经济学家兼作家理查德·戴维斯都经历过,真的,而且经历过很多次。
2006年到2011年,戴维斯在英格兰银行担任经济学家。G20和国际货币基金组织开会商讨欧盟如何应对2008年金融危机时,他曾为英国谈判代表提供咨询。2016次英国退欧选举期间,他担任英国财政部长高级顾问。
很显然,他感觉经历的混乱还不够多。离开政府后,戴维斯踏上全球之旅,后来写成了《极端经济》(Extreme Economies)一书,该书收集了1月美国公布的9个案例。戴维斯想了解经济体遭遇困难时为何能成功适应,又为何会失败。通过写书,他从海啸后的印度尼西亚回顾到后工业时代的格拉斯哥。
“我想寻找本应失败却成功存活的经济,”戴维斯说,“还有本应繁荣却最终失败的经济。”
所以戴维斯一直思考新冠病毒大流行的经济后果和复苏前景也就毫不奇怪。他最近一直忙着照顾刚出生的双胞胎,本次抽出时间分享了一些重要的见解。
市场需要政府,政府也需要市场
“要利用市场,不能让市场失控。”戴维斯说。他在巴拿马达里安峡地区考察期间发现,当地人拼命争夺木材导致灾难性的森林砍伐,因此越发相信维持平衡的重要性。
“目前最明显的例子是个人防护用品(PPE)市场。”他接着说。“有些政府只是在指挥,不让价格信号发挥作用,结果造成了巨大的混乱。然而如果走另一个极端完全让市场决定,又会出现像英国一样的‘价格欺诈’。”
“激进的弗里德曼主义,也就是完全自由主义的模式显然是错误的,”戴维斯说。“但伯尼·桑德斯的激进主义也行不通。经济学就是要问:何时能让市场不受限制地运行,何时应该加以控制?”
不平等威胁到所有人
为了写《极端经济》,戴维斯前往一些能说明全球趋势可能影响所有人的地方考察。为了研究不平等日益严重可能导致的后果,他去了智利圣地亚哥,当地超级富人和工薪阶层之间的差距相当深远,不仅阻碍了社会流动,也阻碍了创新和经济增长。
戴维斯认为新冠病毒为全球对不平等及后果敲响了警钟。“我们意识到护士跟医生一样重要,亚马逊的员工为护士提供装备也非常重要。”他说。“我觉得这是好事。关于不平等……等疫情过去后会有大讨论,因为我们都意识到相互依存的关系。”
信任是最重要的资产,正面临风险
戴维斯认为,“社会资本”可能是成功经济体最容易忽视的因素,尤其是从冲击中复苏的经济体。不管是达里安的无政府状态,还是圣地亚哥的不平等,都加剧了人们的不信任和疏远,影响了经济发展,而印度尼西亚班达亚齐由于社区联系强大,推动当地迅速从2004年海啸几乎一片荒废中恢复。
“社会资本的价值在于能提升其他类型的资本,例如金融资本、实物资本。”他说。“关键是分享。如果社会资本很高,投入一点物质资本会就可以实现提升。如果能搭建本地化的信贷系统,金融信贷可以更稳定发挥作用。社会资本较高的社区在管理流行病和从中恢复的能力更强。”
戴维斯说,地震或战争中,社区可以积攒社会资本,因为要团结起来对抗共同的敌人。但他担心,从新冠危机的发展来看,可能威胁到从危机中恢复最重要的事。
“目前还没有战时心态,”他说。“还存在大量批评,”比如美国零星的反封锁抗议。“我对当前危机最担心的就是,疫情不断侵蚀社会资本,更广义地说会侵蚀民族情绪。”
非正规经济至关重要
戴维斯的书还考察了充满惊人活力的约旦扎塔里难民营。难民营里,在非政府组织建立的限制性援助系统之外,叙利亚难民经营着服装店、宠物店和台球场,生意相当繁忙。
“我以前认为非正规经济很小众。”戴维斯说。“但现在我认为,大多数(经济学家)真正评估的经济只有实际的一半左右。”这意味着GDP等官方数据还有经济学家和央行使用的模型,都无法判断病毒引发的全部后果,特别是在发展中国家。
戴维斯还发现,非正规经济系统也是危机后复苏的关键。他说,危机过后,“充满机会主义精神的当地人反应迅速,比国际货币基金组织等机构要快得多。如果能给人们购买力,他们就会出去买需要的东西,如果买不到,他们会组织邻近城镇的企业家集体采购。”
钱会变
全球很多政府都迅速采取行动,希望提升人们的购买力。但从美国的小企业过桥贷款,还有失业救济扩大的惊人混乱状况来看,很多国家确实需要升级正规金融体系。
“现代的危机应对工具,就是政府知道我们拥有的银行账户。”戴维斯说。“而且任何时候都能获得一定数额的资金。通过注入大量购买力,推动市场恢复正常运转,援助才可以真正奏效。”
特殊情况下,不太正规的金融创新也能蓬勃发展。“在危机时期,”戴维斯说,“人们能迅速建立新货币,做好新的财务安排。”例如,《极端经济》当中的一章探讨了路易斯安那州安哥拉监狱的经济,狱中禁止使用美元后,人们用鲭鱼罐头当货币。
戴维斯推测,严重的全球金融冲击也可能鼓励人们使用布里斯托尔英镑等本土货币或加密货币。他还认为,地方信用社,还有借贷圈等“非正统方式”都有望发展。
“如果疫情过去,五年后金融创新能留下什么?”戴维斯问道。“当然,我们会获取一些测试结果。但更微妙的是,我们可能收获一些新观点,比如人类社会如何更有效地利用资金。”(财富中文网)
译者:Feb
经济学家兼作家理查德·戴维斯都经历过,真的,而且经历过很多次。
2006年到2011年,戴维斯在英格兰银行担任经济学家。G20和国际货币基金组织开会商讨欧盟如何应对2008年金融危机时,他曾为英国谈判代表提供咨询。2016次英国退欧选举期间,他担任英国财政部长高级顾问。
很显然,他感觉经历的混乱还不够多。离开政府后,戴维斯踏上全球之旅,后来写成了《极端经济》(Extreme Economies)一书,该书收集了1月美国公布的9个案例。戴维斯想了解经济体遭遇困难时为何能成功适应,又为何会失败。通过写书,他从海啸后的印度尼西亚回顾到后工业时代的格拉斯哥。
“我想寻找本应失败却成功存活的经济,”戴维斯说,“还有本应繁荣却最终失败的经济。”
所以戴维斯一直思考新冠病毒大流行的经济后果和复苏前景也就毫不奇怪。他最近一直忙着照顾刚出生的双胞胎,本次抽出时间分享了一些重要的见解。
市场需要政府,政府也需要市场
“要利用市场,不能让市场失控。”戴维斯说。他在巴拿马达里安峡地区考察期间发现,当地人拼命争夺木材导致灾难性的森林砍伐,因此越发相信维持平衡的重要性。
“目前最明显的例子是个人防护用品(PPE)市场。”他接着说。“有些政府只是在指挥,不让价格信号发挥作用,结果造成了巨大的混乱。然而如果走另一个极端完全让市场决定,又会出现像英国一样的‘价格欺诈’。”
“激进的弗里德曼主义,也就是完全自由主义的模式显然是错误的,”戴维斯说。“但伯尼·桑德斯的激进主义也行不通。经济学就是要问:何时能让市场不受限制地运行,何时应该加以控制?”
不平等威胁到所有人
为了写《极端经济》,戴维斯前往一些能说明全球趋势可能影响所有人的地方考察。为了研究不平等日益严重可能导致的后果,他去了智利圣地亚哥,当地超级富人和工薪阶层之间的差距相当深远,不仅阻碍了社会流动,也阻碍了创新和经济增长。
戴维斯认为新冠病毒为全球对不平等及后果敲响了警钟。“我们意识到护士跟医生一样重要,亚马逊的员工为护士提供装备也非常重要。”他说。“我觉得这是好事。关于不平等……等疫情过去后会有大讨论,因为我们都意识到相互依存的关系。”
信任是最重要的资产,正面临风险
戴维斯认为,“社会资本”可能是成功经济体最容易忽视的因素,尤其是从冲击中复苏的经济体。不管是达里安的无政府状态,还是圣地亚哥的不平等,都加剧了人们的不信任和疏远,影响了经济发展,而印度尼西亚班达亚齐由于社区联系强大,推动当地迅速从2004年海啸几乎一片荒废中恢复。
“社会资本的价值在于能提升其他类型的资本,例如金融资本、实物资本。”他说。“关键是分享。如果社会资本很高,投入一点物质资本会就可以实现提升。如果能搭建本地化的信贷系统,金融信贷可以更稳定发挥作用。社会资本较高的社区在管理流行病和从中恢复的能力更强。”
戴维斯说,地震或战争中,社区可以积攒社会资本,因为要团结起来对抗共同的敌人。但他担心,从新冠危机的发展来看,可能威胁到从危机中恢复最重要的事。
“目前还没有战时心态,”他说。“还存在大量批评,”比如美国零星的反封锁抗议。“我对当前危机最担心的就是,疫情不断侵蚀社会资本,更广义地说会侵蚀民族情绪。”
非正规经济至关重要
戴维斯的书还考察了充满惊人活力的约旦扎塔里难民营。难民营里,在非政府组织建立的限制性援助系统之外,叙利亚难民经营着服装店、宠物店和台球场,生意相当繁忙。
“我以前认为非正规经济很小众。”戴维斯说。“但现在我认为,大多数(经济学家)真正评估的经济只有实际的一半左右。”这意味着GDP等官方数据还有经济学家和央行使用的模型,都无法判断病毒引发的全部后果,特别是在发展中国家。
戴维斯还发现,非正规经济系统也是危机后复苏的关键。他说,危机过后,“充满机会主义精神的当地人反应迅速,比国际货币基金组织等机构要快得多。如果能给人们购买力,他们就会出去买需要的东西,如果买不到,他们会组织邻近城镇的企业家集体采购。”
钱会变
全球很多政府都迅速采取行动,希望提升人们的购买力。但从美国的小企业过桥贷款,还有失业救济扩大的惊人混乱状况来看,很多国家确实需要升级正规金融体系。
“现代的危机应对工具,就是政府知道我们拥有的银行账户。”戴维斯说。“而且任何时候都能获得一定数额的资金。通过注入大量购买力,推动市场恢复正常运转,援助才可以真正奏效。”
特殊情况下,不太正规的金融创新也能蓬勃发展。“在危机时期,”戴维斯说,“人们能迅速建立新货币,做好新的财务安排。”例如,《极端经济》当中的一章探讨了路易斯安那州安哥拉监狱的经济,狱中禁止使用美元后,人们用鲭鱼罐头当货币。
戴维斯推测,严重的全球金融冲击也可能鼓励人们使用布里斯托尔英镑等本土货币或加密货币。他还认为,地方信用社,还有借贷圈等“非正统方式”都有望发展。
“如果疫情过去,五年后金融创新能留下什么?”戴维斯问道。“当然,我们会获取一些测试结果。但更微妙的是,我们可能收获一些新观点,比如人类社会如何更有效地利用资金。”(财富中文网)
译者:Feb
Economist and writer Richard Davies has been here before—quite literally, and many times.
As an economist at the Bank of England from 2006 to 2011, Davies advised U.K. negotiators at the G20 and IMF meetings that organized the EU’s response to the 2008 financial crisis. He was later a senior advisor to the U.K.’s finance minister during the runup to the 2016 Brexit vote.
Apparently that wasn’t enough economic chaos for him. After leaving government, Davies started the global tour that became the book Extreme Economies, a collection of nine case studies published in the U.S. in January. Davies wanted to learn how economies succeeded in adapting—or failed to adapt—to hard times, a mission that took him from post-tsunami Indonesia to post-industrial Glasgow.
“I looked for places that should have failed,” says Davies, “but ended up with a working economy; and places that should have thriving economies, but failed.”
Not surprisingly, Davies has been thinking a lot about the coronavirus pandemic, its economic consequences—and the outlook for recovery. He recently took time out from caring for his newborn twins to share some of his most important insights.
Markets need governments, and vice versa
“You have to use markets, but you can’t let markets run amok,” says Davies. His time in Panama’s Darien Gap region, where an unregulated scramble for wood has led to catastrophic deforestation, helped convince him of the importance of that balance.
“The prime example right now is the market for PPE [medical protective equipment]," he continues. "Some governments are just directing it, and not letting price signals work, which is causing huge mess-ups. And if you go to the other extreme and just let markets run, you wind up with the price gouging we have here in the U.K.”
“An aggressively Friedmanite, fully libertarian model is clearly wrong,” Davies argues, invoking economist Milton Friedman. “But the Bernie Sanders extreme isn’t going to work either. Economics is about [asking], 'Where can we let markets run untrammeled, and where should we control them?'”
Inequality threatens everyone
For Extreme Economies, Davies visited places that illustrate where global trends could take the rest of us. To study where growing inequality could lead, he went to Santiago, Chile, where the gap between the ultra-rich and working people is profound and deep, stalling not only social mobility, but innovation and economic growth.
Davies sees coronavirus as a global wake-up call on inequality and its consequences. “We’ve realized that the nurse is as important as the doctor, and that the Amazon worker providing stuff to the nurse is also massively important," he says. "I think that’s a good thing. The inequality debate...is going to be huge after this, because we recognize that interdependence.”
Trust is our greatest asset—and it’s at risk
Davies argues that “social capital” is perhaps the most overlooked ingredient in successful economies, especially those recovering from a shock. Darien’s lawlessness and Santiago’s inequity have hampered their local economies by fueling distrust and alienation among residents, while the strong community in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, helped that city bounce back quickly from near-total destruction by a 2004 tsunami.
“Social capital works by making other types of capital – financial, physical – go further,” he says. “It’s about sharing things. If you’ve got high social capital, one bit of physical capital goes further. You can have localized credit systems, so financial credit can go further. Communities where social capital is higher are going to be much better off in their ability both to manage this pandemic, and to recover from it.”
In an earthquake or a war, Davies says, communities can gain social capital because they’re drawn together by a common enemy. But he worries that the specific contours of the coronavirus crisis are a threat to the very thing we most need to recover from it.
“We’re not seeing the wartime mentality,” he says. “Actually we’re seeing masses of criticism,” such as scattered anti-lockdown protests in the U.S. “One of my fears for this crisis is that it’s actively eroding social capital, or national sentiment more broadly.”
The informal economy is vital
Davies’ book also examines the surprisingly vibrant Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan. There, Syrian refugees run clothing shops, pet stores, and pool halls that do bustling business—outside of the restrictive aid systems set up by the NGOs that oversee the camp.
“I used to think the informal economy was a niche thing,” Davies says. “I now think most [economists] are literally measuring about half of what’s going on.” That means that official numbers like GDP, and the models used by economists and central banks, won’t capture the full consequences of coronavirus, especially in the developing world.
But Davies has also found that informal systems are key to post-crisis recovery. After a crisis, he says, “opportunistic locals will react lightning- quick, much faster than [agencies like] the IMF. If you can just get buying power into people’s hands, they will go out and buy what they need, and if it’s not there, they’ll organize an entrepreneur from a neighboring town to get it in.”
Money will change
Many governments worldwide have acted swiftly to try and get that buying power into people’s hands. But the U.S., with its small-business bridge loans and expanded unemployment benefits in shocking disarray, is emblematic of the need to upgrade the formal financial systems of many countries.
“A modern crisis response tool,” says Davies, “would be a bank account that the government knew we had, and at any moment it could be topped up with a certain amount of money. Because getting the markets to work for you by injecting a load of spending power is where aid works really well.”
Less formal financial innovations also tend to thrive under extraordinary circumstances. “In times of crisis,” Davies says, “People are able to very quickly build new currencies, and new financial arrangements.” One chapter of Extreme Economies, for instance, explores the economy of Louisiana’s Angola penitentiary, where dollars are barred and canned mackerel serves as currency.
Davies speculates that a serious global financial shock could also encourage the adoption of homegrown local currencies like the Bristol Pound, or of cryptocurrencies. He also sees promise in local credit unions, and in “really unorthodox things” such as lending circles.
“What’s going to be the five year legacy of this?" asks Davies. “Testing, of course. But a more subtle legacy might be some real new ideas about how we as communities can target our funds in the most effective way.”