西西河

主题:【讨论】美国7000亿救市计划的缺陷和这次金融危机的深化 -- 厚积薄发

共:💬64 🌺331
全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖
家园 【原创译文】解决这次金融危机的一个十步方案 II

续前文:zlusc:【原创译文】解决这次金融危机的一个十步方案 I

第四,公共资本的注入可能会给政府带来一定的风险,为降低政府所持股份的风险,现有的股东应当首先承担所发生的损失。如何实现呢?首先,暂停给所有的普通股持有人派息分红,甚至是原有的优先股持有者也有可能被停止派息;政府注入资金的同时,强制要求原有一级资本的股东匹配部分注资。【感谢小试牛刀兄】

Fourth, given the risk to the government deriving from the public injection of capital in the financial system the existing shareholders of the banks need to take a first-tier loss to minimize the risks for the government share. How to do that? First, you need to suspend dividend payments on common share and possibly even existing preferred shared; you also need to force to partially match the public capital injection with new Tier 1 capital.

第五,金融机构公共和私有资本的重组为该机构的无担保债权人(所有的债权人,但不包括储户)带来并不均衡的利益,因此必须将一些无担保的债务(分债务和其他无担保债务)转换成股本(债权股本转换)。这样的转换进一步降低了金融机构的杠杆作用(导致更低的债务股本比例)。

Fifth, public and private recapitalization of financial institutions unfairly benefits unsecured creditors (all creditors but insured depositors) of such institutions. So, you also need to convert some of this unsecured debt (the sub debt and other debt unsecured debt) into equity (a debt for equity swap). Such swap further reduce the leverage of the financial system (leading to a lower debt to equity ratio for financial institutions).

第六,当金融危机结束,银行、金融机构可能需要的资本额较危机之前要少,为了避免产生新的资本和信贷泡沫;同时重组之后的银行有更低的杠杆比率有更多的资本出借,这时,应该允许一些仍濒临倒闭的银行和金融机构倒闭。只有健康的机构应该留下。这时应该对整个银行和金融机构进行系统性的甄别,对于虽然资本缺乏、流动性不足,但是能够在公共和私有资本注入和重组之后复苏的机构与始终不能离开濒临破产境地的机构区别对待,应该将后者关闭。我们应当把坏的苹果摘掉,而留给好的苹果和虽然有伤但能自愈的苹果更好的机会去生存和发展。

Sixth, after this crisis is resolved the banking and financial system may need lower capital than before this crisis so as to avoid new asset and credit bubbles; and if you recapitalize some banks that will be able to lend more (still with lower leverage ratios) you still need to let other insolvent banks and financial institutions to go bust and disappear. Only healthier institution should survive. So you need to a systematic triage between banks that are distressed, undercapitalized and illiquid but solvent once the private and public recapitalization occurs from those that are fundamentally insolvent and that need to be shut down. You need to destroy the bad apples to let the good ones or the sick but curable ones survive and thrive.

第七,在RTC中倒闭的银行的资产可以进入HOME计划中寻找其他的解决方案(债务重组和消减债务)。

Seventh, as in the case of the RTC the assets of the banks that are bankrupt and are allowed to fail go to the HOME for workout (debt restructuring/reduction).

第八,现在需要一个类似HOLC的计划来为美国的家庭消减债务。美国家庭的负债实在是太多了(次贷,准优质贷款【感谢小试牛刀兄】,优质贷款,房屋净值贷款,信用卡,汽车贷款,学生贷款)而他们的资产(房屋和股票的价值)却大幅缩水造成净资产的快速下滑。美国的家庭正在被如山一般并日渐增长的债务和偿债负担所淹没。无论是家庭,金融机构、公司还是地方政府都需要债务减免。当一个国家(比如俄国、厄瓜多尔或者阿根廷)负债过多而资不抵债的时候,拖欠或者减免债务才能让这些国家重新回到快速发展的轨道上;当一家公司被巨大的债务所折磨,他需要进入破产法庭,申请破产保护以减免债务,从而继续生产经营;同样一个家庭在入不敷出的财政窘境之中,也需要减免债务来获取更多可以自由支配的收入;所以,任何难以为继的债务问题都需要债务减免来解决问题。对于身处窘境的家庭而没有债务减免,是目前金融危机不断深化、经济衰退,尤其表现在个人消费支出的快速萎缩并不断恶化的原因。而目前财政方面的行动(通过退税进行的收入补助)以及解救被困的金融机构(救援贝尔斯登的债权人,接管两房和美国国际集团)并没有解决最为根本的债务问题,其中的原因有二:首先,你自己无法把自己救出债务的大坑,当债务/可支配收入的比例太高,依靠退税来增大分母是远远不够的,也是暂时的,你更需要减小分子(债务)。其二,救援金融机构而不去减少借贷者的债务,无法从根本上解决债务人资不抵债的问题,从而限制了他们的消费能力,进而将整个经济拖进衰退当中。五个可以利用的金融政策和工具:家庭收入补助(2008年的退税),救援金融机构(救援贝尔斯登的债权人,接管两房和美国国际集团),收购无法运作的金融机构的资产(类似RTC的机构),对资金匮乏的机构注入资金进行资本重组(类似RFC的机构),政府收购可能出现问题的抵押贷款为陷入困境的家庭减免债务(类似HOLC的机构)。这最后的一项是最为重要也最为有效的解决这次金融危机的步骤。在大萧条时期,政府建立了HOLC(Home Owner's Loan Corporation),用较低的折扣价格从银行中购买抵押贷款,并进一步减少这些抵押贷款的面值,然后重新用更低面值和更低的固定利率为陷入困境的家庭做再次融资。这项庞大的计划使数百万家庭保住了自己的房子。HOLC以相对较低的成本在两年中不断买进抵押贷款,并管理这些资产长达18年。一个新的HOLC从宏观上看等同于建立一个大的银行专门收购金融机构手中的不良资产,把它们从资产负债表上清除出去,从而进行重组。

Eighth, you need an HOLC-like program for debt reduction of the household sector. Households in the US have too much debt (subprime, near prime, prime mortgages, home equity loans, credit cards, auto loans and student loans) while their assets (values of their homes and stocks) are plunging leading to a sharp fall in their net worth. And households are getting buried under this mountain of mounting debt and rising debt servicing burdens. Thus, a fraction of the household sector – as well as a fraction of the financial sector and a fraction of the corporate sector and of the local government sector – is insolvent and needs debt relief. When a country (say Russia, Ecuador or Argentina) has too much debt and is insolvent it defaults and gets debt reduction and is then able to resume fast growth; when a firm is distressed with excessive debt it goes into bankruptcy court and gets debt relief that allows it to resume investment, production and growth; when a household is financially distressed it also needs debt relief to be able to have more discretionary income to spend. So any unsustainable debt problem requires debt reduction. The lack of debt relief to the distressed households is the reason why this financial crisis is becoming more severe and the economic recession - with a sharp fall now in real consumption spending – now worsening. The fiscal actions taken so far (income relief to households via tax rebates) and bailouts of distressed financial institutions (Bear Stearns creditors’ bailout, Fannie and Freddie and AIG) do not resolve the fundamental debt problem for two reasons. First, you cannot grow yourself out of a debt problem: when debt to disposable income is too high increasing the denominator with tax rebates is ineffective and only temporary; i.e. you need to reduce the nominator (the debt). Second, rescuing distressed institutions without reducing the debt problem of the borrowers does not resolve the fundamental insolvency of the debtor that limits its ability to consume and spend and thus drags the economy into a more severe economic contraction. So of the five possible uses of fiscal policy – income relief to households (the 2008 tax rebate), rescue/bailout of financial institutions (Bears Stearns, Fannie and Freddie, AIG), purchase of assets of failed institutions (an RTC-like institution), recapitalization of undercapitalized financial institutions (an RFC-like institution), government purchase of distressed mortgages to provide debt relief to households (an HOLC-like institution) – the last option is the most important and effective to resolve this severe financial and economic crisis. During the Great Depression the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation was create to buy mortgages from bank at a discount price, reduce further the face value of such mortgages and refinance distressed homeowners into new mortgages with lower face value and lower fixed rate mortgage rates. This massive program allowed millions of households to avoid losing their homes and ending up in foreclosure. The HOLC bought mortgages for two year and managed such assets for 18 years at a relatively low fiscal cost (as the assets were bought at a discount and reducing the face value of the mortgages allowed home owners to avoid defaulting on the refinanced mortgages). A new HOLC will be the macro equivalent of creating a large “bad bank” where the bad assets of financial institutions are taken off their balance sheets and restructured/reduced.

第九,我们应当尽力避免在对银行进行资本重组和解决这次金融危机的时候,引起信贷和资产泡沫的出现。为避免这一风险,我们有很多事情需要去做,巴塞尔协定对资本充足率的规定仍然不尽合理,迅速调整这一规定对于减少银行对经济周期的推动作用至关重要。【感谢小试牛刀兄】

Ninth, we need to avoid a situation where the recapitalization of the banks and the resolution of this financial crisis leads to another credit and asset bubble. Many things need to be done to avoid this risk but a rapid change of the Basel II capital adequacy ratios to reduce their the pro-cyclicality would be essential.

字数限制,再分一贴。

原文链接

zlusc:【原创译文】解决这次金融危机的一个十步方案 III

关键词(Tags): #金融危机#救市计划#鲁比尼

本帖一共被 2 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)
全看分页树展 · 主题 跟帖


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河