美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)四大怪現(xiàn)象
|
????政府工作的流失：在經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)最嚴(yán)重的時(shí)期，私人部門(mén)的裁員人數(shù)可能數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)。與此同時(shí)政府部門(mén)也裁掉了大量人員，這更給經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)蒙上了一層陰影。例如今年七月，私人部門(mén)雖然新增了154,000個(gè)就業(yè)崗位，但與此同時(shí)公共部門(mén)卻裁掉了37,000個(gè)崗位，抵消了這一利好因素的效果。 ????美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)政策研究所（Economic Policy Institute）最近公布的一份報(bào)告顯示，與經(jīng)濟(jì)剛剛開(kāi)始恢復(fù)時(shí)相比，政府部門(mén)的傭工率反而下降了1.9%，也就是說(shuō)損失了43萬(wàn)個(gè)工作崗位。相比之下， 2000年那次經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)后的恢復(fù)期，政府傭工率增長(zhǎng)了1.1%，也就是為經(jīng)濟(jì)填加了23.2萬(wàn)個(gè)工作崗位。 ????現(xiàn)在政府部門(mén)里之所以哀鴻遍野，很多人被迫卷鋪蓋回家，很大程度上是由于政府稅收收入下降，但失業(yè)和醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)上的支出卻出現(xiàn)了激增。各州和各地方政府由于無(wú)法合法地保持高額赤字（不像聯(lián)邦政府），因此為了填補(bǔ)預(yù)算上的巨大漏洞，只好以前所未有的力度進(jìn)行裁員。而且這種趨勢(shì)很有可能會(huì)持續(xù)下去。不光是州政府和地方政府可能繼續(xù)裁員，現(xiàn)在為了減輕美國(guó)1.5萬(wàn)億美元的龐大赤字，國(guó)會(huì)已經(jīng)成立了一個(gè)特別委員會(huì)，如果特別委員會(huì)認(rèn)為有必要的話，甚至連聯(lián)邦政府都可能裁員。 ????消費(fèi)支出：金融危機(jī)之前的那幾年，美國(guó)家庭顯然在花錢(qián)上過(guò)于大手大腳了。金融危機(jī)爆發(fā)后，美國(guó)家庭一直在努力改善財(cái)務(wù)狀況，但仍然離危機(jī)前那種多消費(fèi)、少儲(chǔ)蓄的水平差得很遠(yuǎn)。 ????消費(fèi)目前占美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的比重大約為70%上下。在經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)最嚴(yán)重的時(shí)期，美國(guó)消費(fèi)出現(xiàn)了顯著下降，即便是在整個(gè)恢復(fù)時(shí)期里也依然低迷不振。不過(guò)紐約聯(lián)邦儲(chǔ)備銀行（the Federal Reserve Bank of New York）近日指出，美國(guó)家庭減少了在教育、娛樂(lè)和外出就餐等個(gè)人可支配性服務(wù)上的支出，這是個(gè)不同尋常的現(xiàn)象。 ????經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)時(shí)期，這些奢侈性消費(fèi)的下降在某種程度上又導(dǎo)致實(shí)際GDP的下滑。美國(guó)的實(shí)際GDP下跌了近7%，跌幅是上世紀(jì)80年代經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)的兩倍還多。 ????住房：在經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)時(shí)期，房地產(chǎn)業(yè)一般會(huì)強(qiáng)勢(shì)反彈，促進(jìn)總體經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)。 ????毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，這次經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)時(shí)期是個(gè)例外。而且短期內(nèi)房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)也不見(jiàn)得有反彈的可能了，因?yàn)殡S著大量房主喪失了抵押品贖回權(quán)，許多房產(chǎn)重新流入已經(jīng)供應(yīng)過(guò)剩的房市，因此預(yù)計(jì)房?jī)r(jià)還會(huì)降得更低。 ????這不僅會(huì)對(duì)房屋銷售造成影響，同時(shí)還意味著消費(fèi)者在家具、家電以及其它與住房相關(guān)的產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)上的支出也會(huì)減少。 ????伯南克承認(rèn)，制訂推動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)長(zhǎng)期穩(wěn)健發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟(jì)政策已經(jīng)超出了央行的權(quán)力范圍。伯南克已經(jīng)敦促華盛頓的立法者們采取“積極的、前攝性的住房政策”，來(lái)給蕭條的房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)解套。 ????譯者：樸成奎 |
|
|
????Government job loss: The private sector may have shed millions of jobs during the depths of the latest recession, but part of what has added to the persistent gloom of the economic recovery is the slash in government jobs. For instance in July, the private sector added 154,000 jobs but the bump was counteracted by the fact that the economy shed 37,000 public-sector jobs. ????Government employment today is about 1.9% lower than it was at the start of the recovery, a fall of 430,000 jobs, according to a recent report by the Economic Policy Institute. By contrast, government employment rose by 1.1% or 232,000 jobs during the same stage of the recovery following the 2000 recession. ????The stubborn woes of today's government job market have been largely due to falling tax revenues while spending on unemployment and Medicaid has surged. State and local governments, unable to legally run deficits (unlike the federal government), have been dealing with glaring budget holes by slashing headcount at an unprecedented rate. And that likely will continue – not only at the state and local level, but also the federal level depending how a special congressional committee assigned to reduce America's debt decides to find $1.5 trillion in savings. ????Consumer spending: In the years leading up to the latest recession, households clearly overspent. They've since been working to improve their finances but we're still a long way from the point where household debt levels fall where consumers feel comfortable spending more and saving less. ????Consumption, which makes up roughly 70% of the U.S. economy, dropped off significantly during the depths of the recession and has continued to be slow through the economic recovery. But as the Federal Reserve Bank of New York recently noted, what has been unusual is the decline in spending on discretionary services like education, entertainment and meals at restaurants. ????Spending on such luxuries partly drove the decline of real GDP during the latest recession. It is down nearly 7% -- more than double the percentage decline seen in the early 1980s recession. ????Housing: During most economic recoveries, the housing industry typically rebounded in a big way and helped drive overall growth. ????Needless to say, this hasn't played out this time. And it become less likely that it will, given expectations that home prices could fall further as an onslaught of foreclosures could eventually seep into the housing market already in excess. ????This not only impacts home sales, but it also means consumers will spend less on furniture and appliances and other housing-related goods and services. ????Bernanke, acknowledging that economic policies supporting strong economic growth in the long run are beyond powers of the central bank, has urged Washington lawmakers to adopt "good, proactive housing policies" to undo the depressed real estate market. |
