For the best part of 20 years, Alan Greenspan has been a symbol of the stupidity of ageism. He became chairman of the US Federal Reserve at 61, when plenty of workers have already been tossed on the scrapheap and many others are preparing to wind down for retirement. His golden years in charge of the US economy were when he was pushing 70 and he’s still there aged 78. Greenspan is the doyen of central bankers, still talked about in almost reverential terms by his peers. The fact that the Fed chairman rarely gives interviews and makes public pronouncements that are to economics what Finnegans Wake is to literature only adds to the mystique.
It is, then, with some trepidation that the question has to be asked: has Big Alan finally lost the plot? At the start of last week, Greenspan presided over a meeting of the Fed which kept interest rates on hold at 1%, the level they have been pegged at for nearly a year. A statement accompanying the decision said the risks to inflation were balanced, which means the Fed thinks there is as much chance of the lost of living going up as going down. On Thursday, new joblessness claims in the US fell to their lowest level in getting on for four years, and the picture of a recovering labour market was underlined by Friday’s non-farm payrolls which showed an increase of 288,000, above what had been expected. The economy is expanding at an annual rate of 4.5%, surveys of both manufacturing and the service sector are strong, the housing market is booming, inflation has started to pick up.
Hardly surprisingly, Greenspan’s call on inflation is now coming under the microscope, even by those on the Kenyesian left who tend to favor expansionary macroeconomic policies. “Show me something, other than computers, where the price is falling,” says Dean Baker of the Centre for Economic Policy Research in Washington. Baker is right. Clearly, risks to inflation are on the upside, and massively so. The economy has been injected with a cocktail of three growth-inducing drugs-negative real interest rates, a rising budget deficit and a falling currency. Oil prices have touched $40 a barrel and the labour market is tightening. It is hard to believe that Greenspan, a junkie for economic data no matter how seemingly trivial, has not spotted all this. Rates in the US are far below a neutral level, which would probably be around 5%, yet Greenspan is in no hurry to act.
在过去20多年最风光的时间里,艾伦·格林斯潘代表了一种形象,证明了“人老不中用”的看法是多么的愚蠢。在他61岁那年,他成为了美联储主席,而很多同龄人早已被淘汰,还有很多人正准备着退休。在年近70时他迎来了掌管美国经济的黄金岁月,而现今78岁的他地位依然牢不可破。格林斯潘是中央银行家中的老字辈了,时至今日,同僚们提起他还肃然起敬。这位美联储的主席很少接受采访,也很少在公共场合讲话,如同文学界中神秘的《为芬尼根守灵》一样,这一作风更增添了他在经济界的高深莫测。
但是,人们还是不禁战战兢兢地要问:难道老谋深算的艾伦最终还是失算了吗?上周初,格林斯潘主持了美联储的一个会议,决定将利率控制在1%的水平,这一水平他们已经坚持了近一年的时间。随着决定发布的一项声明宣称通货膨胀的风险已经被控制住了,这就意味着美联储认为生活水准上升或下滑的几率大致相同。周四公布的失业率已接近四年来的最低水平,而周五非农业就业人数增加了288,000人,劳动力市场呈现出一片复苏的景象,这超出了人们的预期。经济以每年4.5%的速度增长。制造业和服务业的调查表明增长势头强劲,房地产市场愈加繁荣,通货膨胀已经露出了苗头。
格林斯潘对通货膨胀采取的方式受到百般挑剔也就不足为怪了。甚至于那些倾向于扩张性宏观经济政策的凯恩斯左派人士也加入了挑剔的行业。“除了计算机以外,难道还有其他的东西在降价吗?”华盛顿经济政策研究中心的迪安·贝克问道。贝克是正确的。显而易见,通货膨胀的风险呈上升趋势,而且上升幅度很大。美国经济已经被注入了三合一的增长剂:实际利率的降低,不断增长的预算赤字和货币的贬值。油价已经达到了每桶40美元,劳动力市场也在紧缩。人们还是很难相信像格林斯潘这样一位精通数字的经济学家,不管数字是多么地微不足道,居然没有察觉到这一点。美国利率的中等水平约为5%,而目前的利率远远低于这一标准,但格林斯潘却并不急于采取行动。