了解美国金融海啸

美国引爆的金融海啸，蔓延到世界各地，（奇怪，好像只有大马不受影响，首相、第一、第二财长先后放话，要国人放心，大马经济还强，可以经得起海啸）。

对于人来说，我们还是一再追问，到底是什么问题造成美国金融海啸？Please read this good article。

The Crisis's Silver Lining by Fareed Zakaria

Amid the financial chaos and economic uncertainty that has rocked worldmarkets, I can see one silver lining. This crisis has forced the UnitedStates to confront the bad habits it developed over the past few decades.If we can kick those habits, today's pain will translate into gains in thelong run.

Since the 1980s, Americans have consumed more than they produced and havemade up the difference by borrowing. Two decades of easy money andinnovative financial products meant that virtually anyone could borrow anyamount for any purpose. Household debt ballooned from $680 billion in 1974to $14 trillion today. The average household has 13 credit cards, and 40percent of these carry a balance, up from 6 percent in 1970.

But the average American's behavior was virtuous compared with governmentbehavior. Every city, county and state has wanted to preserve itsproliferating operations yet not raise taxes. How to square this circle? Byborrowing, using ever more elaborate financial instruments.
Local pols weren't the only problem. Under Alan Greenspan, the FederalReserve refused to inflict pain. Russian default? Cut interest rates. Theeconomic slowdown after Sept. 11? Cut rates. Whatever the problem, thesolution was to keep money flowing and goose the economy.
In 1990, the national debt was $3 trillion. It is now $10.2 trillion.

If there is a lesson to be taken from this crisis, it's an old rule:There is no free lunch. Now, debt is not a bad thing. Used responsibly, itis at the heart of modern capitalism. But hiding mountains of debt incomplex instruments is an invitation to irresponsible behavior.

In the short term, governments must take on more debts and obligations toresolve the crisis. But that doesn't mean we should stimulate the economywith more tax cuts, as some economists advocate. That would only keep theparty going artificially. A far better stimulus would be to expedite majorinfrastructure and energy projects, which are investments, not consumption,and have a different effect on fiscal fortunes.

In the longer term, we have to get back to basics. Government should putincentives in place that make saving more likely. The U.S. governmentoffers enormous incentives to consume (the mortgage interest tax deductionbeing the best example), and it works. We have the world's biggest housesand the most cars. If we were to tax consumption and encourage savings,that would also work. Regulations on credit card debt should be revised toensure that people understand their risks.

Paul Volcker has long argued that the recent financial innovation simplyshuffled around existing resources while contributing few real benefits tothe economy. Such activity will now be reduced significantly. Boykin Curry,a New York fund manager, points out that "30 percent of S&P 500 profitslast year were earned by financial firms, and U.S. consumers were spending$800 billion more than they earned every year. As a result, most of our topmath PhDs were being pulled into nonproductive financial engineeringinstead of biotech research and fuel technology. Capital expenditures wentinto retail construction instead of critical infrastructure." The crisiswill stop the misallocation of human and financial resources and redirectthem in more productive ways. If some of the smart people on Wall Streetend up building better models of energy usage and efficiency, that would bea net gain for the economy.

The U.S. economy remains extremely dynamic. Even now, the most surprisingdata continue to be how resilient the economy has been through the recentshocks. That will not last if the panic persists, but the economy'sunderlying virtues would help it recover quickly from a recession. The risein emerging-market economies, which have been powering global growth, willnot vanish overnight, either.

In the short run, there has been a flight to safety -- toward dollars andTreasury bills -- but in the long run, countries are likely to seek greaterindependence from an unstable superpower. The United States will have towork to attract capital and must organize its fiscal affairs. We will haveto make strategic choices. We cannot deploy missile interceptors alongRussia's borders, draw Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, and still expectRussian cooperation on Iran's nuclear program. We cannot denounce Chineseand Arab investments here and the next day hope that they will keep buyingT-bills. We cannot keep preaching about democracy and capitalism with ourown house so wildly out of order. Instilling discipline will be painful fora country used to having it all. But it will make us much stronger in thelong run.

The writer is editor of Newsweek International and co-host of PostGlobal,an online discussion of international issues. His e-mail address iscomments@fareedzakaria.com.