FT社評 A股泡沫不會造成經濟災難

In May alone, more than 12m equity trading accounts opened in China — a figure somewhat higher than the population of Greece. No wonder: a year of gains had helped the Chinese stock market put on $6.5tn in value. Since mid-June $2tn have disappeared. China may be experiencing an equity bubble only ever exceeded during the late 1990s US dotcom boom.

僅在今年5月一個月，中國新開股票交易賬戶就超過了1200萬——這一數字甚至略高於希臘人口總數。這並不奇怪：持續一年的上漲讓中國股市市值增加了6.5萬億美元。自6月中旬以來，2萬億美元市值已經灰飛煙滅。可能只有上世紀90年代末美國互聯網熱潮期間的股市泡沫，比中國正在經歷的股市泡沫嚴重。

These numbers dwarf the billions of euros at stake in negotiations between Greece and its creditors. In light of such figures, it is fair to ask whether the world’s media is attending to the right global drama. As in Athens, events move at such a pace that keeping track is no easy task.

以上數字讓希臘與其債權人的談判所涉及的區區幾十億歐元相形見絀。鑑於如此龐大的數字，我們有理由問全球媒體是否關注了正確的全球事件。追蹤雅典瞬息萬變的事態發展可不是個輕鬆活。

Friday saw over 7 per cent falls in Shenzhen and Shanghai indices, a rout that worsened on Monday, before a rebound the day after. Into the middle of this stepped the People’s Bank of China with a Saturday interest rate cut and an easing of reserve requirements, a move widely interpreted as being a response to the stock market turmoil.

上週五，深圳和上海的股指下跌逾7%，本週一兩大股指再次暴跌，隨後在週二反彈。在此期間，中國央行於上週六宣佈降息降準，此舉被廣泛解讀爲對股市暴跌的迴應。

It is hard to tell whether such intervention works, or even what it working amounts to: central banks should stabilise the economy, not make life more predictable in the stock market. The possible arrival of the monetary cavalry may just serve to give speculators more to speculate about.

很難說此類干預是否奏效，或者說這種干預到底算什麼：央行應該穩定經濟，而不是讓股市更可預測。貨幣政策利好的可能出臺，或許只會讓投機者有更多機會投機。

A better question is what the non-speculative majority has to fear from China’s gyrating stock markets, either within its borders or beyond. The country faces a difficult economic transition, shifting from a dependence on credit-fuelled investment in property and infrastructure towards services and household spending.

更好的問題是，對於中國暴漲暴跌的股市，絕大多數非投機性的境內外投資者應該擔憂什麼。中國面臨艱難的經濟轉型，即擺脫對信貸助長的房地產和基礎設施投資的依賴，轉向服務業和家庭支出。

But calming a frenetic market is no part of this project. Some have even called the rally “state sanctioned”, and part of a broader strategy to shift the economy towards greater use of equity and move resources towards new industries. Indeed, while there is no shortage of research on the lasting damage caused by housing busts, plummeting equities deliver more of a glancing blow. After all, the purpose of equity is to absorb risk. Folk memory of how the Depression followed on the heels of the 1929 stock market crash implies too glib a causality; disastrous monetary policy is the likely cause of each. The way the US shrugged off the evaporation of $5tn in the dotcom bubble is more instructive.

但讓一個狂熱的市場冷靜下來並非經濟轉型的一部分。一些人甚至認爲此輪上漲是“政府批准的”，是更宏大戰略的一部分，該戰略旨在讓經濟更多地利用股市，並將更多資源投向新興產業。實際上，儘管不乏對房地產泡沫破裂之長期影響的研究，但股市暴跌的影響更多是短暫而間接的。畢竟，股市的用途就是吸收風險。人們還記得，1929年股市崩盤後接踵而至的是“大蕭條”，但這種因果關係太牽強；每次蕭條的真正禍首，可能是災難性的貨幣政策。美國對互聯網泡沫期間市值蒸發5萬億美元不予理睬，這種做法更有啓發意義。

If not its cause, others may wonder if the swooning equity market is the harbinger of economic distress. But this too is a difficult case to make. China has been slowing for a while, even as shares hit records. Shares in new-economy sectors have attracted the greatest speculative interest, whereas the broader economic slowdown is afflicting its older industries.

如果說股市暴跌不是經濟蕭條的元兇，那麼人們可能想知道，它是否是經濟低迷的先兆。但這也很難證明。中國經濟已經放緩了一段時間，甚至在股市飆升之際也在放緩。新興產業領域的股票吸引的投機興趣最大，而宏觀經濟放緩影響的是較爲傳統的行業。

The arrival of millions of ordinary punters, often to trade on margin, is a classic symptom of a bubble. Usually, knowing insiders then siphon away the newcomers’ savings — a matter of political concern, perhaps, but not an economic catastrophe. Where share price bubbles seem to cause damage, the real culprit is often the authorities overreacting and deploying the heavy weaponry of a monetary squeeze to dampen damaging “speculation”. In America in 1929 and Japan in 1990, such behaviour brought disaster.

數百萬普通投資者入市（他們中許多從事保證金交易）是泡沫的典型徵兆。通常而言，消息靈通的圈內人士接下來會捲走新股民的儲蓄——這或許是一件應引起政治關注的事，但它不是一場經濟災難。儘管股市泡沫似乎造成了傷害，但真正的罪魁禍首往往是那些反應過度、並動用貨幣擠壓這一“重型武器”來打擊破壞性“投機”的有關部門。在1929年的美國和1990年的日本，此類行爲引發了災難。

On Saturday the speculators were lucky that their interests and those of the central bank happened to coincide. China’s growth is stuttering and deflation is proving hard to shake off, so monetary easing is just what is called for. This will not always be the case. The PBoC should continue to steer the economy by economic lights. As for the speculators, there is surely a phrase in Mandarin for “caveat emptor”.

在上週六，投機者是幸運的，他們的利益碰巧和中國央行的利益一致。中國經濟增長正步履蹣跚，通縮也揮之不去，因此正是需要貨幣寬鬆之時。情況不會一直如此。中國央行應該繼續通過經濟信號燈來引導經濟。至於投機者，中文裏肯定有“買者自負”的說法。