OP-ED COLUMNIST
Greece Over the Brink
July 01, 2015
It has been obvious for some time that the creation of the euro was a terrible mistake. Europe never had the preconditions for a successful single currency — above all, the kind of fiscal and banking union that, for example, ensures that when a housing bubble in Florida bursts, Washington automatically protects seniors against any threat to their medical care or their bank deposits.
Leaving a currency union is, however, a much harder and more frightening decision than never entering in the first place, and until now even the Continent’s most troubled economies have repeatedly stepped back from the brink. Again and again, governments have submitted to creditors’ demands for harsh austerity, while the European Central Bank has managed to contain market panic.
But the situation in Greece has now reached what looks like a point of no return. Banks are temporarily closedand the government has imposed capital controls — limits on the movement of funds out of the country. It seems highly likely that the government will soon have to start paying pensions and wages in scrip, in effect creating a parallel currency. And next week the country will hold a referendum on whether to accept the demands of the “troika” — the institutions representing creditor interests — for yet more austerity.
Greece should vote “no,” and the Greek government should be ready, if necessary, to leave the euro.
To understand why I say this, you need to realize that most — not all, but most — of what you’ve heard about Greek profligacy and irresponsibility is false. Yes, the Greek government was spending beyond its means in the late 2000s. But since then it has repeatedly slashed spending and raised taxes. Government employment has fallen more than 25 percent, and pensions (which were indeed much too generous) have been cut sharply. If you add up all the austerity measures, they have been more than enough to eliminate the original deficit and turn it into a large surplus.
So why didn’t this happen? Because the Greek economy collapsed, largely as a result of those very austerity measures, dragging revenues down with it.
And this collapse, in turn, had a lot to do with the euro, which trapped Greece in an economic straitjacket. Cases of successful austerity, in which countries rein in deficits without bringing on a depression, typically involve large currency devaluations that make their exports more competitive. This is what happened, for example, in Canada in the 1990s, and to an important extent it’s what happened in Iceland more recently. But Greece, without its own currency, didn’t have that option.
So have I just made the case for “Grexit” — Greek exit from the euro? Not necessarily. The problem with Grexit has always been the risk of financial chaos, of a banking system disrupted by panicked withdrawals and of business hobbled both by banking troubles and by uncertainty over the legal status of debts. That’s why successive Greek governments have acceded to austerity demands, and why even Syriza, the ruling leftist coalition, was willing to accept the austerity that has already been imposed. All it asked for was, in effect, a standstill on further austerity.
But the troika was having none of it. It’s easy to get lost in the details, but the essential point now is that Greece has been presented with a take-it-or-leave-it offer that is effectively indistinguishable from the policies of the past five years.
This is, and presumably was intended to be, an offer Alexis Tsipras, the Greek prime minister, can’t accept, because it would destroy his political reason for being. The purpose must therefore be to drive him from office, which will probably happen if Greek voters fear confrontation with the troika enough to vote yes next week.
But they shouldn’t, for three reasons. First, we now know that ever-harsher austerity is a dead end: after five years Greece is in worse shape than ever. Second, much and perhaps most of the feared chaos from Grexit has already happened. With banks closed and capital controls imposed, there’s not that much more damage to be done.
Finally, acceding to the troika’s ultimatum would represent the final abandonment of any pretense of Greek independence. Don’t be taken in by claims that troika officials are just technocrats explaining to the ignorant Greeks what must be done. These supposed technocrats are in fact fantasists who have disregarded everything we know about macroeconomics, and have been wrong every step of the way. This isn’t about analysis, it’s about power — the power of the creditors to pull the plug on the Greek economy, which persists as long as euro exit is considered unthinkable.
So it’s time to put an end to this unthinkability. Otherwise Greece will face endless austerity, and a depression with no hint of an end.
希臘應該做好放棄歐元的準備
保羅·克魯格曼 2015年07月01日
一段時間以來，人們已經清晰地認識到，歐元的締造是一個糟糕的錯誤。歐洲根本沒有成功維繫單一貨幣的先決條件——舉例來說，首先它就沒有那種財政聯盟和銀行聯盟，能在佛羅里達的房地產泡沫破滅時，確保華盛頓方面自動為老年人提供保障，讓他們的醫療保險或銀行存款不受威脅。
然而與一開始就不進入貨幣聯盟相比，脫離貨幣聯盟的決定要艱難得多、恐怖得多。迄今為止，就連歐洲大陸處境最糟的經濟體也會一再從危機邊緣走回來。一次又一次，政府都屈從了債權人實行嚴苛的緊縮政策的要求，而歐洲央行也抑制了市場的恐慌。
- 檢視大圖
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times保羅·克魯格曼
然而希臘的處境現在似乎到了無可挽回的地步，銀行暫時關閉、政府採取了資本控制措施，限制資金流出希臘。一種極有可能發生的情況是，政府很快就不得不用白條來支付養老金和工資了，這實際上等於創造一種並行的貨幣。下周，該國就會舉行公投，決定是否接受「三駕馬車」採取更多緊縮措施的要求。「三駕馬車」代表的是債權人的利益。
希臘人應該投反對票，希臘政府應該做好準備，如果有必要的話，就退出歐元區。
要想理解我為什麼這樣說，你就需要認識到，你們聽到的關於希臘人揮霍無度、不負責任的說法，大多數都是假的——不是說全都是假的，而是大多數。的確，希臘政府在2010年之前那幾年裡的開支沒有量入為出，然而從那時開始，該國就反覆削減開支、提高稅收。政府僱員規模已經下降了超過25%，退休金（在過去的確太過慷慨了）也被大幅削減。如果再加上所有的緊縮舉措，省下的錢早就可以填補最初的赤字，實現巨額盈餘了。
那為什麼這種情況沒有發生？因為希臘經濟崩潰了，接着又拖累了財政收入，其原因基本上就是這些緊縮舉措。
而希臘經濟的崩潰，也與歐元有關——它把希臘拴在了一個經濟牢籠里。在緊縮政策的成功案例中，國家能夠控制赤字，同時又不造成經濟衰退，它通常包括使其出口產品變得具有競爭力的大幅貨幣貶值。比如，1990年代的加拿大就發生了這樣的情況，近些年冰島的情形在很大程度上也是如此。然而希臘沒有自己的貨幣，沒有這一選項。
所以我剛才闡述的是希臘脫離歐元區的理由？並不一定是。希臘脫離歐元區的問題，一直都在於會在金融體系引發混亂的風險：恐慌引發擠兌從而擾亂銀行體系；銀行經營困難，而且債務的法律地位存在不確定性，這兩點也都會干擾商業經營。正因為如此，歷任希臘政府都遷就了緊縮要求，也正是因為如此，就連執政的激進左翼聯盟(Syriza)也願意接受現在已經施加的緊縮條款。希臘政府現在要求的，實際上只是不再增加新的緊縮措施。
然而三駕馬車完全不肯接受。人們很容易迷失在細節當中，但現在的重點是，希臘面前擺着一些非接受不可的要求，它實際上與過去五年里的政策沒有什麼差別。
這樣的條件希臘總理阿列克西斯·齊普拉斯(Alexis Tsipras)是不會接受的，因為接受的話，就會毀掉他從政的根本理由。而這麼做可能是故意之舉，所以其目的肯定是把他趕下台。如果希臘選民足夠擔心與三駕馬車發生對抗，於是在下周投了贊成，齊普拉斯可能就要下台。
然而出於三個原因，他們不應該投贊成票。首先，我們知道日益嚴苛的緊縮是死胡同，經過了五年，希臘的狀況前所未有的糟。其次，人們擔心希臘脫離歐元區後發生的混亂，有很多（或許是大多數）都已經發生了。銀行關閉、施加資本控制，還沒發生的損害已經不剩多少了。
最後，接受三駕馬車的最後通牒，就不能再假裝希臘是一個獨立國家了。不要聽信三駕馬車官員只是技術官僚的說法，以為他們是在向無知的希臘人解釋應該做什麼。這些所謂的技術官僚實際上充滿幻想，完全無視現存的宏觀經濟知識，一路上每一步都是錯的。現在的局面與分析無關，但卻關乎權力——債權人讓希臘經濟剎車的權力，只要脫離歐元區的舉動是不可想像的，這樣的權力就會一直存在。
現在正應該結束這種脫離歐洲不可想像的局面，否則希臘就會面臨無窮無盡的緊縮，經濟蕭條也會一眼望不到盡頭。
沒有留言:
張貼留言