評論
打印
If these findings are replicated elsewhere, furlough schemes may be adopted in future recessions. Some commentators point to the record of Germany, which suffered a much smaller rise in unemployment than other rich countries during the recession in 2008-09 because of a scheme that subsidised short-term working.
如果這些調(diào)查結(jié)果在其他地方也適用，那么休假計(jì)劃可能也可以在未來發(fā)生經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退時(shí)實(shí)行。一些評論員提到了德國的例子，在2008-09年金融危機(jī)期間，德國失業(yè)率上升幅度遠(yuǎn)低于其他富裕國家，原因是該國政府補(bǔ)貼了短期工種。
There are two obvious concerns about such support schemes. The first is the cost. The British scheme, which started in March, is expected to cost around ￡60bn ($75bn) by the scheduled end in October, or a bit less than 3% of GDP. The second problem is that such schemes may prevent the necessary role that recessions play in “creative destruction”, whereby resources are reallocated from failing businesses to successful ones. The survival of “zombie” companies may make the next recovery less vigorous.
此類援助計(jì)劃會引發(fā)兩個(gè)明顯的擔(dān)憂。首先是成本。英國計(jì)劃于三月份啟動，預(yù)計(jì)到10月底將耗資600億英鎊（合750億美元），略低于GDP的3%。第二個(gè)問題是，這類計(jì)劃可能會阻礙經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退在“創(chuàng)造性破壞”中發(fā)揮的必要作用，“創(chuàng)造性破壞”是指資源從失敗企業(yè)重新分配給成功企業(yè)。“僵尸”公司的存活可能會使之后的經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇缺乏活力。
On cost, the counterargument is that widespread job losses lead to deep recessions and thus sharp declines in government revenues. They can also be bad news for laid-off workers who may take years to find another job. Paying money upfront to reduce the severity of a recession can thus be a good investment in both social and economic terms.
在成本方面，相反的論調(diào)認(rèn)為大規(guī)模失業(yè)會加劇經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退，從而導(dǎo)致政府收入大幅下降。對于那些需要花費(fèi)多年才能找到另一份工作的下崗工人來說也是噩耗。因此，通過提前支付工資來減輕經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退的嚴(yán)重程度，無論從社會還是經(jīng)濟(jì)角度來看，都是一項(xiàng)不錯(cuò)的投資。
It would be great if governments could save only companies that have a viable long-term future. The analogy might be an old rule of thumb among central bankers that they should lend money in financial crises to banks that have a liquidity problem, not a solvency one. In practice, however, financial crises in recent decades have been so acute that central banks have mostly been unable or unwilling to discriminate. Similarly, while governments have imposed conditions on wage-support schemes in the current crisis, their main priority has been to dole out aid as quickly as possible in order to save jobs.
如果政府能夠只挽救那些有長遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展前景的公司，那就太好了。就如同央行的銀行家們信奉的一條古老的經(jīng)驗(yàn)法則，即在金融危機(jī)中，他們應(yīng)該為那些有流動性問題的銀行提供貸款，而不是償付能力有問題的銀行。然而，實(shí)際上，近幾十年的金融危機(jī)情況都很嚴(yán)峻，以至于各國的央行大多無法或不愿意區(qū)別對待。同樣，盡管各國政府在當(dāng)前危機(jī)中對工資援助計(jì)劃施加了條件，但它們首要任務(wù)是盡快發(fā)放援助，以解決就業(yè)問題。
A lot more research is clearly needed to see whether furlough support schemes will have adverse long-term economic effects. The longer the schemes are in place, the more likely it is that market distortions will occur. But the principle that governments should intervene to support struggling banks and unemployed workers, as a way of reducing the severity of recessions, has long been established. It is conceivable to think that furlough schemes might eventually be viewed in the same light.
顯然還需要更多的研究，以確定是否休假援助計(jì)劃會對經(jīng)濟(jì)產(chǎn)生長期不利影響。這項(xiàng)計(jì)劃實(shí)施的時(shí)間越長，市場扭曲的可能性會對大。但是我們早就確立了這樣一條原則，政府應(yīng)該進(jìn)行干預(yù)以援助岌岌可危的銀行和失業(yè)工人是減輕經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退嚴(yán)重程度的一種方式。可以想象，人們最終可能會以同樣的眼觀看待休假計(jì)劃。
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
