評論
打印
Are SDRS an appropriate crisis-fighting tool? The IMF reports that several poorer countries have called for it, and that members are discussing the idea.
SDRS是應對危機的恰當工具嗎？IMF報告稱，幾個較貧窮的國家已經提出了這一要求，而且成員國正在討論這一想法。
Rich countries are offering their citizens wads of cash with very few strings attached, say supporters.
支持者說，富裕國家給他們的公民提供大量現金，幾乎不帶附加條件。
Why shouldn't the IMF do the same for the world's governments? Some economists want a huge allocation of SDRS, worth $4trn.
為什么IMF不也為世界各國政府這么做呢？一些經濟學家希望獲得價值4萬億美元的SDRS。
There are several hurdles in the way and these could take months to overcome.
在這條路上也存在一些障礙，還需要數月的時間去克服。
Most important, America is reluctant to issue any SDRS at all, let alone $4trn-worth.
最重要的是，美國完全不愿發行SDRS，更別說價值4萬億美元的了。
Its opposition stems from a belief that the IMF should not be printing money (when converted, SDRS increase the amount of cash in circulation).
對該想法的反對源于這樣一種信念，即IMF不應該印鈔（當兌換時，SDRS會增加流通中的現金數量）。
And, like other countries, it also dislikes the idea of handouts that come with so few strings attached.
而且，和其他國家一樣，它也不喜歡這種幾乎沒有附加條件的施舍。
What if the financial lifeline allowed countries to slacken the pace of reforms, or made life easier for Iran?
如果金融生命線能讓各國放慢改革的步伐，或者讓伊朗的日子好過些呢？
The IMF is supposed to support governments facing temporary liquidity problems, but also to insist on restructuring any debts that are unsustainable.
IMF應該支持那些面臨暫時性流動資產問題的政府，但也應該堅持重組任何不可持續的債務。
An SDR allocation is described as liquidity support by its advocates, but it could help an otherwise insolvent country pay off its creditors.
一次SDR分配被其倡導者描述為流動性支持，但它可能有助于一個本來就資不抵債的國家償還債權人。
America's opposition matters. Issuing SDRS worth more than $648bn would require approval from its Congress.
美國的在野黨是關鍵。發行價值超過6480億美元的SDRS將需要得到國會的批準。
Even a smaller issuance would require 85% of votes at the IMF. Uncle Sam, with a 16.5% share, has a veto.
即便是規模較小的發行，也需要獲得IMF 85%的投票。擁有16.5%份額的美國擁有否決權。
Others point out that securing an SDR allocation would mean spending too much political capital for too little gain.
另一些人指出，確保SDR的分配將意味著花費太多的政治資本而獲得的收益太少。
Two-thirds would go to rich countries or those with plenty of reserves. In 2009 183bn SDRS were issued to help fight the global financial crisis.
三分之二的SDR將流向富裕國家或擁有大量外匯儲備的國家。2009年，發行了1830億的SDRS去幫助對抗全球金融危機。
But Ousmene Mandeng of Economics Advisory, a consultancy, finds that emerging markets
但是Economics Advisory咨詢公司的Ousmene Mandeng發現，2009年至2010年，
(excluding China and members of the European Union) swapped just 1.9bn for cash in 2009-10.
新興市場（不包括中國和歐盟成員國）僅用19億美元換取現金。
However, SDRS do not have to be used to be useful. Their very presence on balance-sheets frees up dollars.
但SDRS不一定要被用來發揮什么作用。它們在資產負債表上的存在放開了美元。
And though the sums involved might be too small to matter to many countries,
盡管涉及的金額可能太小，對許多國家來說無關緊要，
the share of a $500bn issuance flowing to the likes of Liberia or South Sudan would be worth 7-8% of GDP,
但流入利比里亞或南蘇丹等國的價值5000億美元的發行份額將相當于GDP的7-8%，
says Sergi Lanau of the Institute of International Finance, an industry group. With global demand collapsing and the world scrambling for dollars,
國際金融研究所的Sergi Lanau說到。在全球需求崩潰、全球爭搶美元之際，
now is not the time to dwell on the question of whether countries face solvency or liquidity crises.
現在不是討論各國是否面臨償付能力或流動性危機的時候。
Poor countries just need help, fast. It is worth taking some risks to make sure they get it.
貧窮國家只需要幫助，而且要快。為了確保他們得到幫助，冒一些風險是值得的。
It is perhaps no surprise that America has doubts about an instrument first designed to reduce the dollar's dominance.
美國對一種最初旨在削弱美元主導地位的工具產生懷疑，或許并不令人意外。
Keynes proposed bancor just after sterling lost its sway.
就在英鎊失去影響力之后，凱恩斯提出了bancor。
It might take the emergence of a serious challenger to the dollar's crown before America sees the appeal of the SDR.
在美國看到SDR的吸引力之前，可能需要出現一個對美元霸主地位構成嚴重挑戰的國家。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
