财政纪律真有那么可贵吗？

Faster economic growth last year coincided with smaller tax rises and public spending cuts in many countries. That is at least partly why many economists are so keen on the use of fiscal policy — spending and tax — to stabilise economies.

去年经济增速加快伴随着很多国家缩小增税幅度和公共支出降幅。至少这在一定程度上解释了为什么很多经济学家如此渴望利用财政政策(支出和税收)来稳定经济。

Growth in 2016 and 2017 has been faster than many predicted early last year, when fear of a potential new global downturn played a role in fiscal policymakers loosening the purse strings last year.

2016年和2017年的经济增速快于去年初很多人的预测，当时对一场潜在的新的全球低迷的担忧，在一定程度上促使财政政策制定者去年放松钱袋子。

Although this loosening coincided with an acceleration in growth, it was not the only explanation for the rebound. “It does seem that most of the action was related to other factors,” says Vitor Gaspar, director of the fiscal affairs department at the International Monetary Fund.

尽管财政政策的放松与经济增速加快同时出现，但这并不是经济增长反弹的唯一解释。国际货币基金组织(IMF)财政事务部门主管维托尔•加斯帕(Vitor Gaspar)表示：“大部分增长似乎确实与其他因素有关。”

Growth was also helped by businesses and individuals having easier access to credit as banks continued rebuilding their balance sheets. In the eurozone, the European Central Bank expanded quantitative easing and business confidence increased, which helped boost private investment. An increase in commodity prices helped ease pressure on countries that rely on production of those goods.

随着银行继续重建其资产负债表，更容易获得贷款的企业和个人也助推了经济增长。在欧元区，欧洲央行(ECB)扩大了量化宽松政策，企业信心增强，这帮助提振了私营部门投资。同时大宗商品价格上涨，帮助缓解了依赖这些大宗商品生产的国家的压力。

There was broad agreement in 2008 and into 2009 that borrowing should be allowed to rise to cushion the impact of the financial crisis. But by 2010, with growth returning, policymakers were keen that it should be scaled back to reassure markets that government debt would not get out of hand, and so head off a sharp rise in borrowing costs.

从2008年至2009年最初几个月，人们普遍认为：应该允许增加借款，以缓解金融危机的影响。但是到了2010年，随着增长回归，政策制定者们热衷于减少借款，以便让市场相信，政府债务不会失控，从而防范借款成本大幅上升。

Many economists agreed, but their views have since shifted. “We’ve learned over the past 10 years that fiscal policy can have pretty powerful effects in deep recessions when central banks have hit very low policy interest rates,” says Alan Auerbach, professor of economics at Berkeley. “We’ve also learnt, at least from the experience in the UK and the US, that we would have benefited from . . . turning less immediately to measures aimed at deficit reduction.”

很多经济学家当时认同这种观点，但此后他们的观点发生了变化。“过去10年，我们领悟到，财政政策在严重衰退、央行已把政策利率降至极低水平的时期可能产生非常强有力的效果，”加州大学伯克利分校经济学教授艾伦•奥尔巴赫(Alan Auerbach)表示，“我们还认识到，至少从英国和美国的经验来看，我们将受益于……不那么急切地转向旨在减少赤字的措施。”

The evolution of thinking on fiscal policy has been less radical than the soul-searching among monetary policymakers, who are reassessing the models they use to inform interest rate setting.

财政政策思路的演变，没有货币政策制定者的反省那么激进，后者正在重新评估他们用来为制定利率提供依据的模型。

However, the period since the financial crisis has been unusual in three main ways that have affected some economists’ views on when and how to use fiscal policy. The effects of the crisis have lasted much longer than after previous downturns; many monetary policymakers believe they are close to the limits of their policy toolboxes; and the interest rates on debt issued by many governments, including long-term debt, remain extremely low despite a big rise in debt levels.

然而，自金融危机以来的这段时期在3个主要方面不同寻常，这些方面影响了经济学家们对于何时以及如何动用财政政策的看法。此次危机的影响持续的时间远远超过前几次经济衰退;很多货币政策制定者认为，他们正接近政策工具箱的极限;尽管债务水平大幅上升，但很多政府发行的债券(包括长期债券)的利率仍然极低。

Under these circumstances, there is a strong case for loosening fiscal policy and borrowing more. This is especially true for policies that put money directly into the hands of people who will spend it quickly and counteract sluggish demand, and for investments that have long-term benefits.

在这些情况下，放松财政政策并增加借款有着充足的理由。尤其是那些把资金直接送入那些会迅速花掉的人手中、从而抵消需求不振的政策，以及那些具有长期效益的投资。

“Economies do not self-stabilise,” said Olivier Blanchard, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, reflecting at a conference on macroeconomic policy, on lessons of the financial crisis for monetary and fiscal policy.

彼得森国际经济研究所(Peterson Institute for International Economics)高级研究员奥利维尔•布兰查德(Olivier Blanchard)在一次有关宏观经济政策的会议上谈到金融危机给货币和财政政策带来的教训时表示：“经济不会自我稳定。”

But politicians and advisers in the developed world still emphasise reining in government deficits and cutting debt, particularly if there appears to be little spare capacity in the economy.

但发达国家的政治人士和顾问仍强调控制政府赤字和削减债务，尤其是在经济中似乎几乎没有富余产能的情况下。

“Markets can ignore or underweight risks, including fiscal risks, for long periods,” said Robert Rubin, former US Treasury Secretary at the Peterson Institute conference. “Until they don’t — and then the reaction can be rapid and savage.”

“市场可能会长时期地忽视或低估各种风险，包括财政风险，”美国前财长罗伯特•鲁宾(Robert Rubin)在彼得森国际经济研究所的会议上表示，“但有朝一日他们可能突然清醒过来，接下来的反应可能迅速而剧烈。”

As for the low level of interest rates charged on the debt issued by many major economy governments since 2008, policymakers say they cannot rely on this being repeated.

至于很多大型经济体的政府自2008年以来发行的债券利率较低，政策制定者表示，他们不能指望这种情况重演。

Eswar Prasad, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think-tank, is sympathetic to policymakers’ concerns about abrupt market reactions. But he hopes that in the next recession, “governments would test markets a little more . . . instead of letting a desire for fiscal virtue get in the way”.

智库布鲁金斯学会(Brookings Institution)高级研究员埃斯瓦尔•普拉萨德(Eswar Prasad)认同政策制定者对于市场突然做出反应的担忧。但他希望在下一次衰退中，“政府会更多地试探一下市场……而不是被严守财政纪律的愿望绑住手脚”。