????假如美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)主席本?伯南克能有幾分“毒舌”評(píng)委西蒙?考威爾的張揚(yáng)，美國經(jīng)濟(jì)的狀況會(huì)不會(huì)比現(xiàn)在好一些？美國國家經(jīng)濟(jì)研究局（National Bureau of Economic Research）本周發(fā)布的一份新報(bào)告似乎就是這種觀點(diǎn)。

????這份報(bào)告名為《伯南克和零利率》（Bernanke and the Zero Bound），由約翰霍普金斯大學(xué)（Johns Hopkins University）經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)教授勞倫斯?巴爾撰寫。報(bào)告質(zhì)問美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)（Federal Reserve）為什么沒有采取更激進(jìn)的政策措施來提振美國經(jīng)濟(jì)。巴爾分析了很多可能性，包括政治壓力以及我們尚未真正陷入通縮的事實(shí)。最后，巴爾得出了自己的結(jié)論：原因在于伯南克個(gè)性靦腆。

????美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)未出臺(tái)第三輪量化寬松政策（QE3），難道真的是因?yàn)椴峡说膫€(gè)性？伯南克在加盟美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)之前曾寫了大量文章，建議美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)在短期利率（就像現(xiàn)在這樣）接近于零的時(shí)候應(yīng)當(dāng)如何復(fù)蘇經(jīng)濟(jì)。實(shí)際上，他曾被認(rèn)為是這方面的專家。巴爾說，伯南克一貫主張采取一些激進(jìn)措施，如將美元大幅貶值、調(diào)高通貨膨脹率目標(biāo)和所謂的“貨幣融資”（money-financed）減稅，即美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)“印刷”更多的紙幣，以便民眾可少交點(diǎn)稅，這往往被認(rèn)為不會(huì)增加通脹。巴爾提到了伯南克2000年的一場(chǎng)演講，當(dāng)時(shí)他曾責(zé)怪日本央行未做更多努力來提振日本經(jīng)濟(jì)。

????但是，伯南克作為現(xiàn)任美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)主席同樣沒有嘗試過這類舉措。比如，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)在最近一次會(huì)議上采納了2%的溫和通脹目標(biāo)，而非哈佛大學(xué)（Harvard）的肯?羅格夫等經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家建議的4%或更高水平。這是怎么回事？巴爾說他也不知道，但他認(rèn)為這可能和伯南克的靦腆有關(guān)。2003年年中，短期利率降至1%，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)委員們也在討論，他們還能采取什么行動(dòng)來刺激經(jīng)濟(jì)增長。大部分人反對(duì)采用很多伯南克過去的政策措施。看來伯南克的觀念已迅速同其他委員形成了一致。

????摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）首席美國經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家文森?賴因哈特不同意巴爾的觀點(diǎn)。賴因哈特在00年代中期曾擔(dān)任美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)首席經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，巴爾認(rèn)為，伯南克觀念的轉(zhuǎn)變一部分原因就在于賴因哈特。但賴因哈特稱，伯南克的改變更大程度上是因?yàn)樗J(rèn)識(shí)到了經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家的頭腦風(fēng)暴和真正擔(dān)任央行行長后的現(xiàn)實(shí)可能性之間的差異，這些遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了他對(duì)伯南克的任何影響。“一個(gè)靦腆的人會(huì)在金融危機(jī)期間推行所有這些特殊舉措嗎？”賴因哈反問。“現(xiàn)在，美國聯(lián)邦公開市場(chǎng)委員會(huì)（FOMC）很多委員甚至都在質(zhì)疑伯南克是不是過于激進(jìn)了。”

????確實(shí)，我們聽到的對(duì)伯南克最多的指責(zé)就是他刺激通脹可能過了頭，而不是做的太少了。伯南克和美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)最近的態(tài)度認(rèn)為，美國經(jīng)濟(jì)仍然比表面看上去更疲弱。這種觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)一步激起一些經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家和共和黨人的憤怒。另外，伯南克是第一位定期召開新聞發(fā)布會(huì)的美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)主席，一個(gè)靦腆的人絕對(duì)不會(huì)這么干。但巴爾仍認(rèn)為，伯南克在擔(dān)任美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)主席前后，對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)刺激政策的態(tài)度判若兩人，實(shí)屬不該。

????“我覺得愛因斯坦如果去參加一個(gè)物理學(xué)講座，不會(huì)一面說它不知所云，一面又表示認(rèn)同，”巴爾說。“但伯南克的情況基本上就是這樣。”

????Would we all be better off if Ben Bernanke were more like Simon Cowell? A new paper published this week by the National Bureau of Economic Research seems to suggest so.

????The paper by economics professor Laurence Ball of Johns Hopkins University, which is titled Bernanke and the Zero Bound, asks why the Federal Reserve hasn't been more aggressive in trying to revive the economy. Ball goes through a number of possibilities, including political pressure and the fact we haven't actually had deflation. In the end Ball lands on this one: Bernanke's a shy guy.

????Can you really blame a lack of QE3 on personality? Before Bernanke joined the Fed he wrote extensively on what the Fed should do to revive the economy when, as is the case now, short-term interest rates are at near zero. In fact, he was considered an expert on the subject. Ball says Bernanke consistently advocated such drastic measures as an aggressive depreciation of the dollar, raising inflation targets and so-called money-financed tax cuts, where the Fed "prints" money so that the rest of us can pay less to the government, which is generally considered an inflation no-no. Ball cites one speech in 2000 in particular where Bernanke takes Japan's central bankers to task for not doing more to revive their nation's economy.

????Yet, Bernanke as actual chairman hasn't tried any of these. The Fed, for instance, at its most recent meeting adopted a mild 2% inflation target, instead of the 4% or more that some economists like Harvard's Ken Rogoff have suggested. So what happened? Ball says he doesn't know, but he thinks Bernanke's shyness may have played a role. In mid-2003, when short-term interest rates were cut to 1%, members of the Federal Reserve debated what else they could do to stimulate the economy. The majority argued against using many of the policy measures that Bernanke had earlier backed. Bernanke's views appear to have quickly conformed to the rest of the group.

????Vincent Reinhart, Morgan Stanley's chief U.S. economist, disagrees. He was a top economist at the Fed in the mid-2000s, and Ball, in part, credits Reinhart with changing Bernanke's views. But Reinhart says the change in Bernanke is more a factor of what you brainstorm about as an economist and what you realize is really possible as a true central banker, than any influence he had on Bernanke. "Would a shy person put in place all the collection of special facilities during the financial crisis," says Reinhart. "There are a number of members of the FOMC who would question right now whether Bernanke has been too aggressive."

????Indeed, Bernanke's most vocal critics have often wondered whether he has done too much to stoke inflation, not too little. And Bernanke and the Fed's recent stance that the economy remains weaker than it appears has only invited more ire from some economists and Republicans. What's more, Bernanke is the first Fed chairman to hold regular press conferences, not something you would expect a shy person to do. Still, Ball thinks Bernanke about-face on policy measures to revive the economy is significant, and in Ball's view unfortunate.

????"I don't think Albert Einstein would have gone to a lecture on physics that said he didn't know what he was talking about and then agree with it," says Ball. "But in Bernanke's case that's essentially what happened."