G2救經濟 世銀寄望中美帶頭
2009/0308 中時
世界銀行總裁佐立克與副總裁林毅夫六日在《華盛頓郵報》投書指出，全球經濟陷入衰退，若要走出谷底，中美兩大經濟體必須扮演火車頭的角色。他們開宗明義點出，少了中美兩國（G2）強勁的經濟帶動，恐讓其他廿國經濟體（G20）走出衰退陰霾的希望落空。
文中指出，全球收支失衡係結構性問題，亦即美國過度消費，中國則過度儲蓄。在美國，消費過度肇因於股價與房市泡沫，人民有錢卻不懂得未雨綢繆，導致儲蓄率偏低。在中國，儲蓄過剩也是結構性扭曲的結果，不僅人民愛儲蓄，就連企業、原料供應商、金融機構也樂此不疲。
收支失衡 美過度消費 中過度儲蓄
中國的儲蓄率逼近ＧＤＰ的二分之一，在全球數一數二。不僅家家戶戶愛儲蓄，大型企業的儲蓄率也偏高。中國金融業被四大銀行壟斷，服務對象以大型企業為主，導致中小企業（雖然雇用全國八成勞工）所能享有的金融服務少之又少。這種金融結構嚴重偏頗的現象顯示，大型企業與新富靠的是一般人與中小企業省吃儉用長期補貼以及政府的低利率政策。
佐立克與林毅夫說，光是調整人民幣匯率無法解決這種結構性問題，中美必須想辦法解決儲蓄、消費失衡的現象。歐巴馬現在的經濟振興方案仍以刺激消費為主，但假以時日必須想法提振儲蓄率，中國則必須鼓勵民眾與企業消費。此外，美國應持續進行貨幣、信貸、資產整頓，強化金融系統。
攜手合作 齊帶領世界 渡百年海嘯
再者，中國下一波改革必須著眼於社會安全保護、薪資待遇、服務業品質、綠色產業，這些在在都會刺激消費與進口。
此外，文中特別點名中國本土銀行必須改善對中小企業的金融服務，並開放電信等寡佔事業。美國則必須努力改善消費與儲蓄失衡問題，縮小不斷膨脹的預算赤字。
文章並且呼籲，中美兩國一個是中國最大的出口市場，一個是美國最大的債權國，兩者經濟互依程度顯而易見，唯有攜手合作，型塑世界經濟未來走向，始能帶領世界經濟走出這波百年海嘯。
Recovery Rides on The 'G-2'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/05/AR2009030502887.html
By Robert B. Zoellick and Justin Yifu Lin
Friday, March 6, 2009; A15
China's economic growth will plunge in 2009. The United States is in severe recession. For the world's economy to recover, these two economic powerhouses must cooperate and become the engine for the Group of 20. Without a strong G-2, the G-20 will disappoint.
We must address realities. The root cause of broader global payment imbalances is structural: overconsumption in the United States and oversaving in China. For the United States, the consumption boom was fueled by bubbles in stocks and housing. This was accompanied by a collapse in the U.S. savings rate. For China, the savings surplus is a result of structural distortions in the financial, corporate and resource sectors.
China's savings rates, at up to half of its gross domestic product, are much higher than in other countries. But this is not all because of workers saving money. Indeed, household savings in China are about 20 percent of GDP, similar to the rate in India. An unusually high amount of savings comes from large companies in China's corporate sector. Small and medium-size enterprises, which employ 80 percent of workers, have minimal access to financial services because that sector is dominated by four large banks that primarily serve large companies. The smaller businesses' lack of access to financial services retards their growth, curbs employment and exerts downward pressure on wages. In effect, the skewed financial structure in China means that ordinary people and small and medium-size companies have been subsidizing big corporations and the new rich through low wages and interest rates.
A revaluation of China's currency -- a change in relative prices -- is not the primary tool for addressing these structural problems and the imbalances they have produced. In fact, economic diplomacy between the United States and China should focus on two other areas.
First, the two countries should join forces to prevent a protracted global recession. Both countries have announced stimulus packages. The United States is again relying on boosting consumption, and China is again channeling funds to investment. While this is a natural response to the immediate concerns, over time the United States must boost savings and investment while China increases consumption, not just capacity. China is preparing a second stimulus, which should focus on creating purchasing power for poorer consumers as well as building "soft infrastructure" in service industries and "hard infrastructure" to reduce growth bottlenecks (which would in turn increase productivity). China could also clean up environmental damage caused by underpricing resources. For its part, the United States should persist with monetary, credit and asset restructuring policies to reboot the financial system so its stimulus has a chance to work. Both must resist protectionism and assist the vulnerable in poor countries.
Second, the strategic economic dialogue between China and the United States should focus on how to reduce the structural consumption-savings imbalances in both economies. To achieve its leaders' goal of building a "harmonious society," China needs to improve its income distribution. The next stage of Chinese reforms should boost social security protections, wages, service-sector efficiencies, and "green" resource-pricing and businesses -- all of which can increase consumption and imports. In particular, China should promote the local banking sector to better serve small and medium-size enterprises, including through microfinance lenders. It should open up oligopolies, such as in telecommunications, to competition. Further liberalization in trade and investment in services would make China's markets more competitive and productive, and it would reduce trade tensions. Without greater imports, China faces the risk of adjustment solely through a sharp and painful fall in exports.
The United States, in turn, must rebalance saving and consumption. It cannot afford a return to the days of maxing out credit cards to finance unfettered consumption. It must regain control over expanding budget deficits, which are driven largely by entitlement spending. It also needs investments in education, research and development, and technology -- with continued openness to investment, goods, ideas and talented people -- to remain the world's leading economy.
Such adjustments would go a long way toward reducing the risk of global economic turmoil. There are strong mutual incentives: The United States is the largest destination for Chinese exports, and China is the largest foreign investor in U.S. government debt. The economic interdependency is stark.
The imbalances in the Chinese and U.S. economies can only be tackled gradually. Yet they must be addressed. A recovery based on boosting U.S. consumption and providing easy money financed by overseas savings would result in a repeat of mistakes, with dangerous consequences for global markets and politics. Even as the United States and China lead the way toward today's solution, they need to be shaping tomorrow's world economy.
Robert B. Zoellick is president and Justin Yifu Lin chief economist and senior vice president for development economics of the World Bank Group.
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
回應給：
