首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

通胀率居高不下是因为哄抬物价?其实另有原因

企业哄抬物价最多只是通胀失控的诸多原因之一,不是主要原因。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

在美国华盛顿的加油站和超市里,飙升的物价让消费者感到非常愤怒,很多人认为罪魁祸首很明确,因为贪婪的企业凶猛抬高价格攫取利润。

为了回应民众的愤怒,今年5月,民主党领导的众议院针对一项法案做了党派立场投票,多数民主党人支持,所有共和党人反对。法案内容是希望打击能源生产商涉嫌哄抬物价的行为。

无独有偶,今年5月,英国也宣布计划对石油天然气公司的利润征收25%的临时暴利税,并将相关收入发放给经济困难的家庭。

然而尽管公众怨声载道,多数经济学家却表示,企业哄抬物价最多只是通胀失控的诸多原因之一,不是主要原因。

“针对当下情况,其实有更靠谱的元凶。”位于西班牙的纳瓦拉大学(University of Navarra)的经济学家何塞·阿扎尔表示。

其中包括:消费者强劲支出;工厂、港口和货场供应中断;工人短缺;美国总统乔·拜登的大规模疫情援助计划;新冠病毒导致中国停产;俄乌冲突;最重要的是,美联储(Federal Reserve)维持超低利率水平的时间比专家说的长。

如果说谴责声有愈演愈烈之势,主要原因是今年5月,美国政府报告称通胀率与去年同期相比上升8.6%,这是自1981年以来物价的最大涨幅。

为了对抗通胀,美联储大幅收紧信贷,但为时已晚。6月15日,美联储将基准利率上调了75个基点,这是自1994年以来最猛的一次加息,也预示会出现更多的大幅加息。美联储希望实现“软着陆”,然而实现这一目标是出了名的艰难。所谓“软着陆”是指放缓增长速度以抑制通胀,同时又要避免经济陷入衰退。

多年来,通胀一直保持或低于美联储2%的年度目标,甚至失业率降至半个世纪以来最低水平时也能够做到。然而当经济从大规模衰退中以惊人速度和力度反弹时,美国的消费者价格指数(CPI)从2021年3月的同比增长2.6%不断上升至今年5月的近40年来高点。

今年年初,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)的成份股公司的利润率下降之前,至少有一段时间的通胀飙升与企业盈利增长保持同步。消费者很容易从中发现蛛丝马迹,从而认为企业似乎在哄抬物价。这可不是简单的通胀。而是贪婪导致的通胀。

今年的4月末5月初,《华盛顿邮报》(Washington Post)和乔治·梅森大学(George Mason University)的沙尔政策与政府学院(Schar School of Policy and Government)对1055名美国人的民意调查中,被问及汽油价格飙升背后的罪魁祸首时,72%的人将之归咎于营利性企业,超过了俄乌冲突(69%)、拜登(58%)或者新冠疫情带来的影响(58%)。而且两党结果一致:86%的民主党人和52%的共和党人都指责企业抬高油价。

“消费者发现价格上涨,感到愤怒,然后找人责怪,这很自然。”纽约大学(New York University)的斯特恩商学院(Stern School of Business)研究企业竞争的经济学家克里斯托弗·康伦表示。“不管是超市、加油站还是汽车经销店,都轮不到普通人定价。所以人们自然会责怪企业,因为人们看到企业在提价。”

然而,康伦和其他很多经济学家不愿意指控,也不支持惩罚美国企业。本月,芝加哥大学(University of Chicago)的布斯商学院(Booth School of Business)询问经济学家,愿不愿意支持通过法律禁止市场震荡期间大企业以“不合理的过高价格”出售商品或服务,65%的经济学家表示不支持。支持者仅占5%。

经济学家阿扎尔承认,哪些因素组合导致价格飙升“仍然悬而未决”。新冠疫情及其后果导致人们很难评估经济状况。当今的经济学家并不具备分析新冠疫情在财务方面影响的经验。

面对2020年3月新冠疫情爆发以来的经济走势,政策制定者和分析师一再判断失误:他们没有料到在庞大的政府支出、美联储及其他央行创造的创纪录低利率的推动下,经济可以迅速从低迷中复苏。之后,他们又迟迟没有意识到高通胀压力日益增大的威胁,刚开始认为只是供应中断引发的暂时影响。

然而,经济有一个方面无可争议:近几十年的并购浪潮已经扼杀或削弱了航空公司、银行、肉类包装和其他行业的竞争。整合后幸存的公司能够要求供应商降价,压低工人工资,将更高成本转嫁给客户,毕竟客户除了付钱没有什么选择。

波士顿联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of Boston)的研究人员发现,竞争越少,企业就越容易将更高的成本转嫁给客户,并将其称之为通胀复苏的“放大因素”。

自由派的经济政策研究所(Economic Policy Institute)的研究主任乔希·比文斯估计,自2020年年中以来,非金融企业近54%的价格上涨原因在于“追求更丰厚的利润”,而从1979年到2019年,该比例仅为11%。

比文斯承认,过去两年企业贪婪和市场影响力都不太可能显著增长。但他表示,新冠疫情通胀飙升期间,公司确实改变了利用市场力量的方向:很多公司不再向供应商施压以削减成本,也不再限制员工工资,而是面向客户提价。

上周一项针对近3700家公司的研究中,左倾的罗斯福研究所(Roosevelt Institute)得出结论,去年提价和利润率均达到20世纪50年代以来最高水平。罗斯福研究所还发现,新冠疫情之前曾经大举提价的公司在疫情爆发后涨价可能性更高,“表明市场力量具有驱动通胀的作用。”

然而,很多经济学家并不认同企业贪婪是罪魁祸首。美国前总统贝拉克·奥巴马的白宫高级经济顾问杰森·弗曼表示,一些证据甚至表明,与因为成本上升而面临激烈竞争的公司相比,垄断企业的提价速度相对较慢,“部分原因是垄断企业定价一开始就很高。”

纽约大学的康伦还列举了竞争激烈的市场中价格飙升的例子。例如,全美国各地的众多个人大量出售二手车。然而过去一年,二手车平均价格飙升了16%。今年5月,另一个竞争对手众多的市场——大型家电的平均价格较去年同期也涨了近10%。

相比之下,尽管啤酒市场由百威英博(AB-Inbev)垄断,百加得(Bacardi)和帝亚吉欧(Diageo)主导烈酒市场,酒精饮料的价格比一年前仅上涨了4%。

“如果非要说百威英博没有家电公司美泰克(Maytag)贪婪,很难让人相信。”康伦说。

那么,是什么推动了通胀飙升?

“需求。”现供职哈佛大学(Harvard University)的弗曼说,“大量的政府支出,庞大的货币供应,共同支撑了极高的需求水平。然而供应跟不上,所以导致了价格上涨。”

旧金山联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)的研究人员估计,自2021上半年以来,美国政府在新冠疫情期间的经济援助导致通胀率上升了约3个百分点。经济援助直接给消费者发钱,帮助人们渡过危机,也引发了消费热潮。

今年4月发布的报告中,圣路易斯联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis)的研究人员指出,工厂成本之所以上涨,全球供应链瓶颈是“重要原因”。研究人员发现,去年11月,制造业的批发通胀率增加了高达20个百分点,达到30%。

尽管如此,不少经济学家,甚至连一些认为过去一年价格飙升原因并非贪婪的经济学家也表示,政府应该限制垄断企业的市场力量,比如阻止减少竞争的合并。关键在于,要让更多的公司争夺客户从而鼓励创新,提升经济效率。

即便如此,采取更严厉的反垄断政策也不太可能短期减缓通胀压力。

“我发现可以把竞争比作饮食和锻炼。”纽约大学的康伦说。“竞争加大是好事。但就像节食和锻炼一样,要等很久才能够看到回报。”

“现在的情况是,病人躺在急诊室里奄奄一息。饮食和锻炼当然还是好事。但首先要治疗严重的通胀问题。”(财富中文网)

译者:梁宇

审校:夏林

在美国华盛顿的加油站和超市里,飙升的物价让消费者感到非常愤怒,很多人认为罪魁祸首很明确,因为贪婪的企业凶猛抬高价格攫取利润。

为了回应民众的愤怒,今年5月,民主党领导的众议院针对一项法案做了党派立场投票,多数民主党人支持,所有共和党人反对。法案内容是希望打击能源生产商涉嫌哄抬物价的行为。

无独有偶,今年5月,英国也宣布计划对石油天然气公司的利润征收25%的临时暴利税,并将相关收入发放给经济困难的家庭。

然而尽管公众怨声载道,多数经济学家却表示,企业哄抬物价最多只是通胀失控的诸多原因之一,不是主要原因。

“针对当下情况,其实有更靠谱的元凶。”位于西班牙的纳瓦拉大学(University of Navarra)的经济学家何塞·阿扎尔表示。

其中包括:消费者强劲支出;工厂、港口和货场供应中断;工人短缺;美国总统乔·拜登的大规模疫情援助计划;新冠病毒导致中国停产;俄乌冲突;最重要的是,美联储(Federal Reserve)维持超低利率水平的时间比专家说的长。

如果说谴责声有愈演愈烈之势,主要原因是今年5月,美国政府报告称通胀率与去年同期相比上升8.6%,这是自1981年以来物价的最大涨幅。

为了对抗通胀,美联储大幅收紧信贷,但为时已晚。6月15日,美联储将基准利率上调了75个基点,这是自1994年以来最猛的一次加息,也预示会出现更多的大幅加息。美联储希望实现“软着陆”,然而实现这一目标是出了名的艰难。所谓“软着陆”是指放缓增长速度以抑制通胀,同时又要避免经济陷入衰退。

多年来,通胀一直保持或低于美联储2%的年度目标,甚至失业率降至半个世纪以来最低水平时也能够做到。然而当经济从大规模衰退中以惊人速度和力度反弹时,美国的消费者价格指数(CPI)从2021年3月的同比增长2.6%不断上升至今年5月的近40年来高点。

今年年初,标准普尔500指数(S&P 500)的成份股公司的利润率下降之前,至少有一段时间的通胀飙升与企业盈利增长保持同步。消费者很容易从中发现蛛丝马迹,从而认为企业似乎在哄抬物价。这可不是简单的通胀。而是贪婪导致的通胀。

今年的4月末5月初,《华盛顿邮报》(Washington Post)和乔治·梅森大学(George Mason University)的沙尔政策与政府学院(Schar School of Policy and Government)对1055名美国人的民意调查中,被问及汽油价格飙升背后的罪魁祸首时,72%的人将之归咎于营利性企业,超过了俄乌冲突(69%)、拜登(58%)或者新冠疫情带来的影响(58%)。而且两党结果一致:86%的民主党人和52%的共和党人都指责企业抬高油价。

“消费者发现价格上涨,感到愤怒,然后找人责怪,这很自然。”纽约大学(New York University)的斯特恩商学院(Stern School of Business)研究企业竞争的经济学家克里斯托弗·康伦表示。“不管是超市、加油站还是汽车经销店,都轮不到普通人定价。所以人们自然会责怪企业,因为人们看到企业在提价。”

然而,康伦和其他很多经济学家不愿意指控,也不支持惩罚美国企业。本月,芝加哥大学(University of Chicago)的布斯商学院(Booth School of Business)询问经济学家,愿不愿意支持通过法律禁止市场震荡期间大企业以“不合理的过高价格”出售商品或服务,65%的经济学家表示不支持。支持者仅占5%。

经济学家阿扎尔承认,哪些因素组合导致价格飙升“仍然悬而未决”。新冠疫情及其后果导致人们很难评估经济状况。当今的经济学家并不具备分析新冠疫情在财务方面影响的经验。

面对2020年3月新冠疫情爆发以来的经济走势,政策制定者和分析师一再判断失误:他们没有料到在庞大的政府支出、美联储及其他央行创造的创纪录低利率的推动下,经济可以迅速从低迷中复苏。之后,他们又迟迟没有意识到高通胀压力日益增大的威胁,刚开始认为只是供应中断引发的暂时影响。

然而,经济有一个方面无可争议:近几十年的并购浪潮已经扼杀或削弱了航空公司、银行、肉类包装和其他行业的竞争。整合后幸存的公司能够要求供应商降价,压低工人工资,将更高成本转嫁给客户,毕竟客户除了付钱没有什么选择。

波士顿联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of Boston)的研究人员发现,竞争越少,企业就越容易将更高的成本转嫁给客户,并将其称之为通胀复苏的“放大因素”。

自由派的经济政策研究所(Economic Policy Institute)的研究主任乔希·比文斯估计,自2020年年中以来,非金融企业近54%的价格上涨原因在于“追求更丰厚的利润”,而从1979年到2019年,该比例仅为11%。

比文斯承认,过去两年企业贪婪和市场影响力都不太可能显著增长。但他表示,新冠疫情通胀飙升期间,公司确实改变了利用市场力量的方向:很多公司不再向供应商施压以削减成本,也不再限制员工工资,而是面向客户提价。

上周一项针对近3700家公司的研究中,左倾的罗斯福研究所(Roosevelt Institute)得出结论,去年提价和利润率均达到20世纪50年代以来最高水平。罗斯福研究所还发现,新冠疫情之前曾经大举提价的公司在疫情爆发后涨价可能性更高,“表明市场力量具有驱动通胀的作用。”

然而,很多经济学家并不认同企业贪婪是罪魁祸首。美国前总统贝拉克·奥巴马的白宫高级经济顾问杰森·弗曼表示,一些证据甚至表明,与因为成本上升而面临激烈竞争的公司相比,垄断企业的提价速度相对较慢,“部分原因是垄断企业定价一开始就很高。”

纽约大学的康伦还列举了竞争激烈的市场中价格飙升的例子。例如,全美国各地的众多个人大量出售二手车。然而过去一年,二手车平均价格飙升了16%。今年5月,另一个竞争对手众多的市场——大型家电的平均价格较去年同期也涨了近10%。

相比之下,尽管啤酒市场由百威英博(AB-Inbev)垄断,百加得(Bacardi)和帝亚吉欧(Diageo)主导烈酒市场,酒精饮料的价格比一年前仅上涨了4%。

“如果非要说百威英博没有家电公司美泰克(Maytag)贪婪,很难让人相信。”康伦说。

那么,是什么推动了通胀飙升?

“需求。”现供职哈佛大学(Harvard University)的弗曼说,“大量的政府支出,庞大的货币供应,共同支撑了极高的需求水平。然而供应跟不上,所以导致了价格上涨。”

旧金山联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)的研究人员估计,自2021上半年以来,美国政府在新冠疫情期间的经济援助导致通胀率上升了约3个百分点。经济援助直接给消费者发钱,帮助人们渡过危机,也引发了消费热潮。

今年4月发布的报告中,圣路易斯联邦储备银行(Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis)的研究人员指出,工厂成本之所以上涨,全球供应链瓶颈是“重要原因”。研究人员发现,去年11月,制造业的批发通胀率增加了高达20个百分点,达到30%。

尽管如此,不少经济学家,甚至连一些认为过去一年价格飙升原因并非贪婪的经济学家也表示,政府应该限制垄断企业的市场力量,比如阻止减少竞争的合并。关键在于,要让更多的公司争夺客户从而鼓励创新,提升经济效率。

即便如此,采取更严厉的反垄断政策也不太可能短期减缓通胀压力。

“我发现可以把竞争比作饮食和锻炼。”纽约大学的康伦说。“竞争加大是好事。但就像节食和锻炼一样,要等很久才能够看到回报。”

“现在的情况是,病人躺在急诊室里奄奄一息。饮食和锻炼当然还是好事。但首先要治疗严重的通胀问题。”(财富中文网)

译者:梁宇

审校:夏林

WASHINGTON—Furious about surging prices at the gasoline station and the supermarket, many consumers feel they know just where to cast blame: On greedy companies that relentlessly jack up prices and pocket the profits.

Responding to that sentiment, the Democratic-led House of Representatives in May passed on a party-line vote—most Democrats for, all Republicans against—a bill designed to crack down on alleged price gouging by energy producers.

Likewise, Britain in May announced plans to impose a temporary 25% windfall tax on oil and gas company profits and to funnel the proceeds to financially struggling households.

Yet for all the public's resentment, most economists say corporate price gouging is, at most, one of many causes of runaway inflation—and not the primary one.

“There are much more plausible candidates for what’s going on," said Jose Azar an economist at Spain’s University of Navarra.

They include: Robust spending by consumers. Supply disruptions at factories, ports and freight yards. Worker shortages. President Joe Biden’s enormous pandemic aid program. COVID 19-caused shutdowns in China. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. And, not least, a Federal Reserve that kept interest rates ultra-low longer than experts say it should have.

The blame game is, if anything, intensifying after the U.S. government reported that inflation hit 8.6% in May from a year earlier, the biggest price spike since 1981.

To fight inflation, the Fed is now belatedly tightening credit aggressively. On June 15, it raised its benchmark short-term rate by three-quarters of a point—its largest hike since 1994—and signaled that more large rate hikes are coming. The Fed hopes to achieve a notoriously difficult “soft landing”—slowing growth enough to curb inflation without causing the economy to slide into recession.

For years, inflation had remained at or below the Fed’s 2% annual target, even while unemployment sank to a half-century low. But when the economy rebounded from the pandemic recession with startling speed and strength, the U.S. consumer price index rose steadily—from a 2.6% year-over-year increase in March 2021 to May 2022's four-decade high.

For a while at least—before profit margins at S&P 500 companies dipped early this year—the inflation surge coincided with swelling corporate earnings. It was easy for consumers to connect the dots: Companies, it seemed, were engaged in price-gouging. This wasn’t just inflation. It was greedflation.

Asked to name the culprits behind the spike in gasoline prices, 72% of the 1,055 Americans polled in late April and early May by the Washington Post and George Mason University's Schar School of Policy and Government blamed profit-seeking corporations, more than the share who pointed to Russia's war against Ukraine (69%) or Biden (58%) or pandemic disruptions (58%). And the verdict was bipartisan: 86% of Democrats and 52% of Republicans blamed corporations for inflated gas prices.

“It's very natural for consumers to see prices rising and get angry about it and then look for someone to blame,” said Christopher Conlon, an economist at New York University’s Stern School of Business who studies corporate competition. “You and I don’t get to set prices at the supermarket, the gas station or the car dealership. So people naturally blame corporations, since those are the ones they see raising prices.”

Yet Conlon and many other economists are reluctant to indict—or to favor punishing—Corporate America. When the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business asked economists this month whether they'd support a law to bar big companies from selling their goods or services at an “unconscionably excessive price” during a market shock, 65% said no. Only 5% backed the idea.

Just what combination of factors is most responsible for causing prices to soar “is still an open question, ” economist Azar acknowledges. COVID-19 and its aftermath have made it hard to assess the state of the economy. Today’s economists have no experience analyzing the financial aftermath of a pandemic.

Policymakers and analysts have been repeatedly blindsided by the path the economy has taken since COVID struck in March 2020: They didn’t expect the swift recovery from the downturn, fueled by vast government spending and record-low rates engineered by the Fed and other central banks. Then they were slow to recognize the gathering threat of high inflation pressures, dismissing them at first as merely a temporary consequence of supply disruptions.

One aspect of the economy, though, is undisputed: A wave of mergers in recent decades has killed or shrunk competition among airlines, banks, meatpacking companies and many other industries. That consolidation has given the surviving companies the leverage to demand price cuts from suppliers, to hold down workers' pay and to pass on higher costs to customers who don’t have much choice but to pay up.

Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston have found that less competition made it easier for companies to pass along higher costs to customers, calling it an “amplifying factor” in the resurgence of inflation.

Josh Bivens, research director at the liberal Economic Policy Institute, has estimated that nearly 54% of the price increases in nonfinancial businesses since mid-2020 can be attributed to "fatter profit margins," versus just 11% from 1979 through 2019.

Bivens conceded that neither corporate greed nor market clout has likely grown significantly in the past two years. But he suggested that during the COVID inflationary spike, companies have redirected how they use their market power: Many have shifted away from pressuring suppliers to cut costs and limiting workers’ pay and have instead boosted prices for customers.

In a study of nearly 3,700 companies released last week, the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute concluded that markups and profit margins last year reached their highest level since the 1950s. It also found that companies that had aggressively raised prices before the pandemic were more likely to do so after it struck, “suggesting a role for market power as an explanatory driver of inflation.”

Yet many economists aren’t convinced that corporate greed is the main culprit. Jason Furman, a top economic adviser in the Obama White House, said that some evidence even suggests that monopolies are slower than companies that face stiff competition to raise prices when their own costs rise, “in part because their prices were high to begin with.”

Likewise, NYU’s Conlon cites examples where prices have soared in competitive markets. Used cars, for example, are sold in lots across the country and by numerous individuals. Yet average used-car prices have skyrocketed 16% over the past year. Similarly, the average price of major appliances, another market with plenty of competitors, surged nearly 10% in May from a year earlier.

By contrast, the price of alcoholic beverages has risen just 4% from a year ago even though the beer market is dominated by AB-Inbev and spirits by Bacardi and Diageo.

“It is hard to imagine that AB-Inbev isn’t as greedy as Maytag,” Conlon said.

So what has most driven the inflationary spike?

“Demand,” said Furman, now at Harvard University. “Lots of government spending, lots of monetary support—all combined together to support extraordinarily high levels of demand. Supply couldn’t keep up, so prices rose.”

Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco estimate that government aid to the economy during the pandemic, which put money in consumers' pockets to help them endure the crisis and set off a spending spree, has raised inflation by about 3 percentage points since the first half of 2021.

In report released in April, researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis blamed global supply chain bottlenecks for playing a “significant role” in inflating factory costs. They found that it added a staggering 20 percentage points to wholesale inflation in manufacturing last November, raising it to 30%.

Still, even some economists who don’t blame greedflation for the price spike of the past year say they think governments should try to restrict the market power of monopolies, perhaps by blocking mergers that reduce competition. The idea is that more companies vying for the same customers would encourage innovation and makes the economy more productive.

Even so, tougher antitrust policies wouldn't likely do much to slow inflation anytime soon.

“I find it helpful to think about competition like diet and exercise,” NYU’s Conlon said. “More competition is a good thing. But, like diet and exercise, the payoffs are long term.”

“Right now, the patient is in the emergency room. Sure, diet and exercise are still a good thing. But we need to treat the acute problem of inflation.”

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开