評論
打印
Theoretically the federal reserve is independent of the president and the executive branch of government, but president do appoint the chairman of the fed, so it matters to you and your money who sits in that seat. Alan Blinder is a professor of economics at Princeton University, he is a former federal reserve vice chairman, thank you for joining us, sir, it's good to see you, let's talk about Ben Bernanke's fed, has it have more influence on our economy? Has this fed have more influence on our market and economy than the fed's mission would dictate that it has?
理論上，美聯儲獨立于總統和行政政府機構，這一職位卻是由美國總統任命的。因此，到底誰來做這個座子？這可事關重大，事關口袋中的錢。艾倫•布林德是普林斯頓大學的一名經濟學教授，美聯儲前副主席，感謝您參加我們的欄目，很高興看到您。讓我們談一談伯克南的美聯儲，是否對美國的經濟產生了重大影響?美聯儲對市場和經濟的影響是否比美聯儲使命所賦予它的還要大？
Well, that's a hard question to answer, you know because the fed's mission is to promote maximum employment and stable prices, as you just said the price level the inflation rate has been very stable over the Bernanke era as it was in the later part of Greenspan era, the fed has been working overtime so to speak both figuratively and literally on its employment mandate and it still is, what's clear is it's been very activist by historical standard absolutely.
嗯，這是一個很難回答的問題，因為美聯儲的使命是促成實現最大就業以及穩定物價。如您所說，在伯克南在任時期，物價水平，通貨膨脹率已經非常穩定了，如同格林斯潘時代后期。由于美聯儲一直以來的努力工作，無論從數字上還是從實際上來說，而且從絕對意義的歷史標準上看，很清楚，其就業政策相當激進。
When you say activist you know some people call mission creep other say that it's doing that because it has the effectiveness, it's able to do it where congress doesn't do it, what's your sense on should congress be doing more of the work the fed is trying to achieve?
當您說激進時，有人稱其為“使命偏離”還有人認為美聯儲這樣做是因為這種政策有效，美聯儲有能力這么做，然而國會沒有能力。對于美聯儲正在努力實現的目標，國會是否應該承擔更多工作？對于這一問題，您如何看待？
Congress should be doing more of the work the fed is trying to achieve, look, the reason the fed has been pulling so many different levers over the last several years is that its interest its normal weapon the short term interest rates, the federal fund rates hit virtually zero all the way back in December 2008, at that point the Bernanke fed could have said we give up, we are closing up shop, that's all we can do, I think that would be a huge mistake, or it could try to look for other things it can do, such as this various quantitative easing and other things that the fed has put into effect, that's the course it took, i think that's the right course, it doesn't mean you cut every little detail always, but it was basically the right course, and frankly the job might have been a little easier or might a lot easier if congress was more cooperative, i don't mean cooperative with the fed, I mean more cooperative with the president and getting things done such as for example the jobs act the president proposed a year ago and other things like that, rather than letting this thing go or basically leaving it to Ben Bernanke.
對于美聯儲正在努力實現的目標，國會應該承擔更多工作。原因在于，美聯儲在過去幾年采取了各種手段，其中最常用的武器就是利率，短期利率，聯邦基金利率一路降到2008年12月的零利率。在這一程度上，伯克南美聯儲本來可以說，放棄吧，我們把該關的商店都關了，這就是我們所能做的了。我認為那樣做的話，將是一個大錯誤?；蛟S它還可能做些能做的其他事情。比如各種定量寬松政策以及美聯儲已經采取的其他各項措施。這就是美聯儲這幾年所選擇的道路，我認為這是一條方向正確的道路，它不僅僅意味著你總是關閉小型零售店，而是因為它大體上是正確的方向。坦白地說，如果國會更加合作，就業情況會有一些好轉，或者許多好轉。我不說國會與美聯儲合作，我是說國會與總統更加合作，以推進諸如總統一年前提議的工作法案以及其他類似法案，而不是置之不理，基本上留給伯南克處理。
