马丁-沃尔夫：危机后的全新世界？

商业训练营 > 金融英语速读 >马丁-沃尔夫：危机后的全新世界？

精品荐读

这次金融危机后，世界政治和经济秩序会发生天翻地覆的变化吗？

为什么要每天阅读《金融时报》？
- 对于全球的金融业从业人员来说，阅读《金融时报》是每天必须进行的修炼。要想把握金融业的趋势，提高自己的“金融智慧”，和全球的金融业者站在同一高度，《金融时报》是你的首选。
为什么要训练阅读速度？
- 在信息爆炸的今天，能够迅速地阅读和理解大量资料，已成为金融业者必不可少的技能。著名的投资家股神巴菲特曾表示，他每天都会阅读大量报刊和年报，这也是他多年来始终能做出正确的投资决策的基础。
训练阅读速度的小工具
- 自动滚屏助你提高速度。点击该按钮后，屏幕就开始滚动，迫使你改掉向回看的习惯，加快速度。默认为每分钟140字（朗读速度）。随着你的技能提升，你可以挑战更高的速度，直到达到1000。

速度：+ -

阅读以下文章

By Martin Wolf

Published: May 19 2009 19:48 | Last updated: May 19 2009 19:48

Is the current crisis a watershed, with market-led globalisation, financial capitalism and western domination on the one side and protectionism, regulation and Asian predominance on the other? Or will historians judge it, instead, as an event caused by fools, signifying little? My own guess is that it will end up in between. It is neither a Great Depression, because the policy response has been so determined, nor capitalism’s 1989.

Let us examine what we know and do not know of its impact on the economy, finance, capitalism, the state, globalisation and geopolitics.

On the economy, we already know five important things. First, when the US catches pneumonia, everybody falls seriously ill. Second, this is the most severe economic crisis since the 1930s. Third, the crisis is global, with a particularly severe impact on countries that specialised in exports of manufactured goods or that relied on net imports of capital.

Fourth, policymakers have thrown the most aggressive fiscal and monetary stimuli and financial rescues ever seen at this crisis. Finally, this effort has brought some success: confidence is returning and the inventory cycle should bring relief. As Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank, remarked, the global economy is “around the inflection point”, by which he meant that the economy is now declining at a declining rate.

We can also guess that the US will lead the recovery. The US is again the advanced world’s most Keynesian country. We can guess, too, that China, with its massive stimulus package, will be the most successful economy in the world.

Unfortunately, there are at least three big things we cannot know. How far will exceptional levels of indebtedness and falling net worth generate a sustained increase in the desired household savings of erstwhile high-spending consumers? How long can current fiscal deficits continue before markets demand higher compensation for risk? Can central banks engineer a non-inflationary exit from unconventional policies?

On finance, confidence is returning, with spreads between safe and risky assets declining to less abnormal levels and a (modest) recovery in markets. The US administration has given its banking system a certificate of reasonable health. But the balance sheets of the financial sector have exploded in recent decades and the solvency of debtors is impaired.

We can guess that finance will make a recovery in the years ahead. We can guess, too, that its glory days are behind it for decades, at least in the west. What we do not know is how far the “deleveraging” and consequent balance-sheet deflation in the economy will go. We also do not know how successfully the financial sector will see off attempts to impose a more effective regulatory regime. Politicians should have learnt from the need to rescue financial systems stuffed with institutions deemed too big and interconnected to fail. I fear that concentrated interests will overwhelm the general one.

What about the future of capitalism, on which the Financial Times has run its fascinating series? It will survive. The commitment of both China and India to a market economy has not altered, despite this crisis, although both will be more nervous about unfettered finance. People on the free- market side would insist the failure should be laid more at the door of regulators than of markets. There is great truth in this: banks are, after all, the most regulated of financial institutions. But this argument will fail politically. The willingness to trust the free play of market forces in finance has been damaged.

We can guess, therefore, that the age of a hegemonic model of the market economy is past. Countries will, as they have always done, adapt the market economy to their own traditions. But they will do so more confidently. As Mao Zedong might have said, “Let a thousand capitalist flowers bloom”. A world with many capitalisms will be tricky, but fun.

Less clear are the implications for globalisation. We know that the massive injection of government funds has partially “deglobalised” finance, at great cost to emerging countries. We know, too, that government intervention in industry has a strong nationalist tinge. We know, as well, that few political leaders are prepared to go out on a limb for free trade.

Most emerging countries will conclude that accumulating massive foreign currency reserves and limiting current account deficits is a sound strategy. This is likely to generate another round of destabilising global “imbalances”. This seems an inevitable result of a defective international monetary order. We do not know how well globalisation will survive all such stresses. I am hopeful, but not that confident.

The state, meanwhile, is back, but it is also looking ever more bankrupt. Ratios of public sector debt to gross domestic product seem likely to double in many advanced countries: the fiscal impact of a big financial crisis can, we have been reminded, be as costly as a large war. This, then, is a disaster that governments of slow-growing advanced economies cannot afford to see repeated in a generation. The legacy of the crisis will also limit fiscal largesse. The effort to consolidate public finances will dominate politics for years, perhaps decades. The state is back, therefore, but it will be the state as intrusive busybody, not big spender.

Last but not least, what does the crisis mean for the global political order? Here we know three important things. The first is that the belief that the west, however widely disliked by the rest, at least knew how to manage a sophisticated financial system has perished. The crisis has damaged the prestige of the US, in particular, pretty badly, although the tone of the new president has certainly helped. The second is that emerging countries and, above all, China are now central players, as was shown in the decision to have two seminal meetings of the Group of 20 leading nations at head of government level. They are now vital elements in global policymaking. The third is that efforts are being made to refurbish global governance, notably in the increased resources being given to the International Monetary Fund and discussion of changing country weights within it.

We can still only guess at how radical the changes in the global political order will turn out to be. The US is likely to emerge as the indispensable leader, shorn of the delusions of the “unipolar moment”. The relationship between the US and China will become more central, with India waiting in the wings. The relative economic weight and power of the Asian giants seems sure to rise. Europe, meanwhile, is not having a good crisis. Its economy and financial system have proved far more vulnerable than many expected. Yet how far a set of refurbished and rebalanced institutions for international co-operation will reflect the new realities is, as yet, unknown.

What then is the bottom line? My guess is that this crisis accelerated some trends and has proved others – particularly those in credit and debt – unsustainable. It has damaged the reputation of economics. It will leave a bitter legacy for the world. But it may still mark no historic watershed. To paraphrase what people said on the death of kings: “Capitalism is dead; long live capitalism.”

Write to martin.wolf@ft.com
More columns at www.ft.com/martinwolf

选择正确答案

What's the main purpose of this article?

check out the full text

Shed light on some of the author's insights
Urge world governments to take action
Prove a theory put up by the author
Kick start a discussion on the future of capitalism

选择正确答案

The author would agree with all of the below EXCEPT?

"My own guess is that it will end up in between. It is neither a Great Depression, because the policy response has been so determined, nor capitalism’s 1989."

The crisis hits export-oriented paticularly hard.
Aggressive stimuli are beginning to show sign of success.
The health of US economy is vital to the health of global economy.
The current crisis is more severe than the Great Depression in 1930.

选择正确答案

What is most likely to happen in China, according to the author?

"The commitment of both China and India to a market economy has not altered, despite this crisis, although both will be more nervous about unfettered finance. "

Market economy will be abandoned.
China will form a G2 group with US.
China will go back to Maoist economy.
Finance will be more cautiously regulated.

选择正确答案

Which of the following countries is most likely to emerg as world leader, according to the author?

The US is likely to emerge as the indispensable leader, shorn of the delusions of the “unipolar moment”.

US
China
G2
US and Europe

选择正确答案

Please pick the best title for this article.

Good

Long live capitalism
This crisis is a moment, but is it a defining one?
Global economic crisis: the way out
A whole new world: after the crisis

放松与总结

今天的训练暂告一段落，FT中文网还将陆续推出更多的训练项目，欢迎您来信建议。(电子邮件：customer.service@ftchinese.com)

<<后退

开始>>

您的正确率太低，在目前这个阶段，对你来说最重要的是提高英文水平和金融专业水平，而不是速度。请您点击后退仔细查看您答错的题目，并和原文对照。对原文中所有不懂的句子和知识点，也请一一查明。建议您：
1. 在进行下一次训练的时候，将滚屏速度保持在100以下。
2. 您可以找一些有声读物，如《经济学人》的audio edition，帮助你提高英文水平。

看得出你是非常认真来进行这次训练的，如果你坚持的话，你会获得非常大的提高。目前你的阅读速度偏低，可能是因为英文不是你的母语。不过，请不要放慢阅读速度。研究表明，阅读速度越快的人，其理解的正确率反而越高。因此，您可以同时提高您的阅读速度和理解能力。给你一点建议：
1. 一定要改掉默念的习惯
2. 不要一个词一个词的看，要学会把一个语义群当作一个整体来看。比如“an emergency $180bn injection of dollar”这个语义群，你要学会把他当作一个整体来看。
3. 看DVD的时候，切换到英文字幕。

用正常语速来朗读一篇文章，平均速度是每分钟140词。这说明你的阅读速度比朗读还要慢。建议您：1. 每一段的第一句话往往是最重要的。
2. “速读”最忌讳的就是“读”，不要一边看一边默念。
3. 在下一个训练中将滚屏速度设为140，迫使自己不能回头去看已经读过的部分。

您的阅读速度已经超过了正常语速，说明你已经开始有些速读的感觉了。美国大学生的最低阅读速度为每分钟250词，加把劲你就可以赶上了。建议您：
1. 养成习惯，读过的部分不要回头去看，这样会影响速读。
2. 加强“扫描”的训练，让自己的眼睛能“一目一行”。

您的阅读速度已经达到了美国大学生的水平，可喜可贺。不过作为金融从业人员，每天需要阅读数不清的中英文研究报告、公司年报、报刊杂志等，您还需要向每分钟350字进军。建议您：
1. 加强“扫描”的训练，让自己的眼睛能“一目两行”。
2. 对中英文的数字，尤其是大数字(million, billion)的转换进行总结和练习。

厉害，您的阅读速度已经超过了美国大学生的水平。不过，要成为巴菲特那样的金融专家，您需要锻炼出“一目十行”的火眼金睛。建议您在每次的训练中注意三个要点：
1. 您已经学会了将文章分成语义群，而非词来阅读，现在，你需要扩大每一个语义群中的词数。
2. 加快阅读每个语义群的速度。
3. 看过的内容尽量不要回看。

这就是传说中的“一目十行”吗？难以置信！

世界纪录才每分钟416,250字，居然被你破了！无语...