| 內容介紹 | |
開本：32開 紙張：膠版紙 包裝：平裝 是否套裝：否 國際標準書號ISBN：9787509780060 作者：克裡斯托弗·布朗 出版社：社會科學文獻出版社 出版時間：2016年03月
" 編輯推薦 本書搭建了家庭消費行為的制度性或“自上而下”的理論，對次級按揭貸款危機這類的事件提供了非常必要的背景分析，這本及時之作展示了一個經濟體向更深度地依賴消費信用演進的畫卷並分析了隨之而來的風險與權衡。綜合了凱恩斯消費理論和習慣選擇的制度理論（運用*的演化生物學和神經科學的知識），本書代表了以非傳統經濟方法對消費信用的宏觀經濟層面和近期金融創新之蘊義的一種深度解讀。
內容簡介 本書搭建了家庭消費行為的制度性或“自上而下”的理論，對次級按揭貸款危機這類的事件提供了非常必要的背景分析。這本及時之作展示了一個經濟體是如何更深度地向依賴消費信用逐步演進，並分析了隨之而來的風險。本書綜合了凱恩斯消費理論和習慣選擇的制度理論（以及*的演化生物學和神經科學的相關知識），結合近期金融創新，以非傳統經濟方法深度解讀了消費信用在宏觀經濟層面的蘊義。 作者簡介 克裡斯托弗·布朗（Christopher Brown），經濟學博士，美國阿肯色州立大學商學院經濟學終身教授，主要研究領域為消費信用的宏觀層面，收入分配，醫保經濟學等問題。出版了兩部著作和大量論文。本書出版後被Yankee Book Peddler和Academic Magazine選為2008年度核心學術標題。2009年獲阿肯色州立大學校董事會傑出學者獎和商學院傑出研究獎。曾任“制度思想協會”主席（2010-2011）。2011年起擔任阿肯色州州長經濟顧問委員會委員，2012年7月起擔任國際演化經濟學會刊物Journal of Economic Issues主編。
程皓，金融學博士，南昌大學經濟管理學院副教授， 美國阿肯色州立大學訪問學者，中南財經政法大學校級優秀博士學位論文獎獲得者。從教前曾在大型國有商業銀行從事涉外經營管理工作15年。主要研究領域為貨幣制度理論，商業銀行經營管理，金融創新與監管等。 主持研究國家社會科學基金項目1項、省級課題1項，參與研究*、省級課題多項。合著論文曾入選2012年度美國經濟學會（ASSA）年會並宣讀交流、獨撰論文入選2015年度美國東部經濟學會（EEA）年會並宣讀交流。在《金融研究》、Journal of Economic Issues、China Economic Review 等權威核心期刊上發表多篇論文。 目錄 圖目錄／001
表目錄／003
中文版序言／001
Foreword／005
致謝／011
章消費信用與有效需求／001
附錄1A為什麼事關儲蓄／035
第二章家庭債務激增與習慣選擇理論／047
第三章消費信用行業創新簡史／077
第四章儲蓄之謎：一個更為細致的檢視／105
第五章消費信用依賴的宏觀經濟層面／130
第六章資產負債表（明斯基）效應：一個實證分析／161
附錄6A估計分期付款債務任意償還額的方法，1929～1933年／181圖目錄／001
表目錄／003
中文版序言／001
Foreword／005
致謝／011
章消費信用與有效需求／001
附錄1A為什麼事關儲蓄／035
第二章家庭債務激增與習慣選擇理論／047
第三章消費信用行業創新簡史／077
第四章儲蓄之謎：一個更為細致的檢視／105
第五章消費信用依賴的宏觀經濟層面／130
第六章資產負債表（明斯基）效應：一個實證分析／161
附錄6A估計分期付款債務任意償還額的方法，1929～1933年／181
第七章消費主義、不平等與全球化／184
第八章結束語／210
索引／213
譯者後記／221
前言 中文版序言
自本書2008年1月首次出版以來所發生的事件——具體而言，全球金融危機和2007～2009年的大衰退——似乎為書中的主要觀點提供了經驗的確證。其中重要的可能是我斷言，美國1995～2007年期間家庭債務史無前例的累積不可能持續，而一場痛苦的去杠杆化或者“家庭債務緊縮”階段即將來臨。本書警示讀者，這種去杠杆化的過程將具有“摧毀性的宏觀經濟後果”。記錄顯示，自2008年8月以來消費信用餘額開始下降，因為家庭大量削減了新的借款並把當期收入中的更大份額用於償還循環債務。2007年12月到2009年3月間，消費支出（以200計）按年率降低了275（或接近3%）。鋻於消費支出對於美國經濟健康的決定性意義，這樣的下降，就其自身而言，足以引起重大的經濟衰退。如果本書闡述的觀點是正確的，那麼2007年以後嚴重而漫長的產出和就業下降，應當部分地被視為經濟增長日益依賴信用消費的一種累積性後果。中文版序言
自本書2008年1月首次出版以來所發生的事件——具體而言，全球金融危機和2007～2009年的大衰退——似乎為書中的主要觀點提供了經驗的確證。其中重要的可能是我斷言，美國1995～2007年期間家庭債務史無前例的累積不可能持續，而一場痛苦的去杠杆化或者“家庭債務緊縮”階段即將來臨。本書警示讀者，這種去杠杆化的過程將具有“摧毀性的宏觀經濟後果”。記錄顯示，自2008年8月以來消費信用餘額開始下降，因為家庭大量削減了新的借款並把當期收入中的更大份額用於償還循環債務。2007年12月到2009年3月間，消費支出（以200計）按年率降低了275（或接近3%）。鋻於消費支出對於美國經濟健康的決定性意義，這樣的下降，就其自身而言，足以引起重大的經濟衰退。如果本書闡述的觀點是正確的，那麼2007年以後嚴重而漫長的產出和就業下降，應當部分地被視為經濟增長日益依賴信用消費的一種累積性後果。
本書用了相當篇幅來識別和分析這種導致美國家庭中大概1/3的消費支出是通過“打白條”（IOU）實現的機制形成的經濟和社會力量，並認為收入的不平等對解釋這個現像具有相當的重要性。David
Hamilton(1991：944-945)寫道:
產業經濟的難題之一是，其正式的分配體繫不能夠在估算生產力的基礎上進行充分的再分配，從而保持商品和貨幣以固定或者增加的速度循環流動。很明顯凱恩斯（J.M.Keynes）所針對的正是產業體繫的這個方面。
本書引導讀者關注擴大的收入分配差距在宏觀經濟中的負面影響。在現代貨幣經濟中，收入以貨幣而不是商品的形式獲得。貨幣的問題是它能夠被保留而不購買有形的商品和服務——也就是，那些需要使用真實資源來生產的東西。保留收入而不參與交換有形商品的傾向——或儲蓄的傾向——作為一般規則，是收入的一個遞增函數。上升的收入不平等，如以基尼繫數衡量，會影響收入收據做出有利於儲蓄收入比更高的家庭的重新配置。
1987～2007年，美國個人儲蓄率下降伴隨著收入不平等的急劇增加，這個事實看起來，首先令人羞愧，會讓收入不平等對總需求有抑制效應的斷言失效。解決這個表面衝突的關鍵在於承認，伴隨諸如負債管理和消費者債務證券化等現代金融實務的激增，不論在個人層面還是總量層面，當期收入流不再對消費支出具有硬約束。數據顯示，事實上，美國住戶部門能夠擔負起全球有效需求引擎的功能，並以此惠及中國這樣的出口拉動型經濟體，因為前者國內大量的消費者，包括那些力量綿薄的人們，都不但願意而且有能力通過借債補充他們的購買力。這樣，不平等增加的宏觀後果被一個債務融資的消費支出大爆炸給掩蓋了——或更精確地說，推遲了。第六章記錄了1995年後，美國家庭資產負債表質量非常嚴重的惡化，尤其是中等和低收入階層。1995～2007年債務融資的消費猛增給大衰退期間消費者的節儉行為創造了條件。
隨著人類學習的進步，實現廣泛分享的物質繁榮所面臨的主要障礙不再是資源的稀缺，相反，現在這種障礙在本質上是制度性的。這個看法十分適於那些（沿襲的）制度，它們制約著住戶單位之間對商品流動性索取權的分配。現代經濟體繫的龐大生產能力依然有相當的閑置，即使處於經濟周期的高峰時也是如此，因為為數眾多的家庭由於缺乏支付能力而無法將他們對商品和服務的名義需求轉化為有效需求。不容忽視的是，美國資本主義的黃金時代（1950～1971年）出現於收入不平等下降的環境裡。這絕不是偶然的。重要的政治和法律上的成就使得工會和集體談判合法化，這些促進了黃金時代的經濟增長。去工業化、全球化以及離岸化減少了工會的勢力範圍和影響力，這個趨勢記錄在1971年以後的收入分配統計資料中。伴隨收入不平等的上升，美國經濟演變為更加依賴消費信用擴張來支撐經濟增長。盡管這個演變讓家庭層面付出了非常不幸的代價，這部著作主要關切的還是它對宏觀經濟的潛在影響。從本書建立的分析框架來看，鋻於前期家庭債務的龐大累積，大衰退是一個可以預見的、不可避免的結果。
對收入不平等的評述常常囿於假想的公平與經濟效率之間的權衡。市場收入分配被假定為實現經濟效率的工具。這樣一來，意在矯正純粹市場收入分配帶給社會不良影響的公共政策被認為對經濟效率具有負面影響。本書傳達的信息則大不相同。應當用宏觀經濟的效率標準——不過度依賴信用而維持穩健支出的效率為基準——衡量既定的分配機制。換言之，更為平等的收入分配的主張應該既有經濟學的基礎也有道德的基礎。
美國經濟的經驗有一些重要的教訓可資中國汲取，因為中國正力求獲得更加基礎廣泛的物質繁榮。個教訓是，國內消費市場的發展，特別是大件商品如汽車、冰箱，將幾乎必然引起消費貸款機構的相應擴張。消費貸款的增長，接下來，將要求彙集消費者付款的歷史數據以用於信用評分。隻有當放款人有關其所簽債務合同具有法律強制效力的預期具有某些保障時，消費貸款纔可能成為一個有生命力的行業。依賴堅強可靠的法律制度方能存活的正是企業。雖然中國近年來在保障企業之間合約強制效力方面取得了令人印像深刻的進展，但在消費貸款領域還有相當多的工作有待完成。例如，中國也許不得不重新考慮它對收債機構的禁令（中國香港則許可它們經營），因為它們在擁有大規模消費貸款產業的國家是一個標準的，也許是無法避免的制度。我還要指出的是，記錄顯示消費貸款行業需要政府廣泛而密切的監管，因為它易於受到高利貸業務、不對稱和不完全的信息以及在合同條款上有意哄騙借款人等的影響。
對中國重要的教訓是，它未來增長的前景將（部分地）以它解決分配問題的成功程度為轉移。中國必須建立制度以保障公民有能力購買，或至少能夠處置其經濟機器所能生產的巨大商品和服務流。中國作為廉價勞動力國家的地位使其在出口市場占據無可爭辯的優勢。然而，中國不能既達到它龐大的經濟潛力又依然是一個廉價勞動力的國家。以本國需求替代外國需求將要求提升工資。中國應當擴張其非市場供應的羅爾斯“初級”產品——教育、醫療、運輸、休閑，或其他真正的人類興盛不可缺少的東西。工業化國家的經驗是，讓市場來提供初級產品的結果是大部分人口得不到它們，這是不可接受的。而且，中國應該擁抱凱恩斯智慧。一個大的公共部門維持有效需求對於經濟增長是至關重要的。
Christopher
Brown
2015年6月12日
Foreword
The
events that have transpired since the initial publication of this book in
January 2008-specifically, the global financial crisis and the Great Recession
of 2007-2009 seem to have provided empirical confirmation for some of the key
arguments contained within it. Perhaps most significantly, the claim is made
that the historically unprecedented buildup of household debt in the United
States during the 1995-2007 period could not be sustained, and that a painful
phase of de-leveraging or “household debt deflation” was imminent. The reader is
warned that such an episode of de-leveraging would have devastating
macroeconomic consequences. The record shows a decline in the value of consumer
credit outstanding beginning in August 2008, as households sharply curtailed new
borrowing and allocated an increased share of current income to the servicing of
revolving debt.Consumption expenditure (measured in chained 2009 dollars) fell
by $275 billion dollars at an annual rate (or nearly 3 percent) between December
2007 and March 2009. Given the decisive importance of consumer spending to the
health of the U.S. economy, such a decline was, by itself, sufficient to trigger
a major recession.If the arguments set forth in the following pages are correct,
the severe and protracted decline of output and employment after 2007 should be
seen, in part, as the cumulative consequence of a rising dependence for growth
on credit-financed consumption.
Much of this book is devoted to
identifying and analyzing the economic and social forces that gave rise to a
regime wherein roughly one- third of consumption expenditure in the U.S. is
financed through the issue of household IOUs. It attributes considerable
importance to income inequality in explaining this phenomenon. David Hamilton
(1991, pp.944-945) writes:
One of the difficulties in the industrial
economy is the failure of its ceremonial system of distribution, based on
imputed productivities, to redistribute sufficiently to keep the reciprocal flow
of goods and money at a constant or increasing rate. It was precisely this
aspect of the industrial system to which J.M. Keynes addressed
himself.
This monograph invites the reader to consider the
deleterious macroeconomic effects of widening disparities in the distribution of
income. In modern monetary economies, incomes are received in money, not goods.
The problem with money is that it can be withheld from the purchase of tangible
goods and services-that is, things which require the employment of real
resources for their production. The propensity to withhold income receipts from
circulation in exchange for tangible goods-or the propensity to save-as general
rule, an increasing function of income. The effect or rising income inequality
as measured by, say, the Gini coefficient, is to reallocate income receipts in
favor of households with comparatively higher saving to income
ratios.
The fact that, between 1987 and 2007, the U.S. personal
saving rate declined alongside a sharp increase in income inequality would
appear, at first blush, to invalidate the claim that income inequality exerts a
depressing effect on aggregate demand. The key to reconciling this apparent
contradiction lies in the recognition that, with the proliferation of modern
financial practices such as liability management and the securitization of
consumer debt, current income flows no longer place a hard constraint on
consumer expenditure-whether at the individual or aggregate level. The data
reveal, in fact, that the U.S. household sector was able to assume the function
of global engine of effective demand, to the benefit of export-led regimes such
as China, because a vast number of consumers, including those of modest means,
were both willing and able to supplement their purchasing power through
borrowing. Thus, the macroeconomic consequences of rising inequality were
hidden-or more accurately, delayed-by an explosion of debt-financed consumption
expenditure. Chapter 6 documents a very serious deterioration in the quality of
household balance sheets after 1995, particularly for households in middle and
lower income brackets. The debt-financed consumption boom of 1995～2007 created
the conditions for the major retrenchment of the consumer during the Great
Recession.
With the progress of human learning, the main obstacles to
a widely shared material prosperity are no longer rooted in the scarcity of
resources. Rather, they are institutional in nature. This applies importantly to
the (inherited) institutions that regulate the division of liquid claims to
goods among household units. The immense productive capacity of modern economic
systems remains substantially underutilized, even at cyclical peaks, because so
many households are unable to convert their notional demand for goods and
services into an effective demand due to a lack of spending power. It is
important to note that the Golden Age of American capitalism (1950～1971)
occurred in an environment of falling income inequality. This is no mere
coincidence. Golden Age growth was facilitated by important political and
legislative achievements that legitimized unionism and collective bargaining.
De-industrialization, globalization, and offshoring have diminished the scope
and influence of unionism, a trend that is registered in the income distribution
statistics after 1971. With rising inequality, the U.S. economy evolved to
greater dependence on consumer credit expansion for growth. While the costs of
this development at the household level are quite unfortunate, this book is
mainly concerned with the potential macroeconomic repercussions. When viewed in
the analytical framework developed in the pages that follow, the Great Recession
is interpreted as a predictable, inevitable outcome given the massive buildup of
household debt that preceded it.
Commentaries on income inequality
are often framed in terms of the supposed tradeoff between equity and economic
efficiency. Market income distribution is presumed to be instrumental to the
goal of economic efficiency. As such, public policies that seek to correct for
the socially undesirable effects of pure market income distribution are thought
to involve negative tradeoffs with economic efficiency. The message conveyed
here is much different. A given distributive regime should be evaluated on the
criterion of macroeconomic efficiency- that is, on the basis of its efficacy in
maintaining robust spending without excessive reliance on credit. In other
words, the case for a more equitable distribution of income should be based on
economics as well as ethics.
The U.S. economic experience holds some
important lessons for China as it strives to achieve a more broad-based material
flourishing. The first lesson is that the development of domestic market for
consumer goods, and especially for big-ticket items such as cars and
refrigerators, will almost certainly necessitate the parallel expansion of
consumer lending institutions. The growth of consumer lending will, in turn,
require the compilation of data on consumers payment histories for purposes of
credit scoring. Consumer lending is not a viable business unless lenders have
some security of expectations with respect to the legal enforceability of debt
contracts they have issued. It is an enterprise that depends vitally on strong
and reliable legal institutions. Though China has made impressive progress in
guaranteeing the enforceability of business-to-business contracts in recent
years, there is considerable work to be done in the consumer lending area. For
example, China may have to rethink its prohibition on debt collection agencies
(they are permitted in Hong Kong), as they are a standard, perhaps unavoidable,
fixture in all countries with large consumer lending industries. I should also
note that the record reveals that the consumer lending business requires
extensive and close supervision by state authorities, as it is subject to
usurious practices, asymmetric and incomplete information, and the intentional
deception of borrowers as to contract terms.
The most important
lesson for China is that its future growth prospects will (partly) hinge on how
successfully it addresses its distribution problem. China must build
institutions that assure that its citizens have the capacity to purchase, 0or at
least have disposal over, the colossal flow of goods and services its economic
machinery is capable of producing. China’s status as a cheap labor country has
conferred undoubted advantages in export markets. China cannot, however, reach
its immense economic potential and remain a country of cheap labor. Substituting
domestic for foreign demand will require rising wages. China should expand its
non-market provisioning of Rawlsian“primary”goods-that is, goods such as
education, healthcare, transportation, recreation, or other goods without which
a truly human flourishing is not possible. The experience of the industrialized
countries is that market provisioning of primary goods leaves an unacceptably
large segment of the populace without them. Moreover, China should embrace the
wisdom of Keynes. A large public sector is vital to the maintenance of effective
demand and,thus,to economic growth.
Christopher
Brown
June 12,
2015
" | | |
|
