近來，標準普爾500指數，在長達七年的牛市中，幾乎天天創下歷史新高。

但股票價格的穩步上漲并未打消部分投資者的質疑，他們認為地緣政治的不確定性、相對低迷的經濟增長速度和前所未有的央行刺激政策，均意味著我們不能假設股市上漲便意味著經濟形勢一切順利。

但最近集中公布的大銀行收入，卻讓我們有理由懷疑那些憎恨銀行的人。美國四大銀行富國銀行、摩根大通、花旗集團和美國銀行的財務狀況，均證明當前的貸款規模高于三個月前。

這對于美國經濟繼續保持健康運行至關重要，銀行銀行貸款與經濟增長之間存在密切的相互關系。事實上，我們可以認為，相比美聯儲的政策變化，私有銀行貸款的變化，對于實體經濟更加重要。這是因為，美聯儲的所有政策均需要通過大銀行，才能對宏觀經濟產生影響。

以四大銀行三至六月份累計貸款增長為例。四家銀行合計為經濟新注入資金約530億美元，超過了美聯儲在其量化寬松政策的最高點，每個月買進的政府債券總額。當然，區別在于美聯儲從銀行購買大量政府債券時，并不能保證這筆資金會落到廣大民眾的手中。而大銀行的貸款則會真正投入到民眾和公司，用于在實體經濟中消費。

實際上，有經濟學家認為，銀行貸款疲軟是導致大衰退之后經濟復蘇乏力的原因之一。下列圖表摘自胡佛研究院（Hoover Institution）經濟學家最近的工作論文。圖中顯示了此次大衰退之后與其他經濟衰退之后銀行貸款習慣的區別：

Last week, the S&P 500 charged to the 109th record high of the current bull market, now in it’s seventh year.

But the steady upward march of stock prices hasn’t calmed the skepticism of some investors, who have pointed to uncertainty in geopolitics, relatively sluggish economic growth, and unprecedented central bank stimulus as reasons why we shouldn’t assume that rising stock prices means that everything’s a-okay with the economy.

But a recent spate of big-bank earnings releases give us reason doubt the haters. If you look at the financials of four of the largest American banks, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Bank of America, they all show higher lending today than three months ago.

This is hugely important for the continued health of the U.S. economy, as there is a strong correlation between growth in bank lending and economic growth. In fact, one can argue that changes in lending by private banks is more important to the real economy than policy changes at the Federal Reserve. That’s because all Federal Reserve policy works through big banks before it makes it way to the broader economy.

Take for instance, the aggregate lending growth by the four largest banks from March through June. Collectively, they added close to $53 billion in new money to the economy, or more than the Federal Reserve was buying in government bonds per month at the height of its quantitative easing program. The difference, of course, is when the Fed was buying huge amount of government bonds from the banks, there was no guarantee that this money would find its way into the hands of the broad public. When big banks lend, on the other hand, that money is going to real people and business and is getting spent in the real economy.

In fact, weak bank lending is one reason economists believe the recovery following the Great Recession was so weak. The following chart, from a recent working paper by economists at the Hoover Institution, shows the difference in bank lending habits following the Great Recession compared with those following other recessions:

論文的作者認為，多德-弗蘭克改革導致的監管負擔加劇，至少要為大蕭條之后銀行貸款低迷承擔部分責任。但許多經濟學家在為非常不得人心的“不良資產救助計劃”進行辯護時，也會將這種變化作為理由，包括前美聯儲主席本·伯南克。該計劃即眾所周知的銀行救助。如果銀行得不到救助，便無法繼續提供保持經濟增長需要的貸款，而美國經濟將會陷入嚴重下滑，類似于上世紀30年代大蕭條期間的經濟狀況。

也許你會為美國陷入下一次經濟衰退而感到不安，但只要大銀行貸款繼續增加，在短期內便不太可能再次發生經濟衰退。 （財富中文網）

譯者：劉進龍/汪皓

The authors of the paper argue that increased regulatory burden caused by Dodd-Frank reforms is at least partially to blame for muted bank lending following the recession. But this dynamic is also the reason given by many economists, including former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke, for defending the hugely unpopular Troubled Asset Relief Program, popularly known as the bank bailouts. If the banks weren’t bailed out, and thus were unable to continue to lend money to keep the economy growing, the U.S. economy would have been sent into a downward spiral much like that which we saw during the Great Depression.

So fret all you want about the coming U.S. recession, but as long as we continue to see big banks lending more, it’s likely not right around the corner.