Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content


以下來自一位業界網友的分享,希望針對「印鈔」的概念詳細講解,歡迎指正:

//大部分人對貨幣制度無深入認識,其實所謂「印鈔」並非真正印鈔,而只是「放寬信貸」,那些鈔票並無直接發行並在市場流通。當然,如果借貸買資產(例如樓)的人在還款期結束之前,而其資產價格有所上升的時候賣出,那他會創造出其賣出與買入之間差價當量的貨幣,加上利息給銀行。這是為何在量化寬鬆中,只有部分容易做到抵押貸款的資產如房地產和證券的價格飆升,而一般消費物價只以相對低的速度增加。

如果是真的「印鈔」派發(helicopter money),像美國現在因應疫情在做的,那是對一般消費物價有推動作用的。美國在這疫情階段如果無咁做,應該已經進入通縮。

美聯儲之前一直以通脹作為貨幣政策指標,其實係好有問題。因為聯儲局嘅利息政策直接控制嘅係信貸嘅價錢(利率),而直接會傳導到資產價格,而只會好間接咁通過上述機制傳導至消費物價。聯儲局應該根據資產價格而調整貨幣與利率政策。

而且「印鈔」一說其實非常誤導,量化寬鬆絕對不是印鈔,而是放寬信貸。而放寬信貸是必然要通過資產價格膨脹,才能夠trickle down至一般人手上,再刺激消費。因為信貸仲係有規律嘅,呢啲資產嘅價格除咗信貸創造嘅流動性走向外,佢本身都係要有回報。好似房地產,租金收入就係佢本身應該有嘅回報,如果個回報率已經超低,淨係靠資產價格上升嚟創造收入,咁嗰個就肯定係泡沫,係龐氏騙局。

當資產價格上升到某個水平,回報率就肯定壓得好低,回報率普遍壓得過低嘅時候,回報不足以還本金加利息,嗰個資產價格泡沫就會爆破。放寬信貸可以刺激資產價格水平,但係對實體經濟嘅傳導好間接,所以對租金嘅刺激作用低。//

Comments

Aaron Ho

全球化量寬(即印鈔), 最終的結果(亦是最不好的結果)= Stagflation

Jonathan

Simplifying the covid crisis from an economic perspective, this is a typical (and significant) demand shock. If this is relatively short-term assuming vaccine will be ready in 1y to 2y, QE or “printing money” is the certainly the right policy move, and should help revive the economy on a stand alone basis. The market seems to agree with such view and effectively pricing in a V-shape recovery. Unfortunately, this crisis can not be isolated on its own. The real (financial) problem the world facing is that we are towards the end of an 80/100 years debt cycle. We were supposed to be deleveraging from the debt we built up from 2008 and before, but we were actually leveraging up even more because of Covid! This combining with the widening wealth/income gap, polarising politics and Thucydidles trap means that we are certainly in for a ride!