網路城邦
回本城市首頁 時事論壇
市長:胡卜凱  副市長:
加入本城市推薦本城市加入我的最愛訂閱最新文章
udn城市政治社會政治時事【時事論壇】城市/討論區/
討論區全球經濟網 字體:
看回應文章  上一個討論主題 回文章列表 下一個討論主題
國家倒閉危機 -- Aaron Task
 瀏覽1,346|回應2推薦0

胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友

Is Sovereign Debt the New Subprime?

Aaron Task in Investing, Recession, Banking

That’s a question many on Wall Street are asking as 2009 comes to a close. Just as many subprime borrowers were unable to make their mortgage payments in 2007 and 2008, investors now fear certain nations will be unable to pay their debts in the year ahead.

Rising mortgage defaults and credit card delinquencies put many banks on the brink of bankruptcy in 2008, sending the global economy into a tailspin. But sovereign debt defaults are potentially even more catastrophic as they can lead to geopolitical instability, societal unrest and even war. And there will also be economic ramifications for investors worldwide, putting America’s (and the globe’s) fragile recovery at great risk.

To varying degrees, Greece, Spain, Ukraine, Austria, Latvia, Mexico are just a handful of the nations viewed at risk of defaulting. Meanwhile, Dubai only just avoided a similar fate thanks to a $10 billion bailout from their oil-rich neighbor Abu Dhabi.

So, who else out there could rattle our constantly more interconnected world? Here's a look at where the trouble spots could be:

Greece: Fitch Ratings last week joined two other ratings agencies in expressing concern about the country’s health. “Greece faces the risk of sinking under its debt,” Prime Minister George Papandreou said Monday in a speech where he pledged to slash the nation’s budget deficit by overhauling the nation’s tax system and cutting government spending.

Ecuador, which defaulted in December 2008 when President Rafael Correa said the nation wouldn't make an interest payment of more than $30 million on a $510 million bond issue, carries a CCC+ rating at S&P. They define the debt issuers in the CCC category as "[c]urrently vulnerable and dependent on favorable business, financial and economic conditions to meet financial commitments." Translation: Probably in for hard times.  

Argentina, Grenada, Lebanon, Pakistan and Bolivia are judged to be a little better off, but they're saddled with still dubious B- ratings. The single-B classification at S&P means these nations are "[m]ore vulnerable to adverse business, financial and economic conditions but currently [have] the capacity to meet financial commitments." Translation: Not good, and needs some things to go right, preferably soon.

Mexico: This week, S&P cut some of its ratings on America’s southern neighbor, but said the outlook is stable. Why the move? Because the agency believes Mexico's attempts to raise money through sources other than oil revenue and to make the economy more efficient "will likely be insufficient to compensate for the weakening of its fiscal profile." Put it on your watch list.

Spain: Before you go thinking that problems can only emerge from closed regimes or places economists have stuck with the "developing" tag, think again. Earlier this month, Spain's outlook was dropped to negative from stable by S&P, owing to fears the nation "will experience a more pronounced and persistent deterioration in its public finances and a more prolonged period of economic weakness versus its peers."

What Is Sovereign Debt?

Now that we’ve (hopefully) got your attention, here are some definitions for those unfamiliar with the subject:

Sovereign debt” refers to the debt of nations. Just as the U.S. issues Treasuries backed by the “full faith and credit” of the government, other nations sell bonds in order to raise money to pay for programs ranging from armies to public healthcare.

A “default” refers to a nation’s inability (or refusal) to repay its debt. Whether a homeowner sends “jingle mail” (home keys via post) because a lost job makes mortgage payments impossible or because a drop in home values makes paying the mortgage uneconomical, the effect on the bank is the same: they lent money and now they’re not getting it back.

The same goes for investors who’ve purchased sovereign debts. This is critical because nations’ debt is often viewed as safer than corporate debt since countries have the ability to raise taxes and increase tariffs in order to raise money to pay their debts.

But “safer” is not the same as “safe and certainly not guaranteed. There are risks in owning nations’ or sovereign debt, as with any stock. Defaults by Argentina in 2002 and Russia in 1998 are just recent examples in the long history of sovereign debt defaults going back to the Spanish empire in the 1600s.

In a new book “This Time Is Different”, economic professors Ken Rogoff of Harvard and Carmen Reinhart of Maryland, detail the history of sovereign debt defaults, noting common traits, including:

High Debt-to-GNP Ratio

Since 1970, nearly half of sovereign defaults have occurred in nations debt-to-GNP (gross national product) ratios of 60% or more. This makes sense: As a country’s debts start to approach the size of its total economy (or GNP), it gets harder to make the payments, just like a individual whose debts start to eat up all (or most) of their salary.

Countries like the U.S. and U.K. have triple-A ratings, meaning they are considered the strongest in terms of the ability to repay their debt. (The ratings from top to bottom are based on the alphabet, AAA being the best to CCC meaning the financial world doubts your ability to pay the money back.) However, some experts worry about those pristine ratings being in jeopardy as Anglo-Saxon nations continue to accumulate massive amounts of debt to pay for spending, and to take on the recession.

A World of Risk

Few investors seriously worry about an imminent default by the U.S. or the U.K. But with worries about Dubai's ability to pay its debts shaking markets across the globe in recent weeks, investors are on guard about which other countries might be in dire financial straights.

Ratings agency Moody's, for example, said Tuesday that the upcoming year could be a rough one for government debt, issuing a report depressingly titled "Fasten Your Seat Belts: Tumultuous Times Ahead."

Anyone with access to the business pages knows individuals, banks, companies and governments everywhere have a serious problem -- just how bad it is and how long it will last is still being sorted out. Unfortunately, we probably still have a way to go before brighter days return.

Chris Nichols contributed to this report.

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/391552/is-sovereign-debt-the-new-subprime



本文於 修改第 1 次
回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘

引用
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=3740306
 回應文章
謝謝貼文
    回應給: 竹林士(hwangc99) 推薦0


胡卜凱
等級:8
留言加入好友

 
多謝。
回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=3742756
搞垮經濟十法
推薦1


江山改 : 七月七日夢醒時分
等級:8
留言加入好友

 
文章推薦人 (1)

胡卜凱

經濟日報╱社論】 2009.12.18 03:08 am  
英國金融時報專欄作家強森受到一篇部落格文章與一本新書的啟發,歸納出「搞垮公司的十個辦法」。觀其內容,我們赫然發現,這十個辦法固然力足以搞垮幾乎每一家公司,放在台灣經濟上,要將它搞垮也易如反掌;事實上,台灣經濟今天的處境,泰半與其所言雷同。

列於十個辦法之首的,就是過度舉債。對每個台灣公民而言,我們的政府不但大舉借債已逼近乃至超過了法定的舉債上限,一方面債留子孫,另一方面則使政府預算被大量還本付息負擔所牽絆,捉襟見肘,福國利民的許多大事都難為無米之炊。

第二,公司擁有者爭鬥不休。從李前總統接下蔣故總統的棒子以來,當政者帶頭分裂族群、挑起意識型態鬥爭,自此國人一分為二、不共戴天,到陳前總統手中更是變本加厲,一意以挑逗教唆人民互鬥爭取個人政治資源。因而國家大政方針永遠在意識型態、人民互鬥之下難以形成共識。中共當初篡奪國民黨天下,最狠毒的一招就是「一分為二」,今天的台灣深陷困局,又將如何?

第三,過於依賴單一客戶。這次金融海嘯前後的經濟衰退,才讓許多國人凜然發現,台灣經濟成長幾乎獨沽對大陸出超一味;因而當中共悍然以「騰籠換鳥」政策掃除其加工出口業時,我們的成長命脈即隨之斷絕,迄今不知何以為繼。

第四,領導者因故失去工作能力。自從陳前總統因貪瀆專斷而為國人群起撻伐以來,領導者的執政能力即大趨薄弱;好不容易政權輪替,卻如坊間所傳,「走了個壞蛋,來了個笨蛋」,其治國能力愈來愈受質疑;偏偏又遭逢騰籠換鳥、金融海嘯、八八水災重擊,船破又遇頂頭風,奈何、奈何!

第五,砸錢搞大型資訊設備投資。對台灣這家公司而言,我們是集中一切資源、人才、優惠,大搞兩兆雙星資訊產業投資。這些動輒數千億的投資,絕大部分耗於進口設備、器材、原料,僱用率極低、附加價值微薄、獲利更少得可憐。結果更大比重的其他產業乏人聞問、自生自滅,一旦資訊產業出路受阻,整個經濟即驟然崩坍。

第六,陷入價格戰。一家公司若獲利只靠不斷殺價與纏鬥,固無前途,當台灣經濟的主力都在技術、品牌、設計、創新方面乏善可陳,唯賴壓低成本賺取蠅頭小利,豈能不自陷險境!

第七,固定投入過大、固定成本偏高。就公司而言,通常是辦公室房租離譜得高;對一個經濟而言,則是政府人事、房舍、設備成本偏高,而效率遠遠偏低,如果又進一步胡亂投入公共建設,留下大量蚊子館,當收入銳減時,這個政府與這個經濟自將艱困無比。

第八,忽視客戶。今天無人能否認,對岸是我們最大的客戶;但十餘年來,我們不止是忽略客戶而已,根本就是竭盡全力要推拒客戶、激怒客戶、對抗客戶。

第九,故步自封。沒有任何公司面對如同台灣經濟過往20年如此巨大的變局;而我們不但故步自封,還力求停止經濟向正確方向前進的腳步。結果不甘被困者紛紛用腳投票,留此不去者則共趨落伍腐朽。

第十,懶得投資。我們的企業為了生存,不論環境如何艱險,仍然努力投資於人力、技術、設備;但我們的政府,從上到下,數十年不知求新、求進,即使館舍設備裝潢一新,官員的思維、作為、組織、制度,則一仍舊貫,永不創新。

用這十個辦法可輕易搞垮每家公司;我們頗可自豪,用了20年,台灣經濟依然健在。勇哉,台灣!
【2009/12/18 經濟日報】
 http://udn.com/NEWS/OPINION/OPI1/5315280.shtml


搞垮公司的10種做法 c The Financial Times Ltd 2009

作者:英國《金融時報》專欄作家 盧克·詹森 2009-11-30

《紐約時報》(New York Times)近期的一篇博客文章談到一個話題:讓生意破產的N種方法。
去年出版的一本商業書籍也曾談到相同的話題。前者的論述是從企業主的角度出發,後者則是從公司管理者的視角出發。
在博客文章《毀掉你公司的十一種簡單方法》中,企業主傑伊‧戈爾茨(Jay Goltz)警告讀者要防範一系列問題,例如沒有購買足夠的保險,以及聘用錯誤的會計師。
可口可樂(Coca-Cola)前總裁唐納德‧基奧(Donald Keough)所著的《可
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001030002

總裁伊莉莎白:大英帝國建立者,送給企業領導者的十個忠告
Elizabeth Ⅰ,CEO
作者:亞倫.艾克塞羅/著
語言:繁體中文 ISBN:986803082X
定價:280元 優惠價:9折252元
內容簡介
「我相信在我的身上可以看到權力和意志力。
因此也請你們相信,我會盡全力為你們的生命安全、與生活的安定而努力。」--伊莉莎白,加冕典禮前夕之演說

  1558年,甫25歲的伊莉莎白,正式接下英格蘭這個企業爛攤子。

  內有通貨嚴重膨脹和英鎊貨幣重貶,外有策略盟國相繼背棄而去,此時的英格蘭已經瀕臨崩潰邊緣。

  在這樣內外混亂的狀況下,伊莉莎白女王,仍然能帶領英格蘭成為歐洲最富強大國,同時朝著全球有史以來,最偉大帝國的方向邁進。

  她是怎麼做到的?
http://www.books.com.tw/exep/prod/booksfile.php?item=0010202730

回應 回應給此人 推薦文章 列印 加入我的文摘
引用網址:https://city.udn.com/forum/trackback.jsp?no=2976&aid=3742049