美联储大动作的风险

    “哇哦！”投资者听到美联储（Federal Reserve）在上周三的政策声明后，肯定会有这样的反应。这种反应里不仅包含着惊讶，还混杂着各种相互矛盾的情绪。

    毫无疑问：美联储昨天的声明，起码关于中央银行业务和货币政策的部分，肯定会被载入史册。它标志着美联储朝着激进主义、积极参与的抱负迈出了重要一步。然而，这种转变同时也充满了风险，因为它使得美联储在试验性的、充满政治因素的领域愈陷愈深。上周三，美联储公布了两项措施，其中一项在意料之中，另外一项则完全超出了人们的预期。

    首先，美联储增加了市场证券购买力度，将2013年的美元金额扩大一倍，增加到1万亿美元，不论从哪个角度来看，都堪称大手笔。其次，美联储改变了远期政策指引的量化指标（失业率与通胀）。鉴于理论与实践的复杂性，美联储祭出该政策的时间远远早于大多数投资者的预期。

    经济增长缓滞带来了持续的失望情绪，居高不下的失业率和对失业愈加深切的担忧是美联储此次急切推出未知政策的原因。这些因素从结构上已经渗透到美国经济中。

    美联储公布政策声明之后的新闻发布会上，直率的美联储主席本•伯南克也表达了类似的观点。很明显，伯南克对财政悬崖依然抱有顾虑，政治瘫痪使美国经济再次陷入衰退的可能性也让他寝食难安。加快政策执行也反映出美联储希望给美国经济加上多重保险。

    关于投资者的复杂情绪：政策加大对失业率的重视，我们应该表示欢迎。美国的就业危机将耗费庞大的人力成本。贫困阶层人数将日益增加。社区的社会结构正在日益遭到这场危机所侵蚀。危机持续的时间越长，解决的难度就越高。

    美联储再次向投资者证明，它已经使尽浑身解数。这是好消息。为了“推动”投资者承担更多风险，美联储甚至付出了更多努力，试图人为支撑资产价格。坏消息是，美联储为应对目前的挑战所设计的工具尚不完善，对于美联储和其他美国联邦政府机构（尤其是MIA）而言，可能会力不从心。

    首先，伯南克自己也承认，美联储异常的激进主义可能导致的后果根本无法预测，而且会付出一定的代价。不确定的预期效益，伴随而来的附带损害和意外后果风险将会提高。而且，每次美联储感觉自己应该做更多工作时，对微妙平衡的支持却会越少，因为之前的措施收效甚微。

    其次，美联储加大干预从根本上说并不符合市场经济的有效运行。截至2013年底，根据证券市场的表现，美联储掌控的市场份额将在30%至40%之间，美联储以“裁判”和“参赛者”的双重身份参与市场。结果将使市场功能、价格发现机制和资本分配遭到严重扭曲。

    Wow! That is what I suspect many investors said when they heard Wednesday's policy announcement from the Federal Reserve. And this single reaction would have captured not just partial surprise but also a combination of conflicting feelings.

    Have no doubt: Yesterday's Fed announcement will go down in the history books -- at least those texts covering central banking and monetary policy. It marks a major evolution in the activism, involvement and aspirations of the central bank. It is also a risky move, taking the institution much deeper into experimental and politically charged territory.The Fed took two major steps on Wednesday, one expected and one less so.

    First, it added to its expected purchases of market securities, doubling the dollar amount to $1 trillion for 2013 -- a very large number by any measure. Second, the Fed shifted to quantitative (unemployment and inflation) targets for forward policy guidance, and it did so earlier than most expected given theoretical and practical complexities.

    This further leap into the policy unknown was motivated by continued disappointment with the economy's sluggish growth, persistently high unemployment and increasing concern about joblessness becoming more structurally embedded into the economy.

    That much was said by Ben Bernanke, the Fed's admirably transparent chairman, during his press conference after the news was unveiled. It was also obvious that he is very concerned about the fiscal cliff, and the possibility that political paralysis could push the economy into another recession. The accelerated policy implementation may also reflect the Fed's desire to take out some additional insurance.

    Now for the mixed feelings: We should all welcome the greater policy emphasis being placed on unemployment. This national jobs crisis has enormous human costs. It increases poverty. It eats away at the social fabric of our communities. And the longer it persists, the harder it is to solve.

    The Fed has again demonstrated to investors that it is "all in." That is the good news. The Fed is doing even more in its attempt to artificially bolster asset prices as a way to "push" investors to take more risk. The bad news is that the institution, with its imperfect tools for the challenge at hand and with other federal government entities essentially MIA, may be taking on an unsustainable burden.

    First, and as recognized by Bernanke, the outcome of the Fed's unusual activism is neither predictable nor costless. Uncertain expected benefits come with an increasing risk of collateral damage and unintended consequences. And the tricky balance becomes less favorable every time the Fed feels it has to do more because prior actions have not been sufficiently effective.

    Second, the Fed's growing involvement is ultimately inconsistent with the proper efficient functioning of a market economy. With a market share that will end 2013 between 30% and 45% depending on the securities, the Fed is heavily involved in markets as both a referee and player. As such, it distorts their functioning, the price discovery process and the allocation of capital.