipartisan, nothing lasting is done that's not done on a bipartisan basis. And we all need to be working to fix the political system, and the political system is a little bit of a catch-22. It's hard to fix the political system if you've got a dysfunctional economic system, and it's hard to fix the economic system if you've got a dysfunctional political system. I tend to be an optimist because I'm an American, and I think we're gonna—I keep expecting the leadership to emerge. [LAUGHS]

而且中国的情况和我们正好相反。在美国政府要出资搞救市,需要足够的政治勇气,因为这种做法不受人待见。在中国,他们会直接这么做,不去救市反而需要更大的政治勇气。所以,这样就会产生各种道德风险。我不是在预测来自美国外部的危机,但我认为今天的年轻人,关键在于让本国的政治体系能够运作起来,而不是让它抛锚。这需要两党合作,没有什么比两党死掐更伤害政治体制的了。我们都需要出力修复政治体系,而我们的政体多少有点22条军规的意味(注:左右为难的状况)。如果经济失灵了,修复政体就很难,反过来政体失灵了,修复经济也很难。但我仍然愿意保持乐观,因为我是美国人,我认为我们要——我会等待年轻的引领者出现。

 

CHRIS DODD: That was a brief answer we had there. [LAUGHS]

克里斯·多德:你的回答真简洁。[笑]

 

HANK PAULSON: They should call it a filibuster!

汉克·鲍尔森:他们会说我在冗长辩论!(注:所谓“阻挠议事法”(filibuster),又称“冗长演说”,是美国国会一项特殊的议事规则,目的在于通过不停地发表演说,阻止正在审议的议案或人事提名交付表决。这一规则一般由少数派议员采用,是他们的最后一道抵抗程序。)

 

CHRIS DODD: I know! Let me just mention a couple of things in response to what you said, because it's–I’ll share what I was thinking about, particularly in writing the financial reform bill. Nobody's been aware of this, but in April of 2008, the G20 came out with a series of recommendations on financial reform. I didn't go around issuing a press release that I was sort of curious about these ideas that the G20 had recommended, but we followed them to a large extent, and you can imagine the political reaction if someone had suggested we were following some international set of criteria. Two things about what we tried to do with the bill: one was restore confidence, which had been shattered, and so I can't legislate confidence, but hopefully some of the things we did would bring confidence back to the system. And the other was to try to harmonize where possible, internationally, some of the rules. I didn't want to see our country become—we'd been leading in financial services for decades.

克里斯·多德:我懂你。让我再顺便说几点,回应一下你刚才说的,因为它—我分享一下我的想法,特别是撰写金融改革法案时的想法。(注:即《多德-弗兰克法案》全称《多德-弗兰克华尔街改革和消费者保护法》(Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act),它是在众议院与参议院分别通过的法案版本基础上整合而成的,分别于2010年6月30日和7月15日获众议院和参议院通过,最后由美国总统签署,被认为是20世纪30年代以来美国改革力度最大、影响最深远的金融监管改革。该法案旨在通过改善金融体系问责制和透明度,以促进美国金融稳定、解决“大而不倒”问题、保护纳税人利益、保护消费者利益。)当时没人会意识到这点,但是在2008年4月时,G20峰会期间提出了一系列金融改革的建议。我当时并没有刊发什么以表示我对这些G20提出的建议感兴趣,但是我们采纳了大部分的改革建议,你可以想象一下政界的反应,如果有人建议我们在跟进一系列国际标准。我们主要围绕法案做了两点:首先,修复动摇的信心,我当然不能立法恢复信心,但是我希望我们做的事能让人们重拾对金融体系的信心。再就是在协调,在国际上可能协调的地方,协调一些规则。我不希望看到美国变得——我们几十年来一直引领金融服务领域。

 

To give up that leadership would've been catastrophic, in my view. And so one of the reasons for writing this bill—the Financial Reform Bill—which by the way, I remember the Secretary actually talking about the importance of re-writing the rules, the tool-chest, in a sense, but you could never get Congress to do it in the absence of a crisis. We never, ever could have never passed the Dodd-Frank legislation in '06, '07, '08, and you couldn't have passed it again in 2010 or '11. The window opened up because of TARP—what we went through—and so there was an opportunity to do that and get it through. But the harmonization was something I really wanted to see us come out leading on. We'd set sort of some ideas and rules, and maybe the rest of the world would follow, in a way. So hopefully today, in the absence of—when the President talks about being a "nationalist" and talking about "we're gonna go our own route and own way," I think raises some serious questions that does pose some serious risk, financially and politically, with that mentality.

要放弃这个领先地位,在我看来,后果不堪设想。所以撰写这个法案的理由之一——就是金融改革法案。顺便说一句,我记得当时鲍尔森财长其实谈到了重定规则和调控政策的重要性,但你可别奢望国会能通过法案,如果没有危机掐住喉咙的话。我们绝无可能会在06年、07年甚至08年通过《都德-弗兰克法案》,而且就算历史重现,再次回到2010年或11年也不可能通过。我们当时正好碰上了一个窗口期,就是“问题资产救助计划”(注:Troubled Asset Relief Program,简称TARP。2008年10月美国国会通过了《紧急经济稳定法》,决定出台“问题资产救助计划”,主要内容是授予美国财政部7000亿美元资金额度,用于购买和担保金融机构问题资产,以救助当时处于危机中的金融机构,恢复金融市场稳定),我们抓住了这个窗口,所以才有机会撰写并通过法案。但是我依然希望看到我们能站出来领导并协调各方。我们会提出一些想法和规则,某种程度上或许其他国家愿意遵循。但愿在当下,在还没有——特朗普在说什么当个“民族主义者”并且谈到了“我们要走自己的路,做自己的事”,我认为这种思维,给我们带来了一些严峻的问题,导致一些切实的风险,金融上的,政治上的都有。
看见网·羊说特别鸣谢Leon的英翻中及字幕制作


频道排行榜