????美國制造業正在顯示出復蘇跡象，部分原因在于美元貶值已使美國國內生產的產品較外國產品更具競爭力。不過，甲之蜜糖，乙之砒霜。對于美國而言的好事對于其他國家而言就成了壞事，因為其他國家的產品將因價格相對上漲而被美國市場拋棄，并被迫在其他市場與更為便宜（以本幣衡量）的美國商品展開競爭。

????作為經濟刺激計劃的一部分，日本新首相安倍晉三正在向日本央行施壓，迫使它走日元貶值的路子。中國也正考慮類似路線。德國也在推動各項計劃，它們名義上是為了幫助經濟上陷入困境的歐元區國家，但實際上也將壓低歐元匯率，使德國產品更具競爭力，雖然直接控制歐元的是歐洲央行，而非德國。

????美聯儲正在玩一個復雜的、高風險的游戲。美元是世界儲備貨幣，這使得美國能夠吸收來自世界各地的資金，并將這些資金用于貿易和解決預算赤字問題，而無需平衡賬戶。在美國國內情況（美元走低是利好）以及美元作為儲備貨幣的角色（美元貶值過快可能會使投資者恐慌并導致其失去儲備貨幣地位）之間存在矛盾關系。

????而美聯儲低利率政策的第二大副作用是純粹的好事——即為解決聯邦預算赤字問題提供資金。

????自四年前大力實施刺激計劃以來，美聯儲已經獲得巨額利潤，而且這些利潤幾乎全部交給了美國財政部。去年，美聯儲宣布獲利約910億美元，其中889億美元交給了美國財政部。2008年，也就是上一個近乎正常的年度，交付金額為317億美元。2009年至2011年交付金額分別達474億美元、793億美元和754億美元。

????美聯儲的利潤不斷飆升，因為其證券投資組合規模已從2007年年底的約7,500億美元上升至去年年底的2.65萬億美元左右。美聯儲一直在大力收購美國國債和抵押貸款支持證券，以期推高它們的價格，而這會壓低利率。

????美聯儲用實質上憑空創造出來的資金購買這些證券，然后將資金計入出售證券的金融機構在美聯儲的賬戶。美聯儲對賣家留在這些賬戶上的資金支付名義利息，而從這些賬戶中提取用于其他目的（如發放貸款）的資金則無利息支付。同時，美聯儲收取其已購買證券的利息。因此，擴大投資組合讓美聯儲獲得了巨大的盈利。

????新澤西州普林斯頓全球經濟和金融市場研究公司四通麥卡錫研究協會（Stone McCarthy Research Associates）聯席創始人雷?斯通是美聯儲問題領域的專家，他說：“美聯儲實施這些計劃并不是為了尋求自身利潤最大化，這只是一個副作用。”他預計，相比去年，今年美聯儲將實現更高利潤，交付給美國財政部的資金也會更多。

????此外，預計美聯儲今年將收購約5,400億美元的美國國債，而這將間接為今年的聯邦預算赤字填補約一半資金缺口。如果您能搞明白這點，那可以說得上是相當了不起了。那就再接再厲吧！

????落健生發液和美聯儲降息之間還有一個關鍵區別：持久力。您可以一直使用落健生發液，但美聯儲不斷降低利率的計劃不具有無限的保質期。伯南克將美國利率推低至現代最低水平，但他不能將利率降至零以下。即便美聯儲不愿意收緊貨幣政策，但它無從控制世界——它不能無限期地承受來自金融市場及其他央行的壓力。當美聯儲不可回避地開始加息時，美元將隨之上漲，美聯儲的利潤和交付給美國財政部的資金也將下降。總之，醫藥刺激是永恒的。但美聯儲的刺激不是。（財富中文網）

????U.S. manufacturing is showing signs of recovery, in part because the dollar's decline has made domestically produced products more competitive with foreign products. But what's good for us is bad for countries whose products are being priced out of our market and are being forced to compete with cheaper (in terms of their currencies) U.S. goods in other markets, including their own.

????The new Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, is pushing his country's central bank to run down the value of the yen as part of his economic stimulus program. China is thinking along similar lines. Germany, which doesn't control the euro directly -- the European Central Bank does -- is pushing programs that are nominally aimed at economically struggling euro countries, but that will also drive down the euro's value, making Germany more competitive.

????The Fed is playing a complicated, high-stakes game here. The dollar is the world's reserve currency, which allows us to suck in money from all over the world to fund our trade and budget deficits without having to balance our accounts. There's a tension between our internal situation (a lower dollar is good) and our role as a reserve currency (a dollar that falls too rapidly risks spooking investors and costing us our reserve-currency status).

????By contrast, the second side effect of the Fed's low-rate policies -- helping finance our federal budget deficit -- is an unalloyed good thing.

????The Fed has been making huge profits since its stimulus programs kicked into high gear four years ago, and it has contributed virtually all of them to the Treasury. Last year, the Fed says, it made about $91 billion in profits and sent $88.9 billion of that to the Treasury. That's up from $31.7 billion it sent in 2008, the last almost-normal year, and $47.4 billion, $79.3 billion, and $75.4 billion from 2009 through 2011, respectively.

????The Fed's profit is soaring because the size of its securities portfolio has risen, to about $2.65 trillion at the end of last year from about $750 billion at year-end 2007. The Fed has been buying Treasury and mortgage-backed securities by the boatload in order to raise their prices, which has the effect of driving down interest rates.

????The Fed bought these securities with money that it essentially created out of thin air and then credited to the Fed accounts of the financial institutions that sold the securities. The Fed pays nominal interest on the money that sellers leave in those accounts, and no interest on the money withdrawn from them for other purposes, such as making loans. Meanwhile, the Fed collects interest on the securities it has bought. Thus, expanding the portfolio has been hugely profitable.

????"The Fed isn't running these programs to maximize its own profit; that's just a side effect," says Ray Stone of Stone McCarthy Research Associates of Princeton, N.J., a leading Fed maven. He predicts that the Fed will post higher profits -- and send more money to the Treasury -- this year than it did last year.

????On top of that, the Fed's projected purchases of about $540 billion of Treasury securities this year will indirectly fund about half of this year's federal budget deficit. Nice work if you can get it. And keep it.

????There's one crucial difference between Rogaine and Fed rate-cutting: staying power. You can take Rogaine indefinitely, but the Fed's keep-lowering-rates program doesn't have an indefinite shelf life. Bernanke has driven U.S. interest rates to their lowest level in modern times, but he can't drive them below zero. Even if the Fed is reluctant to tighten, it doesn't control the world -- and it can't indefinitely withstand pressure from financial markets and from other central banks. When the Fed's inevitable dial-back kicks in, the dollar will rise, and Fed profits and remittances to the Treasury will fall. The bottom line: Pharmaceutical stimulus is forever. But Fed stimulus isn't.