評論
打印
Are we really saying that it's not worth the risk to print an extra 200 billion for aid?
那么，為了救援而額外印多2千億鈔票這樣的風險真的不值得去承擔嗎？
Would the risks really be that different?
這些風險真的會有很大區別嗎？
To me, it's not that clear.
對我來說，這是比較模糊的概念。
What is clear is the impact on aid.
而對救援產生的影響則是清晰的。
Even though this is the printing of just three central banks,the global aid that's given over this period is up by almost 40 percent.
哪怕印鈔僅僅只是三家中央銀行的事，但是這個階段給出的國籍援助,也已經上升了接近40個百分點。
Aid as a proportion of national income all of a sudden is at a 40-year high.
援助作為國民收入的一部分突然就上升到了40年來的最高點。
Now, we don't get to 0.7 percent.
那么，假設我們沒有達到0.7%那個點。
Governments are still incentivized to give.
政府也會被要求付諸行動。
But you know what, that's the point of a matching scheme.
但你們知道嗎，那個點就是和計劃匹配的點。
So I think what we've learned is that the risks from this money creation scheme are quite modest,but the benefits are potentially huge.
所以我覺得，我們了解到的是這個印鈔計劃中潛在的風險是相當溫和的，但是收益呢則是非常龐大。
Imagine what we could do with 40 percent more funding.
想像一下這多出來的40%的資金， 我們能做多少事情。
We might be able to feed the front row.
我們估計可以養得起 前排的觀眾了。
The thing that I fear, the only thing that I fear,apart from the fact that I've run out of time,is that the window of opportunity for this idea is a short one.
我擔心的事情， 且唯一擔心的事情，除了我已經沒什么時間這個事實外，就是實施這個想法的時間機會非常短暫。
Today, money creation by central banks is an accepted policy tool.
今天，中央銀行的貨幣創造是一個公認的政策工具。
That may not always be the case.
但這并不是一直都這樣。
Today there are universally agreed aims for international aid.
如今在國際援助上我們有世界普遍認可的目標。
That may not always be the case.
但這也并不是一直都這樣。
Today might be the only time that these two things coincide,such that we can afford the aid that we've always aspired to give.
現在可能是這兩種事物同時被認可實行的唯一時機，這樣我們就能負擔起這些援助,這些我們一直都很想給予的援助。
So, can we print money for international aid?
所以，我們能為國籍援助而印刷鈔票嗎？
I seriously believe the question should be,why not?
我堅決相信這是可行的，為什么不呢？
Thank you very much.
非常感謝。
