型男呀，对着CNBC的主持人说garbage. 最有型的是他说的："Monkeys spend all their time picking bottoms. I refuse to pick bottoms as I don't live in trees！" He also said that he is fearful of China and belives China's GDP is overstated.
  

---

The recent rise in stocks and talk about green shoots in the markets are optimistic assumptions, as the world downturn "still has a way to run," Hugh Hendry, Chief Investment Officer at Eclectica, told CNBC Tuesday.

World gross domestic product looks overestimated, because global consumption has been based on debt, and this cannot continue, Hendry told "Squawk Box Europe."

"In the last five weeks we had a rally in risk. Big deal," he said.

"I am fearful of the surplus countries, like China and Germany. I think GDP has been overstated," Hendry added.

"My notion was, you had Bernie Madoff doing US GDP accounting." China "built capacity to serve a world that doesn't exist. We're drowning in capacity. The idea to propose we build more… that ain't a remedy," he explained.

Although companies' results beat forecasts, this is mainly because they marked their expectations too low, but their outlook is grim, according to Hendry.

"I believe the downturn in the global economy still has a way to run. We've only been given evidence of further deterioration," he said.

The rise in bond yields shows that the yield curve is flattening, pointing to more economic weakness ahead.

"What it reveals is that it's terrifying. This rise in bond yields shows… the private sector is countering the Fed and is tightening policy," Hendry said.

During the Great Depression, there had been rallies in the stock market, but stocks generally fell, Hendry reminded, explaining his bearish stance on stocks. He added that nobody can predict where the bottom was for the stock market.

"Monkeys spend all their time picking bottoms. I refuse to pick bottoms as I don't live in trees," he said

Eyes on China's GDP
China’s GDP growth during the first quarter of 2009 outpaced analysts’ estimates causing Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and CLSA to each raise their 2009 GDP growth forecasts. Goldman is now forecasting 8.3 percent GDP growth for 2009 while CLSA and Morgan Stanley are expecting a growth rate of 7 percent.

Those two estimates tend to be on the higher end of expectations and come with some stipulations.

Goldman says that we must continue to see aggressive policy stimulus from the Chinese government and strong domestic demand in order to reach 8 percent growth.

CLSA also thinks consumption and stimulus will be the key indicators of China’s growth. They think it remains to be seen whether the stimulus is destroying value to maintain volume.

While CLSA says it’s impossible to answer that question at this point, they commend China’s ability to grow in this environment.

“Being able to publish a growth statistic above 6 percent counts as a remarkable achievement in the light of international pressures. This is especially true as China’s (equally) manufacturing driven peers will likely all post negative year-on-year growth in 1Q09.”

The government stimulus has also had a positive effect on fixed asset investment; it was better than expected during the first quarter, up 28.6 percent.

This is important to reinvigorate China’s domestic growth, but also the global economy. We recently saw a strong bounce in global markets after China’s Purchasing Managers’ Index exceeded expectations, and we believe China is currently serving as a precursor to an overall global economic recovery.

---

From the March 19, 2009 issue of The Gartman Letter

ON CHINA: RONALD REAGAN WOULD SMILE

Speaking at the People's Congress in Beijing recently, Premier Wen Jiaboa made it quite clear that China intends fully to achieve 8% growth in GDP this year. Not next year; not two years hence, but this year...'09; the year of the Ox... this year.

Interestingly, Mr. Wen made it clear that not only was the government intent upon force feeding liquidity into the nation's banks, but was also prepared to make material cuts in income taxes, across the board to sponsor such growth.

Wen made it clear that the only way he can see Chinese economic growth returning to the not-so-long-ago-lost halcyon days of 9% growth almost relentlessly shall require more than simple reserve injections.

Mr. Wen said that it is his intention to turn China from an export driven society to a consumer driven one instead. He know that liquidity alone will not suffice to do what Beijing needs the economy to do; hence Mr. Wen will begin this new era of growing consumer demand by cutting corporate and personal income taxes. According to The China Daily, Mr. Wen said, in the simplest of terms, that it is Beijing's intention to spur the economy forward by "boosting domestic demand through residential tax cuts, in addition to the levy reduction for companies."

The latter has already been put into effect; the former is coming. Mr. Wen's proposed "residential" tax cuts include tax cuts on securities transactions; tax cuts on property sales; smaller taxes on exports and an end to a number of "administrative charges" on various goods and services. At a time when American law makers on the Left are debating the possibilities of taxing stock transactions, the Chinese are moving to end them!

Further, China is moving swiftly ahead with very real "infrastructure" spending. The new term here in the US is "shovel ready." Our stimulus program is manifestly un-shovel ready; in China, the shovels are already at hand and the programs are being put into effect, with workers being hired and ground being broken.

Mr. Wen has the calendar working for him too, for this year marks the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic. As is always the case, China will have myriad numbers of building programs in place to commemorate that event. Too... and this is hard for us to believe, for time passes so quickly... this is the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Uprising. Mr. Wen and Mr. Hu will want to make certain that things are on the economic mend in order to keep dissidents wrong-footed throughout the years.

This is a strange era in which we live then. We live at a time when ex-Communists are taking the more free market route toward a consumer led society. We are living in an era when Beijing reads Atlas Shrugged and Washington reads The Manchester Guardian. We are living in an era when tax cuts of all sorts are effected by Beijing, while Washington talks about and effects tax increases of all sorts. We live in an era when Beijing gets out of the way of entrepreneurs, and Washington throws rocks and rubble in their way instead.

As was said in Ecclesiastes, "To everything, turn, turn, turn..."

Good Luck and Good Trading,

Dennis Gartman

---

黃金冒險號：菊帶霜 by 陶杰

女明星一張臉孔太過漂亮，成不了演員，注定是蝴蝶標本。太多電車男的阿諛讚美包圍着，她只會自戀在一揚長髮的護髮素廣告的慢鏡頭裏，銀晶晶的肥皂泡，曼美的輕音樂：啦啦啦，Da - da - da - da，像台灣的林志玲，還有香港的另外幾位，從一「出道」開始，明眼人都會知道，她們一生都不會蛻變成琦溫絲萊。 

　　琦溫絲萊絕不「靚爆框」，恰到一個女明星點化成藝術家的臨界點。這等美態，除了令男人對她有短暫的性幻想，更多是令男人產生敬畏。 

　　琦溫絲萊年過三十，才令人恍然大悟為什麼她當年入選為《鐵達尼號》女主角：她體態圓潤，有一份沉鬱淡靜的風華，而李安納度很瘦，有年少輕狂的神經質。在一段樂譜裏，琦溫絲萊是低音譜號，而李安納度是高音。《鐵達尼號》是這對男女的二重唱。所以到了《浮生路》，二人重逢。奇妙的地方是戲外有戲。在《浮生路》裏，兩人演一對志比天高而又失意於現實的小資產階級。女主角覺得日子苦悶，與一個平庸的肥仔發生婚外情，兩人同樣也在一輛汽車裏做愛，男人的一隻手按在玻璃窗上。這場戲遙向《鐵達尼號》的性愛場面「致敬」──那時也發生在船上一輛勞斯萊斯汽車裏──而且對於不再青春年少的琦溫絲萊，也是巧妙的自嘲。 

　　一晃眼十多年了，經典場面重現，韶華換了幾番光景。琦溫絲萊是那種，套一句很俗的華文：叫做「經得起時間考驗」的女人。 

　　由女明星昇華到女演員，當中經歷幾許憂傷。如果生得太美貌，迷戀着鏡子，會折磨於歲月老去的皺紋，生育之後的沉墜，所謂美女明星，過不了這一關，但鯉躍龍門，成王成聖，由女明星到女演員，十年於茲，琦溫絲萊走過來了。 

　　比起愛瑪湯遜，琦溫絲萊多了性感魅力，比起梅麗史翠普，她也沒那麼局限於耶魯東岸劍橋塔頂和費城樓廈的冷峻，琦溫絲萊可以是憂怨的紐約客，但看她在《讀愛》中獨自回家，踏着家門地毯用力擦鞋底的那一身直腰板，完全是德國女人。金球獎和奧斯卡都歸她，就憑這點眼光。今後三十年，因為琦溫絲萊，有許多好戲在後頭了。讓大家期待，在時間的面具長廊裏，凝看這一盆瓣開千面的霜菊，把她細細來欣賞。

专辑简介

　　她希望用声音感动您们
　　冯曦妤 Fiona Fung
　　首张大碟 A Little Love

　　为确保音色完美,特别加重成本CD由日本压制

　　4首Demo歌曲另加历年来广告歌及电影插曲等27首

　　香港乐坛又一新唱作女新人—冯曦妤(Fiona)，早于2003年，她以 Fiona Fung 之身份和感动的歌声主唱电视剧《当四叶草碰上剑尖时》主题曲“Shining Friends”，同时又是容祖儿金曲“我的骄傲”英文原唱版“Proud of You”的歌者。2008年，冯曦妤正式进军乐坛，并推出首张唱片《A Little Love》。

　　除了收录了Fiona为连锁快餐店电视广告歌原版“阳光．雨”，以及儿歌金曲“幸运儿”，碟内更找到她多年来为电影配乐Demo及广告歌共27首作品，包括∶电影《千机变》插曲“The Glorious Death”、《无间道》插曲“再见---警察”、《单身部落》插曲“不做你的情人”，以及热播广告“遥远的”、“我在那一角落患过伤风”、英文歌“Forever Friends”，还有“幸运儿”的国语版“避风港”和英文金曲“Proud of You”。

01. The Glorious Death "千机变 - 插曲"
02. 阳光．雨
03. More Than Light
04. 遥远的
05. A Wonderful Day
06. 火星原居民
07. 只眼闭
08. Hidden Romance
09. 幸运儿
10. Fun For Sharing
11. Proud of You
12. 我在那一角落患过伤风
13. Shining Friends
14. 再见---警察 "无间道 - 插曲"
15. Forever Friends
16. Shine of the Century
17. 小伤口
18. 在你身边
19. 救生圈
20. 一点点的回忆
21. Flow
22. I Love Sunshine
23. A Little Love
24. Free
25. 避风港
26. Special Crew
27. 不做你的情人 "单身部落 - 插曲"

 

I know how stupid and superficial I may seem to look like if I confess that I am obsessed with Adam Lambert at my age! Whatever, in my opinion, he is such a talented singer and spectacular performer on the stage that he seems to have a native ability to easily obtain all the attentions from the audience when he starts to sing.
I started to notice him after he sang the "Satisfaction" of Rolling Stone in the very early round. What a range his vocal can reach! At that time I did not expect that he can even master those slow songs in his emotional and beautiful way.  
You can watch all of Adam's performance videos on AI through:
http://www.thebestarts.com/adamlambert/idol/default.aspx
BTW, i still do not get why our gov again blocked all the videos for AI and other oversea shows on the internet. Sad though.

---

"Tracks of My Tears". Song writer Smokey Robinson even gave Adam a standing ovation after the performance.
             
"If I Can't Have You":This song really makes my heart melt. Who cares he is a gay or not. His tender voice can kill every single woman at all ages. 
             
Adam received Judge Simon's standing ovation after singing "Mad World", which in my memory is the first time in the history of American Idol that Simon would stand on his feet for a contender's performance. 
         
"Black & White" very rock and very in!
       

The legendary investor is sticking for now with the two Cs: China and commodities.

Well, bank executives and investors can breathe a sigh of relief: Jim Rogers has covered the short positions on financial stocks he put in place ahead of last year's massive meltdown.

But just because this influential investor isn't betting that big banks will fall much further doesn't mean he's confident they will stage a lasting rally either. He feels similarly about U.S. stocks in general.

"I am skeptical about the rally, and the world economy for the next year or two or three," he says. "But if stocks go down, I can make money with commodities."

Rogers, now 66, gained fame as George Soros' hedge-fund partner in the 1970s and 1980s. After retiring from professional money manager in his late 30s, the Alabama native tooled around Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America visiting emerging markets, one by one. His resulting book, Investment Biker, helped to popularize emerging market investing at the outset of a bull market for the sector.

He also helped to popularize commodity investing, which for decades was the province of niche investors. In the 1990s, he developed commodity indexes based on futures contracts that in recent years have been turned into exchange-traded funds available to all investors. His 2004 book, Hot Commodities, came ahead of a surge prices for energy, metals, and agriculture.

Since its inception in July 1998, the Rogers International Commodities Index has gained 158%, while the S&P 500 has fallen 23%. And that gain for the commodities index comes despite the fact that it's lost more than half of its value since last July. At these levels, Rogers has been a buyer.

These days, Rogers, now 66, is sticking close to home in Singapore with his wife, Paige Parker, and two small daughters. He's about to release his latest book, A Gift to My Children: A Father's Lessons for Life and Investing (Random House), in which he encourages other people's children to travel widely and learn Mandarin so they can reap the rewards of China's economic boom.

Recently, Rogers talked to Barrons.com by phone from his Singapore home.

Q: When you last did a lengthy interview with Barron's magazine a year ago (see "Light Years Ahead of the Crowd," April 14, 2008) you were lightening up on emerging markets investments. Well, you called that one right. But now that many of those markets have fallen from their highs of recent years, are you more optimistic?

A: No. I've sold all emerging markets stock except the ones in China. I bought more Chinese shares in October and November during the panic, but I have not bought China or any other stock markets including the U.S. since then. I'm not buying anything in China right now because the Chinese market ran up maybe 50% since last November. It's been the strongest market in the world in the past six months and I don't like jumping into something that has been that run up. Still, I'm not thinking of selling these stocks either. I think if it goes down I'll buy more. I think you will find that it's the single strongest market in the world since last fall.

Q: In your latest book, you talk of China as the great investment opportunity of the 21st century, just as the U.S. was in the 20th century. What percentage of a typical American investor's portfolio should be in China?

A: If they can't even find China on a map, I don't think they should have anything in China. They should know something about China before they invest there. If they have the same convictions that I do then they should probably have a lot. If you asked me that question in 1909 about the U.S. stock market, I would have said to put 100% of your money in the U.S.

Q: Might it make sense to have a greater weighting in a diversified mix of Chinese stocks than in U.S. stocks?

A: Well yes. Just as in 1909, if you were German or Chinese, you should have had the largest percentage of your money in the United States. The idea of investing is to make money, not to have some sort of political agenda.

Q: That being said, you currently think Chinese stocks are bid-up now, so you're not buying at these levels. So what have you been buying lately?

A: I have been buying commodities through the Rogers commodity indexes I developed because my lawyer won't let me buy individual commodities. I recently bought the all four Rogers indexes -- the ElementsRogers International Commodities Index (ticker: RJI) as well as the three specialty indexes, the International Metals (RJZ), the International Energy (RJN), and the International Agriculture (RJA.) That's how I invest in commodities and that's what I bought last week. I have been buying these shares since last fall and up to last week.

Q: Though you got out of emerging markets last year before they fell hard, you seemed be caught by surprise by the fall-off in commodity prices last year. Is that right?

A: Yes, I was surprised. I did not expect commodities to go down that much and in retrospect it was a period of forced liquidation for many (professional) investors. You know AIG went bankrupt, which was huge in commodities. Lehman Brothers was big in commodities.

But at least I was shorting the investment banks at the time and other financials such as Citigroup and Fannie Mae. So I was hedged by being long commodities and short the other things such as financials and as you know most of them were down from 80% to 100%, so I more than made up on my shorts than I lost on my longs. So thank God for (the stock decline in) Citigroup and thank God (for the decline) in Fannie Mae.

Q: Now despite the recent stock-market rally that started in March, many U.S. stocks are trading well off their 2007 highs. How come you see no value to this market?

A: I am not buying U.S. companies mainly because I think we may have seen a bottom but I don't think we have seen the bottom. I am skeptical about the rally, the world economy for the next year or two or three. But if stocks go down, I can make money with commodities. In the 1970s, commodities went through the roof even though stocks were a disaster. In the 1930s, commodities rallied first and went up the most long before stocks pulled it together.

Q: Can you summarize the reasons for your bullishness about commodities?

A: It depends on the supply and demand. And we have had a dearth of supply. Nobody has invested in productive capacity for 25 or 30 years now. The inventories of food are the lowest they have been in 50 years and you have a shortage of farmers even right now because most farmers are old men because it has been such a horrible business for 30 years. And as for metals, nobody can get a loan to open a mine as you know. Who is going to give you money to open a zinc mine? It takes at least 10 years to open a mine so it's going to be 15 or 20 years before we see new mines come on. Nobody has been opening mines for 30 years and they are not going to. And in the meantime reserves are declining. As for oil, the International Energy Agency came out recently with a study showing that oil reserves worldwide were declining at the rate of 6% or 7% a year.

That does not mean that if suddenly the U.S. goes bankrupt that everything won't collapse in price. But I would rather be in commodities because it's the only thing I know where the fundamentals are improving. They are not improving for Citibank or General Motors but the supply situation in commodities is such that when demand comes back, then commodities are going to be the best place to be in my view.

Q: What do you think of bonds?

A: I am anticipating shorting bonds -- the U.S. long bond. It's about the only real bubble around that I can see right now -- other than the U.S. dollar. I am not shorting bonds at this moment because I've shorted plenty of bubbles in my day, and I have learned that you better wait because they go up higher than any rational person can anticipate. But my plan is to short the long bond in the U.S. sometime in the foreseeable future.

Q: I've read that you think the penchant of the last two presidential administrations for bailing out failing U.S. companies is a big mistake and will contribute to prolonging this recession. You argue that it's best to let these companies all go bankrupt. How bad can the economy get?

A: Yes, politicians are making mistakes. In Japan, the problem has lasted for 19 years. I hope that it doesn't last 19 years in the U.S. The approach that works is to let them (U.S. banks and automakers) collapse and clean out the system. The idea that phony accounting is the solution (through changes in mark-to-market rules) is ludicrous. And the idea that a debt problem and an excessive spending problem can be cured with more debt and more spending is ludicrous.

It's laughable on its face, but politicians think they've got to do something. Unfortunately, they are doing the wrong things and they are going to make it worse.

Q: Thanks for your time.
source: http://finance.yahoo.com/retirement/article/106944/Jim-Rogers-Isnt-Buying-a-U.S.-Stock-Recovery

A new theory of the AIG catastrophe.

1. 【律】延期償付;延期償付權
2. (行動,活動的)暫停;中止

The resulting increase in the supply of foreclosed homes could further depress home prices and put additional pressure on bank earnings as troubled loans are written off.  The expiration of foreclosure moratoriums could also put a dent in bank profits. The moratoriums "have to some degree postponed the realization of problems" and "may help bank earnings in the first quarter" by delaying charge-offs of some troubled loans

---

By RUTH SIMON

Some of the nation's largest mortgage companies are stepping up foreclosures on delinquent homeowners. That will likely lead to more Americans losing their homes just as the Obama administration's housing-rescue plan gets into gear.

J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac all say they have increased foreclosure activity in recent weeks. Those companies say they have lifted internal moratoriums which temporarily halted foreclosures.

Some mortgage companies had stopped foreclosing on borrowers as they waited for details of the Obama administration's housing-rescue plan, announced in February, which provides incentives for mortgage companies and investors to reduce borrowers' payments to affordable levels. Others had temporarily halted foreclosures while they put their own programs in place, or in response to changes in state laws.

Now, they have begun to determine which troubled borrowers are candidates for help, and to move the rest through the foreclosure process.

The resulting increase in the supply of foreclosed homes could further depress home prices and put additional pressure on bank earnings as troubled loans are written off.

Some of the mortgage companies are themselves receiving funds under the government's financial-sector bailout, which could make their actions politically sensitive. But mortgage companies say they are taking steps to keep borrowers in their homes, and are only resorting to foreclosure when there are no other options.

Foreclosure sales had dropped in the second half of 2008 as mortgage companies delayed taking action against delinquent borrowers. But sales have been edging up this year, according to LPS Applied Analytics, which tracks loan performance. Foreclosure-related filings increased by nearly 6% in February from the month earlier, and were up almost 30% from February 2008, according to RealtyTrac. The backlog of seriously delinquent loans has been growing.

In California, notices of trustee sales, which are preludes to foreclosure sales, climbed by more than 80% to 33,178 in March, from February, according to data from ForeclosureRadar.com and the Field Check Group. The increase reflects both the expiration of foreclosure moratoriums and a California law enacted late last year that temporarily delayed default and foreclosure notices, says Mark Hanson, president of the Field Check Group, a research firm.

Ronald Temple, co-director of research at Lazard Asset Management, expects home prices to fall 22% to 27% from their January levels. More than 2.1 million homes will be lost this year because borrowers can't meet their loan payments, up from about 1.7 million in 2008, according to Moody's Economy.com.

Mortgage-servicing companies, such as J.P. Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo, collect mortgage payments and work with troubled borrowers, both for loans they own and those held by investors.

J.P. Morgan Chase has increased foreclosure actions since the expiration of a moratorium on new foreclosures that began on Oct. 31, and a later moratorium put in place at President Obama's request. The Oct. 31 moratorium delayed foreclosures on more than $22 billion of Chase-owned mortgages involving more than 80,000 homeowners.

"We had stopped putting additional loans into the foreclosure process so we could be sure that delinquent borrowers would have every opportunity to take advantage of new initiatives that we were putting in place," a Chase spokesman says. Borrowers who are now receiving foreclosure-sale notices, he said, "own vacant properties, have not been in contact with us and/or do not qualify for the modification programs."

Citigroup Inc. says it stopped all foreclosures until March 12, at the Obama administration's request, on loans serviced for Fannie and Freddie. Since then, says a spokesman, it has "reverted to our previous business-as-usual moratorium." Under that policy, it will not initiate a foreclosure sale for any borrower who is working with Citigroup and is a good candidate for a loan modification, provided Citigroup owns the loan or has investor approval. "For borrowers who do not qualify under these criteria and where no other options are available, we will move forward with foreclosures," the spokesman says.

Wells Fargo has also increased foreclosure actions since the expiration of its foreclosure moratorium, put into place while it awaited details on the administration's plan. Wells Fargo "will continue to work with our customers to find solutions up to the actual point of a foreclosure sale," a Wells Fargo spokesman says. "But the expiration of foreclosure moratoriums is having an impact."

Both Fannie and Freddie have stepped up sales of foreclosed properties since their moratoriums ended on March 31. Freddie says it has started to complete some foreclosure sales, such as those involving investment properties or second homes, though it continues to delay foreclosures on loans that may be eligible for modification under the Obama plan.

Fannie has told servicers that "a foreclosure sale may not occur on a Fannie Mae loan until the loan servicer verifies that the borrower is ineligible" for a loan modification under the Obama administration's plan, "and all other foreclosure prevention alternatives have been exhausted," a Fannie spokeswoman says.

GMAC's mortgage division, which had temporarily halted foreclosures while awaiting details of the Obama plan, is now reviewing loans to see which ones will qualify under the program. So far, about 10% of borrowers in some stage of foreclosure appear to be eligible for the federal program, a company spokeswoman says. Although GMAC may be able to work with investors who own these loans to come up with another solution, she says, many borrowers who don't qualify for help under the federal program are likely to wind up in foreclosure.

Mortgage companies are sorting through loan files to determine which borrowers are candidates for help. "At the time a moratorium expires, we have a team of folks who will pore through all of those loans where borrowers have not paid before we will take the next step in the process," says Jim Davis, executive vice president for American Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. "If there is any borrower contact, we will hold off on the foreclosure process until we've exhausted every effort to assist that borrower."

Still, some borrowers who are currently talking to their mortgage companies are also likely to wind up in foreclosure once their files are reviewed. "We are getting so many of these cases where people don't fit the new [Obama] program," says Michael Thompson, director of Iowa Mediation Service, which works with troubled borrowers. Many borrowers are unemployed or underemployed or have credit problems that go well beyond their mortgage troubles, he says.

Many have been "playing for time" while the moratoriums have been in place, he says. But the delays have only increased the amount of interest and fees they owe, making their loans "nonviable in the long run."

Many troubled loans will ultimately wind up in foreclosure because the borrower doesn't have sufficient income to make even a reduced mortgage payment, or doesn't respond to the mortgage company's requests for information. "Certainly half of the loans that would have wound up in foreclosure before the foreclosure moratoriums went in place" will ultimately wind up in foreclosure, says Michael Brauneis, director of regulatory risk consulting at Protiviti Inc., a consulting firm.

While many troubled loans are held by hedge funds, pension funds and other investors, the expiration of foreclosure moratoriums could also put a dent in bank profits, says Frederick Cannon, an analyst with Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. The moratoriums "have to some degree postponed the realization of problems" and "may help bank earnings in the first quarter" by delaying charge-offs of some troubled loans, he says.
source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975395670518941.html

By Reshma Kapadia | Smart Money
Irving Kahn sits at his cluttered desk, peering at his computer screen through thick, dark glasses. The Dow inched up 38 points today, a small move in light of its 332-point drop earlier in the week. But Kahn has made a career of betting on beaten-down stocks, and he's hard at work poring over annual reports and studying balance sheets looking for companies that have lots of cash, not much debt and good long-term growth prospects. General Electric has a solid business and looks pretty good at these prices, he muses. General Motors? Not so much.

Like a lot of us, Kahn has seen good times and bad, bull markets and bear markets, recessions and recoveries. But he's also seen something most of us haven't: the Great Depression. Kahn, who still shows up at work every day and puts in a good six hours, worked as a stock analyst and brokerage clerk on Wall Street in the 1930s. He's 103 years old.

That's right — 103. As pundits half their age dominate the airwaves with prognostications on whether the next Great Depression is just around the corner, a small group of overlooked folks who not just lived through it but worked through it — on Wall Street — are still here. What's more, they're still at it, running their own sizable portfolios and, in a few cases, managing money for clients. Despite innumerable bull and bear markets, 17 presidents, and countless economic policies, they've remained remarkably true to their investing philosophy. They've also remained remarkably true to their methods: Forget BlackBerrys; most of them hardly touch their desktop computers. And you won't find CNBC blaring in their offices throughout the day; that's more noise than news to these gentlemen. Instead, you'll find stacks of reading material (these guys actually read a firm's annual report before investing) and a lot of old-fashioned...what do you call it? Oh, right. Math.

This cohort has perspective most of us lack: They know what the Depression looked like and how it felt. They saw bread lines on the street and despair in the faces of friends and strangers. Some lost money in the stock market, while others made enough to make it through the Depression rather comfortably. A few began their 80-year careers working for a legendary investor whose investing principles are still taught in business schools. And their take on today's markets might surprise you.

Now, lest this sound like an "in my day, we walked to school barefoot in the snow" admonishment, rest assured these veteran investors are all quick to acknowledge that times are indeed tough. At just over 8 percent, unemployment is at its highest level in decades, and some number crunchers argue that if it were calculated to include discouraged workers who have given up their job search, it would be more like 15 percent. Stocks fell 40 percent in 2008, the worst annual return since 1937. When these Depression-era investors reflect on what they faced in the 1930s, it's clear they view today's crisis differently — we're certainly not seeing bread lines or a resurgence of tenement living — but the tactics they used to cope are remarkably similar. So we sat down with three of these old hands, in their Midtown Manhattan offices and their Park Avenue homes, to hear their stories and note their strategies, then and now.

After dropping out of city College to work on Wall Street in 1928, Irving Kahn had a front-row seat to investors' successes and failures during the Depression, especially those of mentor and friend Benjamin Graham. Investing buffs know Graham as the legendary father of value investing, whose disciples include Warren Buffett. After taking a beating in the 1929 crash, Graham set out to find the least risky way to make money — conveying his findings in the landmark book Security Analysis and through investing courses. (Not to mention racking up millions over a multidecade investment career.) Kahn helped him on all fronts, crunching numbers and researching stock picks. In fact, when you talk to Kahn, it often seems as if he sees the Depression through Graham's eyes, peppering his recollections with self-effacing comments, such as, "I can tell you about myself by telling you what I did for Graham."

Like many investors (and many New Yorkers), Kahn is supremely skeptical — be it of a company's prospects or of inquiries from a curious reporter asking about the similarities between now and the 1930s. Kahn, who sounds more like a professor than a money manager, actually asks more questions than he answers, dodging most queries about himself. When prodded, the public school-educated son of Polish immigrants says the problem after the Depression was not so much the lack of money to invest but rather "knowing how to use it without losing it. There were too many bargains." A bargain isn't a sure thing, and Kahn learned from Graham to buy only investments he deemed "riskless." He also learned when to get out even if that meant leaving money on the table.

Kahn hasn't deviated from that philosophy, even now that he's chairman of his investment firm, Kahn Brothers Group. He still shows up five days a week to hunt for overlooked companies with good businesses and little debt that are trading for less than the value of their assets. Kahn's youngest son, Tom, 64, runs the firm, which has returned an average of 10.9 percent a year since 1994 through the end of 2008, better than the S&P 500's 6.8 percent average. After that kind of performance in his nearly eight decades as an investor, the elder Kahn can clearly afford the finer things in life. But he steadfastly prefers hamburgers at low-key neighborhood joints over the haute cuisine at the many pricey restaurants near his Upper East Side home. At 103, he has succumbed to taking a cab to the office but takes the bus home — using his senior citizen's discount. After so many years in the business, it's a wonder Kahn continues the grind. But his son Tom says, "Investing is his hobby. It keeps him alive." That's quite a tonic, but the Kahn genes also have something to do with it. The family — including Kahn's 107-year-old elder sister and their 99-year-old "baby" brother — has been the subject of several studies on aging.

Despite the constant comparisons with the Depression, Kahn says it's "absurd" to think the U.S. is headed for a repeat of the 1930s when people "felt so helpless." Back then, the Feds refused to aid banks and were powerless to adjust interest rates or insure accounts. In fact, Kahn points out, up through 1971, the Federal Reserve couldn't even lend money if it wasn't backed by gold. Today our government is creating billions of dollars — literally — to help get the economy back on track, we have programs to insure individuals don't lose their bank deposits, and there's a general sense that Washington will do what it takes to help both Wall Street and Main Street. That's not to downplay the troubles ahead, and Kahn is the first to suggest ultrasafe government bonds for part of a portfolio. But as an investor who has seen dozens of economic downturns, Kahn plainly says this is just part of the natural cycle of the market. "Investors have no reason to feel bearish," he says. "True value investors are glad the markets are down."

In a 1984 speech at Columbia Business School, Warren Buffett called Walter Schloss a "superinvestor" with a singular knack for finding undervalued stocks. That's high praise from one of the most celebrated investors ever. The root of Buffett's admiration may seem clear enough: You could point to the fact that Schloss, like Kahn, started his career working for Ben Graham. Or you could note Schloss's record — an average annual return of nearly 16 percent over 47 years, more than five percentage points ahead of the S&P 500. (He ran his eponymous, hedge fund-like portfolio out of a small office at Tweedy, Browne & Co.) But really, the avuncular 92-year-old with the big smile came to appreciate the merits of a well-chosen stock much earlier; it was a dividend stock that helped ease the strains of the Depression.

All it took was the 100 shares in American Telephone & Telegraph that his grandmother owned to improve his family's experience of the 1930s. Schloss's parents, brother, sister and grandmother all shared a three-bedroom apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, where horse-drawn wagons still delivered milk and the ice truck came by weekly. AT&T's annual dividend of $9 a share went a long way at a time when median rents in that neighborhood were $32 a month. Back then, Schloss says, a dividend was the primary reason "regular" folks invested in the stock market.

Schloss always had an affinity for numbers, though he didn't dedicate himself to Wall Street immediately. He enlisted in the army right after Pearl Harbor and was tasked with decoding messages. The born-and-raised New Yorker was stationed in Iran where he worked in a factory assembling the Studebaker trucks that were key to the Russian victory in Stalingrad. (Schloss received a belated letter of thanks from the Russian government in the 1990s.) It wasn't until he returned to New York in 1946 that he took a job as a stock analyst. He and his son, Edwin, who joined the business during the 1970s bear market, folded up the fund in 2002. But Schloss still keeps his head in the game by managing his own personal multimillion-dollar portfolio.

Schloss remembers the Depression well: Bank chiefs were getting hauled before Congress, the president of the New York Stock Exchange stood accused of defrauding investors, and regulators were contemplating a ban on short selling. Sound familiar? The only difference, Schloss says, is that these weren't the headlines cried on the street corner. With just 10 percent of the population invested in stocks (in other words, just the wealthy), market news wasn't yet mainstream and rarely made it to the front page.

Economic similarities aside, Schloss won't succumb to déjà vu; instead he sits in his cramped home office poring over financial statements. No meetings with management, no relying on computers for data gathering — Schloss has always dug into the numbers himself. "I can sleep at night when I know their assets and can see their worth," he says.

While he understands investors' hesitation today, Schloss doesn't think our current situation compares with the Depression. Back then, he says, the economy was dependent on only a handful of businesses, like banks, railroads, utilities and oil companies. Today economic growth comes from a much broader array of industries, many of them fueled by the huge gains in technological development we've seen over the past eight decades — including communications, biotechnology and the Internet. Sure, General Electric is still a powerhouse, but so are Google and Amgen. That means a much wider array of job possibilities — and more engines of growth for our economy. If investors today "were a little less emotional, they would see that this could be a good opportunity, so long as they move carefully and keep an eye on balance sheets," he says.

Moving carefully has paid off handsomely over Schloss's long investing career, but while you may think that means an all-bond portfolio, you'd be wrong. A 1 percent return, as is the case with government bonds now, "is no way to live," he says. So Schloss, who has about half his portfolio in stocks, is still keeping an eye out for companies like International Paper, which he bought because it was trading at a fraction of recent highs, paid a dividend and had little debt. "Debt bothers me," he says. "The companies in trouble are usually the ones that owe a lot of money."

During the depression, Seth Glickenhaus had the chance to make it big in Arkansas — bonds, that is. While a municipal-bond trader at Salomon Brothers, the acerbic New Yorker made a gutsy call: Even though the state of Arkansas was near bankruptcy and had defaulted on its debt, Glickenhaus thought the newly issued state bonds were a steal. His bosses weren't convinced, and another investor made a fortune on the deal, Glickenhaus, now 95, recalls with some residual indignation. His next step was to start his own firm.

During his 70-year career as an investor, Glickenhaus has been right more often than not. Six months after the 1987 stock market crash, the money manager predicted the Dow would rally 40 percent by the end of 1988. It took a few months longer, but the contrarian's call came through in 1989. In 2002 and 2003, Glickenhaus railed against mounting consumer debt and "the deteriorating caliber of our political leaders" on both sides of the aisle, predicted a housing bust, and forecast the Dow tumbling to 7000. It fell below 6500 in March. "It fooled me in taking so long," says Glickenhaus, whose Dorchester fund has racked up an annual average return of 13 percent since its inception in 1981, four percentage points better than the S&P 500.

While colleagues now describe him as laid-back and partial to light, healthy breakfasts of green tea and a banana, Glickenhaus is still quick to react when irked — and few topics irk him more than politics. In the 1970s, he took out full-page ads in major papers protesting the Vietnam War (landing him on Nixon's "enemies list"), and in 2004 he rejected a White House dinner invitation with a blistering letter to George W. Bush signed "disrespectfully yours."

Glickenhaus is a much bigger fan of President Obama and thinks he may be able to work the same magic FDR did during the Depression. But that's not to say he thinks it'll be easy. Some industries like autos, brokerages and home builders are unlikely to return to their former glory and will push unemployment higher, he says. But he doesn't envision the same dire scenario he witnessed 80 years ago. Glickenhaus gravely remembers the time his father broke down in tears at dinner because he'd had to lay off an employee at his modest insurance brokerage firm, knowing the likelihood of this man finding another job was very, very slim. But today, he adds, the safety nets created since the 1930s — from food stamps to unemployment insurance — will soften the blow. Plus, the power of countries like Brazil, India and China, whose economic growth is slowing but not yet contracting, give him confidence that "a new bull market may soon be in the making."

Ultimately, though, the man who has an opinion on just about everything acknowledges this economy is confounding. "I'm not sure I'm right," Glickenhaus says, which is why he's keeping at least 30 percent of his clients' money in cash. He still fields calls from irate clients but has no plans of quitting: "I love the game and do it quite well." Plus, after enduring countless downturns, Glickenhaus has learned one important lesson: "There always are opportunities and ways of making money, even on the worst days. You just have to have patience."
source:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123981155929121475.html#

   
"Better than expected results from Wells Fargo, JPMorgan and Citi has investors wondering whether financials have turned a corner, with Dick Bove, Rochdale Securities and Bert Ely, Ely & Company."

   

许小年: 敬的各位来宾，早上好。    今天非常荣幸有机会在这里跟大家交流，关于中国经济和市场的一些看法。在我开始讲之前，我希望跟媒体界的朋友打一个招呼，报道是可以的，但是希望准确报道。
            
              许小年: 很抱歉，我今天讲的和我们上海证券的主题有一些出入，我讲的可能不太合适宜。我把中国经济目前的情况称为是“倒冬暖”，我们现在都喜欢说“倒春寒”，我感觉是“倒冬暖”，目前短暂的复苏只不过是春天刚刚开始的回暖，寒冷的冬天还在后面。
            
              许小年: 我讲有四个部分，第一部分判断中国经济未来的走势，首先要把这次经济危机来龙去脉搞清楚，只有分析了这次的经济危机的成因，我们才能够对未来经济的发展作出一个比较准确的判断。    我们都喜欢听结论，不喜欢分析的过程，我想强调的是如果我们不搞清楚这一次全球金融危机的原因，我们就看不清楚中国经济乃至于世界经济未来复苏的方式。所以我会花比较多的时间，解释一下为什么会产生这次全球性的金融危机。
            
              许小年: 第二部分是因为经济的“倒冬暖”为什么一季度的数据只是在“冬天”过程的一个回暖。    第三部分因为这次金融危机的全球性，所以它的复苏也应该是全球性的。中国既不可能独善其身，也不可能率先反弹。正好相反，我感到率先反弹的有可能是美国经济。原因在于，西方经济自2007年中，金融危机爆发以来，已经进行了大幅度的调整，而我们这里的调整，只进行了一小部分，由于政府的政策，被延缓甚至被阻止。所以调整进行的越缓慢，复苏到来就会越迟。西方我们看到，已经进行了大幅度的调整，但是现在还没有见底。    最后是结论。
            
              许小年: 我们首先要理解这次金融危机，这次全球的衰退和战后的历次危机也罢、衰退也罢，到底有什么不同。在1980年代，我们曾经在拉美看到过债务危机和金融危机，在1990年代我们在东亚看到过亚洲金融危机，所以金融危机对我们来说并不是很陌生的，金融危机引起了经济衰退，在战后的历史上我们也多次见过，但这一次有什么不一样？这一次的不一样，不仅在于它的深度和范围，而且在于它的性质，在于全球经济结构，发生了变化之后，所产生的金融危机。
            
              许小年: 全球的经济格局发生了什么样的变化？这个变化就是人们在报纸上经常能看到，我们经常谈论的全球经济一体化，也就是全球化。但是我们谈全球化多，我们报道全球化的故事多，我们从全球化的角度，理解经济少之又少。这一次的金融危机和经济衰退，必须在全球化的背景中加以考察，它的复苏也必须在全球化的背景下进行分析。2001年在世界经济舞台发生了一件很大的事情，这件事情的深远影响我们没有认识到，甚至今天也不能给予充分的评价，这件事就是中国加入WTO，2001年中国加入WTO，标志着世界两大经济板块正是的连接在一起，这两大经济板块一个是以中国为代表的发展中国家，另外一个是以美国为代表的发达国家，这两大板块的相互曲尽、相互融合在战后已经开始了，并且在80年代、90年代加速，到2001年的时候随着中国加入WTO，这两大板块正式的连接在一起了。
            
              许小年: 这两大板块的连接，怎么样改变了中国经济的运行态势，怎么样保持了美国经济的态势。我们从这一张图的右下角开始，从中国的过度投资开始，我们都知道中国经济过去十年间高速增长，主要靠投资拉动。投资每年增长20%以上，今年一季度投资增长接近30%；另外一方面，GDP的增长，也就是国民收入的增长，平均每年10%，粗略来讲两者的增长率相差10个百分点，投资的增长还要形成产能，产能就是供应能力，而GDP是国民收入，国民收入决定了一个国家宏观的总需求，它的总需求是由国民收入决定的。
            
              许小年: 因此粗略来讲，我们国家经济的供应能力，以投资为代表的供应能力，每年增长20%多，而另外一方面收入所决定的需求每年增长10%左右，两者相差10个百分点，供给和需求两者相差10百分点，这会引起严重的供应失衡。所以我们从过渡投资到下一个“过剩产能”，为什么在过去这么多年没有过剩产能的问题，没有暴露出来？这是因为中国融入了世界经济，融入世界经济以后，我们的过剩产能所生产出来的过剩产品可以通过出口的方式，到发达国家。“中国制造”进入了美国、进入了欧洲、进入了日本，暂时掩盖了国内过剩产能的问题。
            
              许小年: 由于海外市场的开拓，支撑了我们依靠固定资产投资来拉动经济增长的模式，如果没有海外市场，我们现在已经为过剩产能问题所困扰，就是在危机爆发之前，我们也应该看到大量的过剩产能，而大量过剩产能的结果是什么？是银行的坏帐。我们为什么对一季度的贷款数据感到忧虑？就是担心如此大规模的增长银行信贷，3—5年之后有可能引起一轮严重的银行坏帐。
            
              许小年: 回到国际经济循环中来，由于出口到了美国或者到了以美国为代表的发达经济体，改变了发达经济的运行态势，改变了运行特征。如何改变美国的经济运行？一个突出的影响——低通胀。这个低通胀是两方面的原因引起的，一方面是由于发展中国家它的劳动力、自然资源低成本使得对美、对发达世界的出口价格显著低于发达国家自己生产的产品。我们到美国去，美国的超市里随便转一下，可以很容易的发现，在美国的超市里几乎没有“美国制造”这样的产品，你到美国的超市里看一下，全都是发展中国家制造的产品。
            
              许小年: 这些产品的价格，具有很强的竞争优势，这样把美国的通货膨胀拉下来，对美国的通货膨胀，对发达国家的通货膨胀影响更大的是间接影响。我们知道发达国家价格中间劳动力成本占了很大的一部分，由于发展中国家的产品想进入到发达国家，美国的劳工面临着前所未有的竞争压力，美国的劳工在工资谈判中丧失了谈判能力，我们可以看一下数据，在过去几年中，发达国家的工资增长率都落后或显著落后公司盈利的增长。为什么？就是因为来自发展中国家的劳动力竞争。全球化不仅是造成了全球的“产品市场”，而且造成了全球的“劳动力市场”。美国的工人现在面临的竞争不仅是来自于墨西哥，而且面临来自中国、来自印度劳工的竞争。美国工人在要求提高工资的谈判中，处于非常虚弱的地步，资方可以忽略他要求提高工资的要求，你要是想罢工，资方可以很有底气的告诉你“请便”，你罢工好了，我干脆把美国的工厂关掉，我把订单下到中国，我把服务中心迁到菲律宾、迁到印度，印度是成为世界的办公室，中国已经成为世界的工厂。
            
              许小年: 所以在这样的形势下，我们想一下，中国13亿人口，印度也是10亿人口，这种劳动力的资源，这种劳动力成本使美国的劳动力根本无法竞争，他怎么可能跟中国的工人竞争。于是他的工人在工资谈判中，处于前所未有的劣势，工资的上升速度缓慢，工资的上升速度缓慢就帮助抑制了美国的通货膨胀，因为美国的通货膨胀中大部分是工资成本，直接的影响和间接的影响造成了美国经济高增长，低通胀。所谓高增长，是以美国增长的高增长。
            
              许小年: 我们可以看到，在前几年美国经济增长速度是4%、5%，这样的速度过去是很难想象的，只有在发展中国家才能看到这样的速度。但是同时，它是低通胀，在低通胀的环境中，我们再往下走，走到下面一个框，（图式）由于没有通货膨胀的压力，美国的中央银行就是美联储，长期保持了松宽的货币政策。美联储曾经面临着紧缩银根，加息的呼声，以格林斯潘为首的美联储看了美国经济的形式，他说：“现在没有通货膨胀我为什么要紧缩银根，没有通货膨胀为什么要加息？”他没有看到美国经济之所以没有通货膨胀，是由于国际经济一体化的造成，他没有看到这一点。
            
              许小年: 松宽的货币政策，一方面制造了资产泡沫，资产泡沫主要在房地产上，等一下我们可以看到图，房地产的泡沫也是美国战后历史上最严重的，像次按，次按资金大量的流入房地产市场，在房地产市场造成泡沫。另外一方面松宽的货币政策也支持了美国的消费，支持了美国的投资，支持了美国的旺盛需求，旺盛的需求有一部分到了中国，在这一部分的旺盛需求面前，中国的过度投资就显现不出来。企业说我投资投这么多，因为有需求，除了国内的巨大市场以外，我现在海外还有一个巨大市场，所以我的生产能力并不过剩。到这里为止，我们形成了两大板块之间一个完美的经济循环，应该说是一个看似完美的经济循环，但是这个经济循环是无法持续的，为什么没有办法持续？因为松宽的货币政策在美国造成的资产泡沫早晚有破灭的一天。房地产价格疯涨了几年，大概从2001年一直到2007年，房地产经历了6年的“牛市”，房屋价格节节升高，终于在2007年中的时候泡沫破掉了。泡沫的破灭不仅表现在房地产市场上，而且以次按为基础的金融衍生品、以次按为基础的债券价格随着房地产市场的调整而暴跌，这种次按为基础的MBS，华尔街给它一个很好听的名字，叫CTO。这个CTO价格暴跌，把雷曼兄弟、美国的商业银行拖入了深渊，于是一场前所未有的金融海啸在华尔街展开。
            
              许小年: 这场金融海啸的过程和内容，现在大家都已经很熟悉了，海啸对经济特别是对中国经济冲击在哪里？金融海啸对中国经济的冲击，并不是我们的商业银行买了美国多少的次按债券？不是的。金融海啸发生的时候，美国的金融体系一片混乱，正常的融资功能已经无法继续下去，美国的银行体系、金融体系再也不能像过去提供信贷了。以信贷支撑的美国经济的繁荣、以信贷支撑的美国家庭的生活水平已经无法维持了，所以次贷危机爆发以后，我们看到在房地产市场上家庭无力承担房屋的购买，违约率大幅度上升。美国的家庭现在必须节衣缩食，当美国的消费者捂紧钱包的时候，全球都会感到经济萧条的寒冷。
            
              许小年: 因为它的经济和我们的经济不一样，我们的经济是投资作为主体，它的经济是消费作为主体。它的消费者不花钱的时候，经济衰退，引起全球的衰退。当银行不能再像过去放债的时候，美国的老百姓买不起房子，房地产泡沫破灭了，当银行不在像过去发放贷款了，美国的汽车公司撑不住了，为什么三大车厂撑不住了？因为美国不仅买房靠借钱，买汽车也靠借钱。通用汽车和福特汽车公司，现在都不行，为什么？由于失去了信贷的支持，汽车销售量降低20%、40%，甚至50%，这样销售的下降有哪一个汽车公司能够招架住？所以现在汽车公司要破产，当然美国汽车公司的核心问题是工会问题，如果解决不了工会问题，美国汽车公司有可能全军覆没。
            
              许小年: 现在奥巴马政府采取了比较强硬的态度，你要是劳资双方不能达成协议，不能对公司的重组形成一致意见，那就准备破产。将来很有可能美国跑的汽车全是外国汽车公司生产的，就像今天我们路上跑的汽车都是外国汽车公司生产的一样。没有什么关系，一个国家可以没有自己的汽车公司，这没有关系。金融危机只不过是把美国汽车工业的矛盾爆发出来，把它显露出来。
            
              许小年: 我们可能很难想象，金融危机之后，电器连锁商要破产，面临经营困难，为什么？美国两大电器连锁商，叫“百思买”和“电器城”，电器城已经不存在了，第二大电器连锁商相当于我们这儿的苏宁，现在已经不存在了，破产清盘。他破产的时候曾经想找买家，去买第二大连锁商，我们想象一下，如果苏宁要破产，找第二大买家的话，相信很多人有兴趣，但是在美国他们找不到买家，最后只好清盘，没有办法，为什么？原来美国的老百姓不仅买房子借钱，买车借钱，连买电视都借钱。
            
              许小年: 话有点讲远，当美国的金融体系不能够像过去那样发放信贷的时候，美国的经济垮下来，美国的经济垮下来对中国意味着什么？忽然之间发生国外的需求如潮水般退去，一夜之间消失得无影无踪。去年4季度很多外向型企业没有一张订单，现在慢慢订单回来的，刚回来一点大家会触底反弹。当松宽的货币政策不能再执行下去，当松宽的信贷政策不能再执行下去的时候，下面旺盛的需求没有了，旺盛的需求没有了，潮水退去了以后，我们才发现，大家都沙滩上“裸奔”，国内的过渡投资问题马上暴露出来，过去我们说我们投资这么多，产能建设建这么多，是有需求的。
            
              许小年: 当我们说这句话的时候，实际上想得是国内需求加上国外需求，现在国外需求没有了。过度投资的问题出来了，过剩产能的问题也出来了，所以中国经济最大的风险看上去是外贸，看上去是投资，实际上它最大的问题在于过去几年间，我们所积累下来的过剩产能将在今后很长的一段时间里压在中国经济上，现在怎么办？总结刚才我们讲的国际经济循环，这场金融危机的问题是在于美国的过度借债，而中国正好相反，是过度储蓄。美国家庭的储蓄率降到了0，中国家庭的储蓄率节节升高，现在接近50%。过度借贷总得有个地方借？跟谁借？跟中国借。美国的问题是过度消费，超前消费，超过他的收入的增长消费，靠借贷来支撑、维持生活水平，中国的问题是什么？中国的问题是过度投资。板块这边的问题和那个板块的问题，正好是像一个“镜像”一样。
            
              许小年: 如果我们同意这个分析，下面就是一个很自然的推论，这个推论就是国际经济的失衡，全球经济的失衡，已经不是一个国家内部经济的失衡，我们国家的经济结构存在着重大的问题，但是从国家来看，两大板块的失衡在过去是互补的，现在要调整，在失衡没有调整过来之前，任何复苏都是无法持续的。我们不排除在失衡调整过来之前，经济会有上上下下，但是进入到可持续的复苏通道，必须要把失衡改正过来，调整过来。既然对美国的诊断是过度借贷、过度消费，美国人现在进行的调整就是减少消费，过去的超前消费是以银行信贷作为支撑的，现在银行不可能给你发了，你怎么办？减少消费。过去借债度日，现在债借不到了怎么办？增加储蓄。什么叫次按？次按就是“零首付”，没有收入证明，而且不用付首付的按揭贷款，我们把它叫“次按”。“零首付”大家都知道风险极高的贷款品种，美国人在执行松宽货币政策的时候就出现了这样的现象。
            
              许小年: 现在房地产“零首付”已经消失了，买房必须付出30%的自有资金，银行不给你怎么办？只好自己积攒买房子。所以美国人现在是增加储蓄然后消费，美国人现在也正在这么做。当他减少消费的时候，我们也讲了美国经济70%是私人消费，中国不是，中国的民间消费只占GDP的35%，所以你可以看到，我们的问题在哪里？我们的问题是消费太少，美国人的问题是消费太多，他要调整的是削减消费，我们必须进行的调整是增加消费。但是目前的宏观经济政策都是增加投资，而不是增加消费。使我们原有的经济结构扭曲，进一步恶化。
            
              许小年: 中国需要进行的调整是什么？既然我们过去的问题是过度投资、过度储蓄；现在要进行的调整就是减少投资，增加消费，降低储蓄。这是我们要进行的调整。我们要进行的调整正好是美国的反面，因此我们用两个词来总结“中美”，我再讲一次不是中国和美国，而是中国和美国微代表的两大经济板块，必须进行的经济调整。美国要“去杠杆化”，什么意思？就是降低负债，降低整个经济的负债、降低企业的负债、降低家庭的负债，这是必须进行的调整。中国必须进行的调整，我们叫做“去库存化”，它是广义的，既包括要削减企业的库存，要消化企业的库存，更重要的是过剩产能，要消除过剩产能。
            
              许小年: 在目前的阶段，为了说明这个概念，为了说明经济周期的运行实际上是由多种因素所造成的波动叠合而形成的，我在这里给了两张图，（图式）左边的图蓝线代表的是投资周期，这条红线代表的是库存周期，两个周期它的波长不一样，幅度也不一样，当这两个周期对经济发生共同作用的时候，当这两个波动叠加起来的时候，我们就得到了右边这张图。如果是学电气工程的，大家应该很熟悉，本人大学本科是学电气工程的，所以概念是从工程上借用过来的。两个“波”的叠加，现在就出现看上去很复杂的波形。    （图式）我们现在看到的是经济下调，调到这以后，开始上升，到这以后大家都喊这叫什么？这叫“企稳”，到这大家都说这叫“反弹”，没有想到反弹以后，下一段是什么？更深的下跌。为什么？为什么到这，我们会看到一些“企稳”的迹象，因为库存周期的调整已经到位了。这一段的“企稳”对应于库存周期这条粉线的上升阶段，所以我们看，好象是到位了。为什么又会发生再一次的下跌？就是投资周期向下的调整，它的幅度超过了库存周期的向上，我们就会看到再一次下跌。
            
              许小年: 所以对于今年一季度的数据，我们的解释应该非常谨慎，要看到它背后的原因，除了库存周期告一段落，库存的调整告一段落之后，第二个因素就是银行贷款在今年一季度“发疯”了，我们没有看到过这么发贷款的，从来没有看到过。去年全年新增贷款58000亿，今年一季度就发了46000亿，这是钱堆出来的，这是钱堆出来的“企稳”，你说这样的“企稳”能不能持续？你问的是什么？就是如此疯狂的贷款发放能不能持续？如果二季度贷款不是这么发的，三季度、四季度不是这样发的，还维持得住吗？我们可以想象吗？二季度、三季度、四季度继续这么发下去，我们能想象吗？
            
              许小年: 我刚才讲了两个周期的叠加，库存周期和投资周期的叠加，只不过是一种概念性的说明，希望大家千万不要用“曲线”去预测未来，用曲线预测未来出现投资损失本人概不负责，只是给大家分析中国经济提供一个思路，经济学家不是庙里的道士，他抽的签和各位抽的一样，如果到庙里抽签经济学家爱莫能助，经济学家能跟大家分享的，就是分析问题的思路和分析问题的方法，而不是预测。
            
              许小年: 第二个是投资周期，刚才我们也已经介绍过了，这是由法国的医生朱格拉研究，因此以他的名字命名，他的周期是10年。第三个太阳黑子是11年。第四是库滋涅茨周期，是20年的长度基本对应房地产；最后一个是大家比较熟悉的，就是长周期，就是康特拉季耶夫周期，它的长度是50年，它是由技术引起的。这些周期什么意思？比如康特拉季耶夫周期，当火车刚发明的时候，当铁路刚发明的时候，全国会兴起一片铺设铁路的高潮，大家都用新技术去铺设铁路，提高生产效率，社会投资就上升，铁路投资就上升，投资的上升拉动经济进入繁荣，当全国的铁路网铺设完毕了，铁路建设投资下降了，经济又进入衰退，这是康特拉季耶夫的含义，其他周期跟这个类似。经济现象是复杂的，由多种因素在作用。我们不要把一个库存周期的调整到位就看成是经济反弹的信号，还有其他因素的作用。其中一个不可忽视的就是投资周期，刚才我们已经讲过了，中国在过去几年间，投资是过度的增长，留下了大量的过剩产能。这个调整现在还没有开始，所以不能轻言触底反弹，不能轻言复苏。
            
              许小年: 这说明什么问题？这说明一季度的GDP增长主要是由政府投资拉动的，所造成的，但是政府拉动所造成的投资高速增长，20%多，如果是扣除物价因素的话，实际上是30%以上的增长，但是这么强劲的投资增长并没有拉动生产，工业增加值6.1%，没有拉动生产，为什么？那30%的投资增长跑哪儿去了？估计都买了库存了，并没有带动企业的生产，而是去买库存，买了钢铁、买了水泥。当然我们假设数据是真实的，不能排除数据有水分。而6%的工业生产电力消费是负增长，这怎么是触底反弹呢？我们为了支持这样的观点，还特意看了投资和设备进口之间的关系，在过去，我们国家的投资增长一般来说都伴随着设备进口的增长，但是这一次不一样。
            
              许小年: （图式）这两条线大家可以看一下，蓝线是固定投资的增长，这条红线是设备进口的增长，在过去很长的时间里，两者几乎是同步的，从去年到今年年初，去年四季度到今年年初，固定资产投资的速度仍然维持在高位，但是设备进口跌的非常厉害，这似乎是验证了我们刚才的判断，就是这么高的固定资产投资的增长，没有带动国内的生产，投资都是买了原材料、库存，而没有去做生产能力的扩大，没有生产能力的扩大，设备的购买当然没有跟上。因此最近的投资对经济的拉动作用，我们估计比过去弱化了很多。设备进口的增长不仅没有增长，而且大家注意，它是负的。负的20%、负的接近30%，是负增长，所以投资的作用对于经济的复苏，到目前为止，我们没有看到非常显著的推动。很可能政府资助的项目，大型基础设施的项目投资是增加了，但是只是买钢铁、买水泥，而没有带动其他行业的生产跟上来。用凯恩斯主义的话来讲，就是政府开支的乘数效应非常小，换句话说政府开支没什么效果，因为它没有拉动其他行业的增长。今年这种投资的高速增长，能不能持续下去？第一我们得出初步的结论，就是靠投资拉动经济增长，拉动作用可能非常的弱，第二这样的高投资能不能持续下去？我本人的意见，起码表示怀疑。
            
              许小年: 从资金来源上看，银行可以继续这样放款，我重申一遍，银行这样放款对中国的经济极不负责任，会恶化，恶化不会在最近表示出来，而是在3—5年之后，银行的资产质量会发生明显的恶化。这种短期行为是很不负责任的，应该受到批评；并且我们呼吁政策制定部门，要尽快的改善这样的局面，不能因为刺激内需，而让银行放款，银行只是根据它自己对于风险和收益的判断来放款。拉动内需跟银行没关系，拉动内需是财政的事，不是银行的事，我们现在的财政刺激计划已经全面转变为银行信贷计划，本来应该政府花钱，现在银行买单。
            
              许小年: 能不能持续下去？当然取决于银行放款，会不会继续放下去？第二个因素是取决于企业的自有资金是否充裕？    （图式）从统计数字看到，在固定资产投资中，银行贷款所占的比重越来越低，下面这条蓝线，而自有资金的比重越来越高，下面红线，当2007年的时候，固定资产投资中的60%以上来自于企业自筹资金，今年一季度我们注意到工业企业的盈利下降了30%多，所以从自有资金的角度来看问题，一季度的投资高增长很有可能是无法持续的，因为企业的自有资金无法支持。
      
  
      
        许小年: 第三个原因，我认为是最重要的，就是企业的投资意愿不足，目前我们的投资，一季度的投资主要是靠政府，而企业投资意愿不足，为  不足？刚才已经讲到了，在金融危机发生的过程中，我们发现各行各业现在都存在着大量的过剩产能，这里给大家一些数据，钢铁行业，我们有6亿多吨的设计能力，过去它的产量是5亿多吨，国内消费是4亿多吨，其中有1亿吨通过各种各样的中国制品输出到海外，现在这一部分没有  ，或者说降低了很多，因此目前钢铁行业是6亿吨的能力，4亿吨国内的消费。
            
              许小年: 过剩产能达到20—30%，在过剩产能的压力下，钢铁行业今后不会有大规模的投资，电解铝产能1800万吨，产量1500万吨，过剩300万吨。石油炼化目前仅为70%多一些，起码20%以上的过剩产能。我看到过各种各样的估计，存房的消化要1—3年以上，按照一季度的“小阳春”也许存房的消化会比预想的快一些，但是一季度房屋销售的“小阳春”能持续多长时间？也依然是一个问号，房地产开发商普遍持谨慎态度。
            
              许小年: 今年的新增投资，房地产开发商是非常有节制，原因在哪里？原因在库存。产能的过剩最清晰不过的反映，就是生产资料价格下跌，在这里我们给出的是化工原料、钢铁制品，有色金属的价格可以看到进入今年以来，价格下跌的确实尽管有所缓解，但是仍然在下跌。一季度的生产价格指数也是负增长，是负的5%左右，在价格下跌面前，在价格所表明的供大于求面前，今年企业的投资意愿一定比往年差，所以基于上述三个原因，我认为一季度所出现的固定资产高增长，既不是我们所希望的，我们不希望投资这么多高增长，因为投资高增长只能使中国的投资结构进一步恶化，我们刚才已经的多次强调过，中国经济现在需要进行的调整是减少投资，增加消费。所以这种投资的高增长，是我们不希望看到的。
            
              许小年: 第二个也很有可能是无法持续的。我们现在在看外贸这一块，外贸这块取决以美国为首的发达国家恢复的情况。对于发达国家，我们能说的是它金融体系最坏的已经过去了，最坏的就是系统崩溃的危险已经过去了，但是最困难的还在前面，最困难的是什么？是金融的重整，是金融机构资产负债表的恢复。我们现在看到金融体系的不良资产率还在攀升，金融重整的任务远远没有结束。
            
              许小年: （图式）这是美国贷款的违约率，一个是逾期贷款的比率，一个是贷款违约率。回收的可能性极小，看违约比率到了去年年底的时候，今年一季度进一步上升，到去年年底的时候，违约率还没有超过1991年的萧条，违约率要继续上，上到顶点以后再下来，银行体系才能恢复正常。这是坏帐比率同样要上升到顶点之后再下来，这是需要时间的。所以它的资产质量还在恶化，最近我们看到的报多，是信用卡违约率继续上升，这是整个商业银行体系的违约率。
            
              许小年: （图式）美欧的生产活动剧烈萎缩，萎缩是战后历史上没有见过的，蓝线是欧盟27国的工业生产指数，红线是美国的工业生产指数，是以两位数的速度下跌。我们从数据分析可以知道，对中国出口影响最大的不是人民币汇率，而是发达国家的工业生产指数，是发达国家的经济活动指标。这种下跌预示着中国的出口前景不可能在短期内恢复。
            
              许小年: （图式）在消费这边，我们看到美国的失业率急剧上升，但是到3月末的时候，失业率只不过才是8.5%，还没有到历史上的最高峰。市场普遍预期，美国的失业率要超过两位数，失业率会继续攀升，而失业率的上升对消费意味着什么？失业率的上升意味着收入的下降，意味着预期收入的下降，这对消费都会带来明显的负面影响。所以美国的消费确实在调整、收缩，但是还没有到位。因为失业还没有到顶，消费向下调整还没有到位。
            
              许小年: 美国经济什么时候见底？美国经济见底要资产价格跌到底，要家庭和企业的资产负债表恢复平衡才到底。资产价格，美国已经调整了很多，（图式）这是美国的房地产，这条线我们把它叫做“购房的承担能力”，分子是人均可支配收入，分母是房价，在2001年之前，我们看到可支配收入和房价的比率是稳定在这条平均线上，什么意思？房价的上升基本和收入的上升基本同步，所以比例是一条横线。2001年之后，比例迅速下降，什么意思？房价的上升速度超过了收入的上升，是什么？泡沫。7年的泡沫，到2007年的时候比率开始反弹，比率开始反弹说明房价在下跌，房价下跌到位没有？还没有到位。
            
              许小年: 还有这么大一个缺口，当然这是2008年年末的数据，今年一季度又上来了，可是还没有到位，美国的房价估计还要再跌15%、20%左右，起码还有半年的时间再跌，回到历史平均值。在它房价没有跌到底的时候，美国的消费就没有办法恢复
            
              许小年: （图式）我们再看美国的储蓄率，这是美国家庭资产负债表一个很好的指标，美国的储蓄率过去平均大概是7%、8%，跟中国相比简直不算什么，中国的储蓄率40%多，我们现在储蓄已经成为一种生活方式，储蓄成了生活的全部目的。美国家庭储蓄率经过多年的下降到金融危机之前，储蓄率已经在零线附近。它不储蓄，全靠借钱过日子，靠借钱买房子，买借钱买车，靠借钱买家用电器，现在钱借不到了，他只好自己储蓄，因此储蓄率反弹，储蓄率已经反弹到了4%、5%，可是离历史平均值还有一段距离，储蓄率要稳定下来，大概要一到两年的时间。芬兰、瑞典都爆发过金融危机，在金融危机之中，我们也都观察到储蓄率的急剧上升，上升以后稳定下来，从这些国家的经验来看需要一到两年的时间，美国家庭的储蓄率恢复刚刚开始，我们这有个数据是2009年2月份刚刚开始储蓄。
            
              许小年: 如果美国的企业生产，美国企业的投资活动，美国家庭的消费不能恢复正常的话，对中国的外贸需求也无法恢复正常，好在我们现在看到了一线曙光，这线曙光的到来并不是因为奥巴马政府刺激经济的计划，曙光的到来是因为市场上已经进行了大幅度的调整，奥巴马政府那点钱管什么用？真正经济走出衰退，一定是因为它跌到了无可再跌之后，才能复苏。所以什么时候跌到底，什么时候就反弹。我们现在的政策是什么？是阻止它下跌，阻止下跌什么意思？推迟反弹。它应该进行的调整，它不可避免的调整你老想把它挡住，你挡住的是什么？你挡住的是春天的步伐。因为严冬不过的话，春天怎么来？刚刚初冬就想春天？迎接春天最好的方法是什么？是准备严冬的到来，因为严冬到来了以后，春天就到来了。所以我们对美国经济相对乐观，觉得美国经济率先反弹，是基于市场深度调整的考虑，而不是政府财政刺激，不是奥巴马政府的各种各样措施，市场调整到位了，它自然就会反弹。但是我们现在看，美国已经进行了大幅度调整，但是还没有到位。
            
              许小年: 我做一个小结，西方是在政策的干扰中挣扎前行，政策的干扰是什么？西方各国政府的各类救市措施，它干扰了调整的进行。它试图延缓甚至试图阻止调整的进行，但是毕竟它是市场化程度比较高的经济，市场的力量还在发挥作用。不管奥巴马政府推出什么样的解救次按债务人的计划，房价该跌还是跌，政府想挡也挡不住，因为房价过去太高了，因为房地产过去泡沫太大了，只有泡沫彻底破灭，美国的房地产市场才有复苏的可能性。所以奥巴马政府的这个计划、那个计划，要解救次按债务人，能挡住房价下跌吗？挡不住，市场的力量超出任何世俗的力量。美国家庭的调整，家庭消费的收缩，储蓄率的上升，也在继续之中。由于经济进行了调整，所以有可能率先反弹。
            
              许小年: 政府的各种各样刺激计划，在我看来没有必要，因为它只是延缓了调整的进行，政府的金融救援计划那是迫不得已，但是金融救援计划的后果是非常危险，就是通货膨胀。美联储为了救急大印钞票，为日后的通货膨胀埋下伏笔，种下祸根，所以今后有可能看到，在西方经济复苏的时候，跟着经济一起上升的是通货膨胀，甚至更坏的是滞胀，因为这些资金在实体经济中找不到很好的投资机会，又都重新涌入了资产市场，造成资产市场的泡沫。从短期来看，现在西方的市场情绪是久旱盼雨，国内市场的心理很类似。中国的结构调整刚刚开始，之所以说它刚刚开始，也就是我们库存的调整进行了一部分，但是中国经济结构的调整由于政府政策的反向操作，结构性问题比过去更加严重，投资的比率比过去更大，消费的比率进一步下降。
            
              许小年: 长期困扰中国经济的问题，到现在非但没有得到解决，反而比以前更加严重。我们一再说，不能够依靠投资驱动来实现经济的增长，要更多的依靠消费，但是我们现在还是靠投资驱动，靠政府大把花钱，靠银行大放贷款推动投资，消费仍然被放在次要的地位上，这个结构性问题没办法在现行的政策下扭转过来。我们在金融危机爆发以后，一再说不能过分的依赖海外市场，但是我们现在采取的政策，比如说出口退税，还是鼓励企业依赖海外市场，不还是反向的吗？现在应该是什么？应该是鼓励引导企业尽快地把市场从国外转到国内，我们现在还在提高出口退税，干什么？鼓励大家还在依赖海外市场，现在海外市场已经靠不住了，还在靠。我们的政策都是短期行为，短期行为可以造成短期宏观经济数字的好看和回暖，但是解决不了中国经济的结构性问题。这些结构性问题一天不解决，可持续的复苏就是一句空话。
            
              许小年: 我不认为中国存在需求不足的问题，中国是一个发展中国家，我们的老百姓生活水平还比较低，跟西方国家没法比，你要说美国人需求不足，这是可以理解的，一个房子两辆车，两个孩子一条狗什么都有了，我们差得远了，我们多少人还没有住上自己的房子。我并不认为中国要提倡每个家庭都有车，每个家庭都有车像杭州这样的城市道路很快和北京一样拥挤，但是我们的生活水平跟发达国家还差了很多，需求有的是，不需要政府花钱创造需求，政府需要做的是进行经济体制的改革，把民间巨大的需求释放出来，我们能够渡过难关。老百姓既有需求，又有购买力，你说美国人需求不足，美国人没有购买力，我可以理解，因为它储蓄率已经到零了。银行没什么存款，美国的家庭有的是什么？有的全是信用卡的负债，最近我看到一张照片，美国的家庭主妇她手里拿5、6张信用卡，放到炒菜锅里炒，我彻底和过去的生活告别，我把消费建立在收入和储蓄的基础上，中国的问题正好相反，我们既有需求，又有大量的储蓄，但是老百姓就是不花钱，美国人是没钱好花，我们是有钱不花，哪有需求不足的问题？把老百姓的需求释放出来带动中国经济继续增长，没有问题，根本不需要政府花钱。
            
              许小年: 20多万亿的居民储蓄是什么购买力？你要问一下为什么中国老百姓不花钱？社会保障体系不到位。未来的不确定性太高，孩子上学、老人生病、自己退休怎么办？所以拼命储蓄，我们的公共服务部到位，我们的社会保障体系不到位，你要真有钱，你就往社会保障体系里花，你去充实社会保障体系，解决老百姓后顾之忧，老百姓消费就起来了。而且你刺激消费需求，有助于扭转中国经济结构的长期失衡。这个长期市很就是投资过重，消费过轻。你要刺激需求，就应该给老百姓减税，给企业减税，现在税负的负担太重，企业25%的所得税，加上17%的增值税，这税有多高？世界上最高的税负。老百姓的所得税减了，十七大提出了一个很好的政策，“增加居民的资产性收入”，我举双手赞成，但是增加居民的资产性收入，刺激消费首先要增加居民的资产，没有资产哪来资产性收入？因此我赞成一些学者最近提出来的，把国有股分掉，本来就是全民的，无非是回归全民罢了。你把国有股分掉，老百姓的资产增加，他就可以去消费，外汇储备要分，我也没意见。但是外汇储备不能在国外花，只能在国外花，因为都是美元、欧元，但是什么时候想去香港旅游的时候到外管局领一笔钱，没关系。每个人的外汇储备都有一份。
            
              许小年: 当然刺激的消费是在国外，而不是在国内。你刺激国内的消费，增加居民的资产，增加居民的收入，充实社会保障，把老百姓的消费需求释放出来，我们有办法走出困境，我们不需要政府花钱，不需要“凯恩斯主义”，我们需要的是什么？我们需要的是动员民间的力量，动员市场的力量。
            
              许小年: 最后作为一个结语，也是我最近在各种各样的会议上讲的，“在目前困难的情况下，我们不需要以财政开支为主要工具的凯恩斯主义，凯恩斯主义解决不了中国的问题，也解决不了世界的问题，我们需要的是***理论。”***理论的核心就是相信市场、相信民众，不断的通过改革和开放，释放市场的力量，释放民间的力量，释放出新的需求，带动中国经济继续平稳增长。就讲到这，谢谢大家！
            
              主持人: 谢谢许教授。今天非常难得能够把许小年教授请到杭州来，所以我们特别安排了提问互动的环节，大家如果有提问，可以跟许小年教授现场沟通，这是智慧的碰撞。我抢先问一个问题，刚刚你也在报告中说道了一季度楼市的“小阳春”，但是现在有不同的观点认为，现在这个“小阳春”是开发商造价造出来，说房价还有非常下降的空间。我想问许教授一个问题，您对一季度的“小阳春”是怎么看的？另外您您为现在的房价怎么样？
            
              许小年: 现在的房价在中国做任何认真的研究，都非常困难，因为我们没有可靠的数据。我曾经想做中国的一张图，就是收入和房价的比率历史的趋势，试了各种各样的数据做不出来，发现我们数据的可靠性没有办法保证可靠的结果，在没有数据支持的情况下，我想我很难做出结论。只能说我的观察，楼市的“小阳春”是过去刚性需求的释放，过去很多人已经准备在买房子了，现在房子价格有所下降，房子价格下降之后，这一部分刚性需求就被释放出来，这是造成楼市的“小阳春”，能不能持续？我表示怀疑，但是我也没有很充分的数据表明它二季度、三季度就终止了。在没有数据支持的情况下，在没有做什么调查研究的情况下，我想不能随便做结论，这是不负责任的。
            
              主持人: 好，谢谢许教授，您对现在的房价有什么看法？
            
              许小年: 同样由于数据的缺失，我可以很明确的讲，美国的房价现在还高，但是我没有办法讲中国的房价高了还是低了，因为我没有数据。我们都知道，我们的房价统计数据是怎么统计的？前一段时间政府打压房价的时候，我听到过地方政府告诉他们的统计人员，房价下来不容易？你往周边地方跑一跑不就完了，什么意思？周边地区的房价低，尽管中心地带的房价没有下，但是为了符合上面的要求说房价已经下来了，让统计人员跑到周边地区去统计。统计完了以后他报，说我们调控房地产市场取得明显成效，房价下来了，这数据我能信吗？没法信。收入的数据我也找不到，在这里跟大家实实在在的讲一下作为学者的苦恼，收入的数据也找不到，因为统计上来收入的数据只是各位数据的一部分，或者一小部分，各位的“灰色收入”都不报。我怎么做分析？我没有办法做分析。也只能说，我在下面看一些楼盘，一些零星的接触，我感觉到我们的房价还是有下降的空间，但是你说我有很充分的证据吗？我没有。我不能够像研究美国的房地产市场这么有底气的讲，美国的房地产价格还要下降20%，我不能这么讲，因为我没有数据支持。
            
              提问1:: 刚才听了您的一系列讲座，我们对于当前复杂的经济环境有了更深刻的认识，应该说一季度我们的银行也释放出了信贷，在两者的矛盾下，应该说A股市场或者资本市场，您有什么个人的看法？我相信在会场当中数百位投资者，都想听听你的智慧。
            
              许小年: 对于资本市场来说，两股力量相互作用的结果。一股力量是市场上充裕的资金，市场上充裕的资金往上推，另一股力量是公司盈利的基本链，把它往下压。我想两股力量的结果既不会出现2007年的情况，也不会出现2008年的情况。就是涨起来疯涨，从2000点到6000点，再从6000点跌到2000点，因为这是两股不同的力量。    再多的我觉得我也说不出什么来。提问2: 许教授我想提问您两个问题，一个您判断美国经济率先反弹，您认为美国经济大概会在什么时点上反弹？还有通货膨胀您认为今年下半年可能会发生吗？另外还有一个问题，我想请教您一下，你认为本次金融危机对国际货币体系会有什么改变吗？会改变美元在国际货币中的强势地位吗？
            
              许小年: 问题都非常大，我只能回答一小部分。美国经济的反弹，按照目前的调整速度，我感觉可能在今年年底或者明年上半年会走出谷底，停止下跌，这是我个人的估计，看各方面数据的一种感觉。    通货膨胀的危险是非常现实的，现在之所以通货膨胀没有起来，是因为决定通货膨胀是两个因素，一个因素是货币存量，货币存量毫无疑问全球的货币存量比危机前大大增加，不仅美元、日元、欧元、人民币，都比以前大大增加了，所以制造货币通胀的基础材料已经有了。但另外一个因素就是货币流通速度，货币存量乘以货币流通速度，才相当于经济中的货币总量。
            
              许小年: 打一个简单的比方，如果货币存量10元，10元在经济中每年转两圈，相当于有效的货币20元，如果我货币能在经济中每年转5圈，相当于50元，现在是什么？货币存量在上升，但是货币的流通速度很低。因此我们看到，尽管世界各国的央行大印钞票，目前还没有通货膨胀的危险。什么时候货币流通速度加快的时候，就危险了，一般来说经济复苏的时候，货币流通加快。因为经济活动活跃，交易完成的速度快，货币周转的速度也快，货币流通速度一提高，本来存量这么大通货膨胀有可能很快起来，那个时候要求中央银行能够及时的收紧银根，减少货币存量，但是从中央银行过去的历史来看，在时点的把握上它永远是错的。它要是能正确的话，不会有这次金融危机，这时点的把握是把握不住，既然把握不住，这个世界上没有中央银行也罢，也是很难把握。所以通货膨胀现在有一定的通货膨胀预期，反映在大宗商品的价格上，反映在美国的国债，特别是长期国债的收益率上，我们已经看到通胀预期了，但是温和，不是很严重，什么时候经济复苏了，通胀的危险就到来了。许小年: 第三个问题是这次金融危机毫无疑问动摇了美元在世界上的霸权地位，美国人利用全球储备货币，大发钞票，发钞票目的是什么？是将国内金融救援的成本，将国内刺激经济的成本转嫁给世界各国，是用通货膨胀的办法，用多发钞票的办法把他的成本转嫁给各国，这种局面很难改变，但是中国一定要逐步的推进国际货币体系的改革，减少美元的比重，增加人民币的比重。为了使人民币在世界上有更大的影响力，首先我们自己要做好“家庭作业”，“家庭作业”是什么？就是创造人民币国际化的各种制度基础，尽快的推进人民币的国际化，否则的话，我们永远受制于人。
            
              许小年: 最近我们看到，人民银行和世界各国的中央银行签了很多货币互换协议，签储备互换协议意义在什么地方？试图使人民币变成国际上能够接受的一种货币，首先是世界各国在中央银行接受人民币，首先我们跟他们签定协议。最近我们又在五个城市开始了人民币贸易结算的试点，希望在民间的贸易中有更多的国家接受人民币作为结算货币，但是冰冻三尺非一日之寒，美元在全球的主导地位是在过去几十年间形成的，你想一时取代它是不现实，但是我们要逐步的创造条件，把人民币推向国际，减少美元贬值对我国经济利益的伤害。    所以我们现在正在一步一步的做，但是最终目标，一个多元化货币组成的国际货币金融体系，它的形成不是一、两年能完成，要一步一步来做这份工作。
            
              提问3: 许小年教授，你好，我提一个个人的问题，我们认为中国经济复苏要大量减少外汇储备，不知道我这个观点你是不是认可？
            
              许小年: 我同意。
            
              提问3: 还有一个要降低消费价格，消费价格实在太高了。
            
              许小年: 你指的是哪方面？
            
              提问3: 普通消费，到市场上买一些东西，价格普遍要比美国高很多。如果降低下来，政府花钱去降商品的价格，势必会推动消费能力。因为我有一个朋友给我做了比较，他说美国人和中国人同样品质的牛奶，上海光明牌一升装的全脂牛奶21元人民币，在美国是4升装的是1.7美元，那我们根本没有办法跟他们比；按照我们的工资收入跟美国的工资收入，现在美国人失业一周那500美元的救济金，如果按照人民币和美元1：1相比较的话，我们也是达不到他们的消费能力。我是这样的想法，如果降低了商品的价格，因为大家都降下来，等于是没有降，工资只要不降也不要上调，就能提高消费能力。
            
              许小年: 减少中国的外汇储备，我完全赞同。我们现在已经积累了过多，我们根本不需要的外汇储备。我们的外汇储备有一种地主老财的心态，好象外汇储备都是我们家后院大缸里藏的真金白银，外汇储备和一个国家的综合国力没有任何关系，外汇储备和财富的创造也没有任何关系。外汇储备是干什么用？外汇储备是因为人民币不可兑换之前，国家必须储备一部分外汇，为中国的企业和家庭进口商品之用，这是外汇储备的由来，它跟国力和财力没有任何关系，为什么没有关系？我问大家，美国的外汇储备是多少？美国的外汇储备等于零，美国没有外汇储备，难道说美国的综合国力是世界上最低的吗？难道说美国的财富创造是世界说最慢的吗？美国为什么没有外汇储备？因为美元是全球接受的货币，它不用储外币，它什么时候需要支付手段的时候，拿美元给别人就行了，因为美元大家都接受，而我们的人民币现在还不是全球都接受的货币，我们中国的厂商在进口设备的时候，必须把人民币换成美元才能够从国外买来设备，一旦当人民币变成了自由可兑换货币，我们根本没必要保留外汇储备，外汇储备既不能财富也不是国力，什么都不是，从本质上来说它是中央银行印的一大堆钞票，一大堆纸票。
            
              许小年: 外贸厂商所创造的财富，出口企业所创造的财富，从银行结汇的时候，已经把那部分从银行拿走了，所以外汇储备根本不是出口所创造的财富，跟综合国力也没有任何关系，因为外汇储备太带了没有必要，原则的储备是一个国家的外汇储备够一个国家3—6个月进口就可以了。我们讲货币银行学的时候讲得非常清楚，就是银行印的一大堆纸票，所以我非常同意你的观点。外汇储备根本没必要保留这么多，它是我们经济结构失衡的一种表现，我们的收支不平衡，顺差太高，表现为外汇储备。
            
              许小年: 你的第二个问题，为了刺激消费要降低消费品降格，我能看到的只有两种办法，第一种办法是中央银行紧缩银根，制造通货紧缩，消费者价格下来。要不要紧缩银根？恐怕大家都反对。第二个办法是进一步开放消费品市场，提高消费品市场的竞争程度，增加供给，这个价格就下来了。现在我们消费品行业的竞争度应该是比较高的，竞争度不高是消费的服务产品。比如说电讯是垄断的、石油、石化垄断，这些东西应该打开，增加供应、增加竞争，只要供应增加了，竞争程度提高了，价格自然会下来。当然价格也有可能上去。
            
              主持人: 好的，谢谢许教授，今天给我们带来非常精彩和及时的演讲，我们再此把掌声送给许教授

   
Jan Friederich, senior economist, global forecasting at the Economist Intelligence Unit, says that we are seeing the troughs in the China's economy. The state-oriented infrastructure sector, tremendously benefitting from the stimulus package, has a very weak link to the export sector though.