(这条文章已经被阅读了 19 次) 时间：2001-09-17 18:58:29 来源：万龙蛇 (万龙蛇) 转载
The economic aftershock
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=786184
Sep 14th 2001
From The Economist Global Agenda
With American markets now scheduled to re-open on September 17th, attention is beginning to focus on the impact of the terrorist attacks on the world economy. Do the events of September 11th mean America and the rest of the world are heading for recession?
SPECULATION is a favourite pastime of economists: but it’s one that has lost much of its attraction since September 11th. Working out what the global economic impact of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington might be is peculiarly difficult because of the their unprecedented nature. It is also, for many of those who work closely with the financial markets, unusually stressful. The attack in New York struck, as it was presumably meant to, at the financial heart of America. The casualty list is full of people who worked in the financial-services sector, giving the job of assessing its impact a personal dimension which hardheaded market people are not used to.
All the signs are that getting back to business will be a slow process. America’s financial markets are now scheduled to re-open on September 17th, ending the longest closure for many decades. But what will happen when they do open is anyone’s guess. So many institutions have been affected by the damage to offices and communications wrought by the collapse of the World Trade Centre and by the large number of human casualties, that no one knows how the markets will operate. Share prices might slide sharply, continuing the slump, which had started before September 11th. Or there might be a temporary calm, reflecting some kind of “gentleman’s agreement” among financial institutions not to rock the boat as America’s financial sector struggles to regroup.
The enormous short-term uncertainties are reflected in the wider economy. How will American consumers and businesses react to the catastrophic events? Once air services are operating something close to normal schedules, will people resume flying as before? Will shoppers—the backbone of the world’s largest economy—decide against making that trip to the mall? How will firms cope if retail therapy goes out of fashion? Is recession now inevitable? On the face of it, the economic implications are huge: and how America responds will, in turn, have important consequences for the rest of the world.
But it is important to remember three things. First is the extraordinary degree of uncertainty involved in making economic assessments right now. This makes any attempt at forecasting even more difficult than normal. Second is the importance of distinguishing between short-term responses and the longer-term impact. The immediate fallout seems bound to be negative: for several days, at least, people can’t fly even if they want to; the emotional reaction to the unfolding tragedy in New York in particular, seems bound to discourage consumer spending. But life will eventually begin to return to normal for most people. The response over the medium-term will be far more important in determining the economic outlook.
Last, but perhaps most important, as things stand now, the economic impact of the terrorist attacks might be relatively small in the long term. Horst Köhler, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said as much in a statement released on September 12th. But that will not stop the events being blamed if America, followed by the rest of the world, slides into recession.
None of this, though, makes the global outlook very cheerful. Indeed, what can easily be forgotten in the aftermath of September 11th is just how bad things were already. World stockmarkets had already slumped in the early days of September. In spite of the assumption made by many economists—and others—that the American economy had just about bottomed out, a stream of disappointing statistics before September 11th was followed by even gloomier ones published after the attacks, but relating to economic activity before them.
On September 14th, government figures showed the eleventh consecutive monthly fall in industrial production in August—the longest decline since 1960. Industrial production has now fallen by 4.8% in the past year; and high-tech output is down 7.2% on a year ago. For most of this year, the American consumer has kept the economy afloat as business activity and investment continued to slide. But there are fears that may be changing. On September 13th, the widely respected University of Michigan fortnightly survey of consumer sentiment was released a day early. This related to the period up to September 10th and showed a dramatic weakening in confidence. It put a dampener on better-than-expected retail-sales figures issued on September 14th, but covering August. The data suggest that as taxpayers started to get their tax-rebate cheques many of them went out and spent them. As confidence has continued to weaken in September, however, it’s possible more people will now put the money in the bank.
So far, America has avoided recession; a prolonged period of consumer weakness, which the latest confidence figures might herald, could tip the balance. That would be bad news for a world economy whose prospects already look far gloomier than anyone predicted only a year ago. Output in Japan, the world’s second biggest economy, contracted sharply in the second quarter of the year. The Japanese central bank is now hinting that it might take new measures at the end of its regular meeting on September 18th-19th, but cynics wonder if these will be yet another instance of too little, too late. Other countries in Asia, including Singapore and Taiwan, are already in recession: the collapse in American demand for their high-tech exports has hit them hard.
And the display of hubris from many European leaders at the beginning of the year has been replaced with mounting concern about the prospects for the euro zone. On September 13th, figures showed that the euro area grew by only 0.1% in the second quarter compared with the first; and only by 1.7% compared with a year ago. Germany’s sluggish performance has been especially surprising and disappointing.
Gloomy indeed, with little prospect of an early improvement; and while their long-term impact may be relatively modest the terrorist attacks have done nothing to help the confidence of investors, firms and consumers. But it is possible that the policy responses to the events in America could have some beneficial impact on economic activity. The response of the world’s central banks has been swift. They have sought to restore stability to the markets and maintain the smooth running of the international financial system by a series of co-ordinated measures, including a $50 billion swap deal between America’s Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank (ECB) announced on September 13th.
Even more significantly, both the Fed and the ECB have made it clear that they stand ready to cut interest rates if necessary. The Fed has already cut rates seven times this year, and a cut before its next scheduled meeting, on October 2nd, is now widely expected—perhaps within the next few days. The ECB decided against a rate cut when it met on September 13th, but this seems partly at least to avoid the appearance of panic. Given the ECB’s previously much-criticised reluctance to cut interest rates this year, a looser monetary stance in the wake of the terrorist crisis would be welcome to many.
The euro area still seems determined to stick with its stability and growth pact, derided by many as wrongly imposing tight fiscal policy at a time of economic downturn. But in America, the political row over the disappearing budget surplus has vanished in the wake of the terrorist attacks. President Bush declared them to be an act of war to which America would respond. The prospect of higher military and other government spending, which might ordinarily alarm fiscal conservatives, will, as a side-effect, inject additional demand into a weakening economy.
For now, though, all economic analysis is necessarily speculative. No one could have predicted the attacks on New York and Washington—let alone their tragic toll in human lives. No one can predict their economic consequences.