Joseph Stiglitz 加息促進通脹 因促進供應短缺

最後，我們必須決定什麽是更大的風險

https://www.ips-journal.eu/interviews/in-the--end-we-have-to-decide-what-what-are-the-the-the-the-the-the-bigger-5-6284/
諾貝爾獎獲得者約瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨Joseph E. Stiglitz

看來，如今的政治發展似乎我們正在從一個危機轉變為另一個危機。 特別是有一個發展可以使您晚上保持起床嗎？

顯然，當今世界麵臨的最嚴重的危機是俄羅斯對烏克蘭的入侵。 每個人都擔心普京的威脅和他的非理性 - 這尤其令人擔憂，因為您正在與一個專製人物打交道，後者有效地不受限製，也許並不完全理性。

看著經濟領域，美元一白天變得越來越強。 結果，我們是否會看到新的國際債務危機，尤其是對全球南方的影響？

我非常擔心。 許多國家在大流行之前就已經過度了，這使情況變得更糟，然後在烏克蘭的戰爭使情況仍然更糟。 氣候變化肯定使情況變得更糟。 因此，食品價格上漲，能源價格上漲，現在中央銀行通過提高利率使情況變得更糟，這將增加美元的價值。 這些國家中的許多國家都以美元計價。 對於其中許多人來說，這是一個巨大的問題。 我認為利率的增加不會對通貨膨脹率產生很大影響，因為這基本上是關於短缺的。 如果烏克蘭的戰爭結束，大多數短缺將消失 - 假設歐佩克不決定嚐試利用當前的混亂來提高能源價格。

世界上許多中央銀行都在提高利率。 從漸進的政策角度來看，是否有可行的替代方案？

就在這裏。 通貨膨脹的問題基本上是由於主要供應短缺而引起的。 適當的回應是減輕供應短缺的財政政策。 然而，利率的提高將加劇供應短缺，因為它會阻礙投資，從而使情況變得更糟。 這就是我真正擔心的。 讓我舉幾個例子。 我們有一個能源價格問題。 對於我們而言，要付出巨大的努力來擴大綠色和可再生能源，這將是很有意義的。 這並不是我們正在發現新的石油。 但是，我們知道如何生產低成本的綠色能源，並且大多數材料都可以使用。 我們可以擴大對可再生能源投資的規模。

德國決定，他們將留下一些核反應堆來麵對危機。 您認為，在這一點上，這是正確的做法嗎？

戰爭比其他問題優先。 我了解使用核能的厭惡，以及為什麽日本事故發生後人們會感到緊張。 但是，大多數科學家認為沒有緊張的理由。 最後，我們必須決定更大的風險。 對我來說，目前，一階風險是俄羅斯贏得了這場戰爭。 這將是一種app依和破壞國際法的形式。 這也表明您可以擺脫侵略性。 因此，對我來說，如果我們要有穩定的未來，我們必須贏得這是一個基本問題。 這就是優先事項。 安全地延長核電站的壽命並不像俄羅斯贏得威脅的威脅一樣多。

回顧以前的經濟危機，我們知道政治影響可能是複雜，複雜且極其消極的。 從經濟上講，您是否覺得世界從以前的危機浪潮中學到了從2008年開始的教訓，還是注定要重複曆史，或者至少是它的回聲？

我認為學習是一個非常漸進的過程。 我們應該從2008年了解到市場經濟不是很韌性。 它不考慮風險。 我們也知道這沒有考慮到氣候變化。 但是我們在2008年看到金融市場沒有彈性。 大流行向我們表明，缺乏彈性不僅是金融市場的錯，而且是我們整個經濟的錯。 我有時會描述它，因為我們在沒有備用輪胎的情況下製造汽車。 隻要您沒有輪胎，那就可以了。 我們構建了整個經濟體係，該體係太短了，沒有考慮到風險。

在2006年，我在書中寫道，《使全球化的工作》撰寫，對於德國和歐洲如此依賴俄羅斯天然氣是愚蠢的。 我說，不需要天才才能弄清俄羅斯並不可靠。 我不得不說，很抱歉它證明是有先見之明的。 過去，市場沒有考慮風險，這是我們在2008年之後沒有足夠學習的教訓。我希望現在我們會考慮到這一點。

'In the end, we have to decide what are the bigger risks.'

https://www.ips-journal.eu/interviews/in-the-end-we-have-to-decide-what-are-the-bigger-risks-6284/

Joseph E. Stiglitz  03.11.2022

Nn Putin's war of aggression, the global debt crisis, German nuclear power plants and ways out of the crisis

Looking at political developments these days it seems we are moving from one crisis to the next. Is there one development in particular that keeps you up at night?

Obviously, the most serious crisis facing the world today is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Everybody is worried about Putin's threat and his irrationality — this is particularly worrisome because you are dealing with an authoritarian figure who is effectively unrestrained and maybe not fully rational.

Looking at the economic sphere, the US dollar is getting stronger by the day. Are we going to see a new international debt crisis with repercussions in particular for the Global South as a consequence?

I am very worried about that. Many countries were already over-indebted before the pandemic which made it worse and then the war in Ukraine made it still worse. Climate change certainly has made it worse. Therefore, food prices are up, energy prices are up, and now the central banks are making it even worse by raising interest rates, which will increase the value of the dollar.

Many of these countries have debts denominated in the dollar. For many of them, that's a huge problem. I don't think the increase in interest rates is going to have much effect on the rate of inflation because it's basically about shortages. If the war in Ukraine ended, most of the shortages would disappear – assuming that OPEC doesn't decide to try to take advantage of the current chaos to raise energy prices.

Many central banks around the world are raising interest rates. Is there a feasible alternative from a progressive policy point of view?

Yes, there is. The problem of inflation is basically caused by mostly temporary supply shortages. The appropriate response is fiscal policies that alleviate the supply shortages. The increase of interest rates however will exacerbate the supply shortages because it will impede investments which makes things worse. That's what I really worry about. Let me give just a few examples. We have an energy price problem. It would make a great deal of sense for us to have a massive effort of expanding green and renewable energy. It's not like we are discovering new oil. However, we know how to produce low-cost green energy and most of the materials are available. We could have an expansion of the scale of our investments in renewables.

Germany decided that they would leave some nuclear reactors running to confront the crisis. Do you think, at this point, this is the right thing to do?

Fighting a war takes precedence over other issues. I understand the aversion to using nuclear energy and why after the accident in Japan people would feel nervous. However, most scientists feel that there is no ground for nervousness. In the end, we have to decide what are the bigger risks. To me, right now, the first-order risk is Russia winning this war. It would be a form of appeasement and undermine international law. It also would show that you can get away with aggression. So, to me, it is a fundamental issue that we have to win if we're going to have a stable future. That's the priority. Extending the life of nuclear power plants safely is not anywhere near as much of a threat as the threat of Russia winning.

Looking back at previous economic crises, we know that political repercussions can be complicated, complex and extremely negative. Do you feel that the world, economically speaking, has learned lessons from 2008, from previous waves of crises or are we doomed to repeat history or, at least, an echo of it?

I think learning is a very gradual process. We should have learned from 2008 that the market economy is not very resilient. It doesn't consider risk. We also know it doesn't take into account climate change. But we saw in 2008 that the financial markets weren't resilient. The Pandemic showed us that the lack of resilience was not just the fault of the financial markets, but our whole economy. I sometimes describe it as we build cars without spare tires. That's fine as long as you don't have a flat tire. We constructed an entire economic system that was too short-sighted and didn't take into account risk.

In 2006, I wrote in my book ‘Making Globalization Work’, that it was foolish for Germany and Europe to become so dependent on Russian gas. I said it didn't take a genius to figure out that Russia was not reliable. I have to say I'm sorry that it proved prescient. In the past, markets did not take account of risk and that is a lesson that we did not learn adequately after 2008. I hope now we will take that into account.