Joseph Stiglitz 加息促进通胀 因促进供应短缺

最后，我们必须决定什么是更大的风险

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/
诺贝尔奖获得者约瑟夫·E·斯蒂格利茨Joseph E. Stiglitz

看来，如今的政治发展似乎我们正在从一个危机转变为另一个危机。 特别是有一个发展可以使您晚上保持起床吗？

显然，当今世界面临的最严重的危机是俄罗斯对乌克兰的入侵。 每个人都担心普京的威胁和他的非理性 - 这尤其令人担忧，因为您正在与一个专制人物打交道，后者有效地不受限制，也许并不完全理性。

看着经济领域，美元一白天变得越来越强。 结果，我们是否会看到新的国际债务危机，尤其是对全球南方的影响？

我非常担心。 许多国家在大流行之前就已经过度了，这使情况变得更糟，然后在乌克兰的战争使情况仍然更糟。 气候变化肯定使情况变得更糟。 因此，食品价格上涨，能源价格上涨，现在中央银行通过提高利率使情况变得更糟，这将增加美元的价值。 这些国家中的许多国家都以美元计价。 对于其中许多人来说，这是一个巨大的问题。 我认为利率的增加不会对通货膨胀率产生很大影响，因为这基本上是关于短缺的。 如果乌克兰的战争结束，大多数短缺将消失 - 假设欧佩克不决定尝试利用当前的混乱来提高能源价格。

世界上许多中央银行都在提高利率。 从渐进的政策角度来看，是否有可行的替代方案？

就在这里。 通货膨胀的问题基本上是由于主要供应短缺而引起的。 适当的回应是减轻供应短缺的财政政策。 然而，利率的提高将加剧供应短缺，因为它会阻碍投资，从而使情况变得更糟。 这就是我真正担心的。 让我举几个例子。 我们有一个能源价格问题。 对于我们而言，要付出巨大的努力来扩大绿色和可再生能源，这将是很有意义的。 这并不是我们正在发现新的石油。 但是，我们知道如何生产低成本的绿色能源，并且大多数材料都可以使用。 我们可以扩大对可再生能源投资的规模。

德国决定，他们将留下一些核反应堆来面对危机。 您认为，在这一点上，这是正确的做法吗？

战争比其他问题优先。 我了解使用核能的厌恶，以及为什么日本事故发生后人们会感到紧张。 但是，大多数科学家认为没有紧张的理由。 最后，我们必须决定更大的风险。 对我来说，目前，一阶风险是俄罗斯赢得了这场战争。 这将是一种app依和破坏国际法的形式。 这也表明您可以摆脱侵略性。 因此，对我来说，如果我们要有稳定的未来，我们必须赢得这是一个基本问题。 这就是优先事项。 安全地延长核电站的寿命并不像俄罗斯赢得威胁的威胁一样多。

回顾以前的经济危机，我们知道政治影响可能是复杂，复杂且极其消极的。 从经济上讲，您是否觉得世界从以前的危机浪潮中学到了从2008年开始的教训，还是注定要重复历史，或者至少是它的回声？

我认为学习是一个非常渐进的过程。 我们应该从2008年了解到市场经济不是很韧性。 它不考虑风险。 我们也知道这没有考虑到气候变化。 但是我们在2008年看到金融市场没有弹性。 大流行向我们表明，缺乏弹性不仅是金融市场的错，而且是我们整个经济的错。 我有时会描述它，因为我们在没有备用轮胎的情况下制造汽车。 只要您没有轮胎，那就可以了。 我们构建了整个经济体系，该体系太短了，没有考虑到风险。

在2006年，我在书中写道，《使全球化的工作》撰写，对于德国和欧洲如此依赖俄罗斯天然气是愚蠢的。 我说，不需要天才才能弄清俄罗斯并不可靠。 我不得不说，很抱歉它证明是有先见之明的。 过去，市场没有考虑风险，这是我们在2008年之后没有足够学习的教训。我希望现在我们会考虑到这一点。

'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.