关于当前货币政策的几个问题

一、我国近年来的货币政策对经济增长的促进作用是十分明显的　　不少人认为财政政策对经济的刺激作用大,货币政策相对来说小一些。其实,财政政策和货币政策都属于短期宏观政策,两大政策的作用最终都要通过投资的增加和消费的增长来体现,在实际中很难确切区分哪些增长是源于财政政策,哪些增长是源于货币政策,二者是相互作用和相互配套的。对财政政策作用的理解,一要看它对增强社会信心的影响,二要看它对企业投资(目前我国主要来自银行贷款)的带动效果,三要看它对增加投资和消费的直接作用,四要看财政政策和货币政策及其他宏观政策的协调与配…     

需求主体的剖析及政策制定

需求主体包括投资需求主体和消费需求主体。刺激内需,既要刺激投资需求,又要刺激消费需求,在当今相对过剩的经济中,更重要的是刺激消费需求,分析需求主体的层次性关键是要让其成为制定经济政策的依据,宏观经济政策可以分为财政政策和货币政策,其中财政政策可分为中央财政政策和地方财政政策,货币政策可分为“面上政策”和“点上政策”。财政政策与货币政策的结合不是一般意义上的结合,这里要强调的的是：中央财政政策和面上的货币政策的有机结合;地方财政政策和点上的货币政策的有机结合,特别是第二个结合,两者的配合虽有难度,但是这种结合对刺激消费需求具有更重要的意义。     

经济波动、区域差异与货币政策效应非对称性——基于中国1984-2009年数据的实证分析

本文基于对货币政策与经济波动关系的理论分析,采用经H-P滤波处理后的产出缺口变量对我国经济波动进行动态度量。考虑到我国经济发展的制度背景,我们引入地方政府投资等变量刻画影响我国经济波动的因素,并分别建立时间序列模型和面板数据模型对货币政策效应在经济周期的不同阶段及在不同区域的货币政策实施效果进行考察。实证结果表明:(1)我国货币政策对实体经济的影响在经济周期的不同阶段存在显著的非对称效应,即在经济扩张时期,无论是扩张性的货币政策还是紧缩性的货币政策对经济波动的影响均大于经济衰退时期货币政策对经济波动的影响;(2)信贷规模在我国的不同区域对经济波动起着显著的推动作用,地方政府的投资行为对经济波动也具有显著的非对称性,即对中西部地区经济波动的影响大于对东部地区的影响。因此,在分析货币政策的最终实施效果时,地方政府投资是一个不容忽视的重要变量。     

经济波动、区域差异与货币改策效应非对称性基于中国1984-2009年数据的实证分析

本文基于对货币政策与经济波动关系的理论分析,采用经H-P滤波处理后的产出缺口变量对我国经济波动进行动态度量.考虑到我国经济发展的制度背景,我们引入地方政府投资等变量刻画影响我国经济波动的因素,并分别建立时间序列模型和面板数据模型对货币政策效应在经济周期的不同阶段及在不同区域的货币政策实施效果进行考察.实证结果表明:(1)我国货币政策对实体经济的影响在经济周期的不同阶段存在显著的非对称效应,即在经济扩张时期,无论是扩张性的货币政策还是紧缩性的货币政策对经济波动的影响均大于经济衰退时期货币政策对经济波动的影响;(2)信贷规模在我国的不同区域对经济波动起着显著的推动作用,地方政府的投资行为对经济波动也具有显著的非对称性,即对中西部地区经济波动的影响大于对东部地区的影响.因此,在分析货币政策的最终实施效果时,地方政府投资是一个不容忽视的重要变量.     

储蓄过剩时代的宏观政策选择

中国经济增长已从供给约束型转化为需求约束型，私人部门消费不足和投资不足导致的储蓄过剩成为其宏观经济运行的基本特征。储蓄过剩降低了货币的流动性，削弱了货币政策对产出的影响，使经济增长更加依赖财政赤字和进出口贸易，也使贸易政策和财政政策面临两难选择。为维持总量平衡，保持适度的经济增长，政府应充分发挥宏观调控的作用。具体而言，运用财政政策改善供给、增加消费；运用货币政策实现货币稳定和金融稳定，促进储蓄向投资的转化。     

防风险的财政政策、货币政策与宏观审慎政策动态协调效应研究

党的二十大报告强调，要“守住不发生系统性风险底线”“提高防范化解重大风险能力”，同时防范化解重大风险也是新时代我国三大攻坚战之一。本文提出经济风险的特征表现为时间维度风险的积累和横截面维度风险的传染，以财政政策、货币政策与宏观审慎政策为主的宏观调控体系在解决内部失衡、防范化解重大风险的协调中尤为重要，本文从理论层面分析了财政政策、货币政策与宏观审慎政策协调配合机制，并以防范经济宽幅波动为目标，选择相应政策工具变量，运用带有随机波动的时变参数向量自回归模型（TVP-VAR-SV）分析了我国财政政策、货币政策与宏观审慎政策的防风险协调效应，结果表明其协调配合对经济稳定作用明显，在短期、中期、长期降低经济波动性的水平分别约为0.19%、0.05%、0.03%，本文也发现不关注债务稳定性的财政政策在一定程度上造成了经济波动。     

关于扩大我国内需的宏观政策建议

中国市场是一个潜力巨大的市场,扩大我国内需有着广阔的前景。作为经济增长的着力点,扩大内需需要相机采取新的宏观政策,包括消费热点育成政策、财政政策、货币政策和投资政策。     

我国货币政策对投资和消费的影响——基于VECM的实证研究

本文运用1996—2012年月度数据建立VECM模型,分析了货币政策对投资和消费的影响,结果显示:(1)货币政策对投资及消费的刺激作用存在非对称性,货币政策对投资的刺激作用比对消费的拉动作用强很多。(2)货币和信贷都可以对消费发挥积极作用,信贷的作用稍强,货币对投资的刺激作用几乎为零,而信贷对投资的拉动作用很明显。(3)利率对投资和消费都有一定影响,但不显著。分析表明,我国货币政策主要通过信贷渠道拉动投资来促进经济增长。通过进一步分析投资与消费的关系,发现当前应着力于扩大消费需求,而且目前财政政策对消费的刺激作用比货币政策有效。     

关于扩大我国内需的宏观政策建议

中国市场是一个潜力巨大的市场,扩大我国内需有着广阔的前景.作为经济增长的着力点,扩大内需需要相机采取新的宏观政策,包括消费热点育成政策、财政政策、货币政策和投资政策.     

货币政策调节经济周期研究

政府宏观调控手段是多样的，比如：货币政策、财政政策等。其中，货币政策通过影响消费、投资以及进出口贸易等来调节经济周期。     

不同的政策不确定性对股市波动影响相同吗?

本文基于多因子混频波动率模型,研究经济政策不确定性对股市行业波动的影响,为预防出现结构性断点,将样本分为经济增长和经济平稳两个时期,分别探讨两个时期内经济政策不确定性对股市波动的影响。研究发现,在全样本时期货币政策不确定性会显著增强行业波动,贸易和外汇政策不确定性会抑制行业波动,而财政政策不确定性的影响存在行业差异性;子样本结果显示,贸易政策不确定性对行业波动的影响存在非对称性,在经济增长期存在助推作用,在经济平稳期存在抑制作用;同时行业波动在经济增长期对贸易政策反应敏感,在经济平稳期对财政政策反应敏感。     

What Is the Importance of Monetary and Fiscal Shocks in Explaining U.S. Macroeconomic Fluctuations?

This paper analyzes the importance of monetary and fiscal policy shocks in explaining U.S. macroeconomic fluctuations, and establishes new stylized facts. The novelty of our empirical analysis is that we jointly consider both monetary and fiscal policy, whereas the existing literature only focuses on either one or the other. Our main findings are twofold: fiscal shocks are relatively more important in explaining medium cycle fluctuations whereas monetary policy shocks are relatively more important in explaining business cycle fluctuations, and failing to recognize that both monetary and fiscal policy simultaneously affect macroeconomic variables might incorrectly attribute the fluctuations to the wrong source.     

Macroprudential policy transmission and interaction with fiscal and monetary policy in an emerging economy: a DSGE model for Brazil

We investigate the transmission of macroprudential (MaP) instruments in a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model where foreign capital flows interact with financial frictions and banks are exposed to different sources of credit default risk. The model is estimated for Brazil with Bayesian techniques. We compute optimal combinations of simple MaP, fiscal and monetary policy rules that can react to the business and/or the financial cycle. We find that the gains from implementing a cyclical fiscal policy are only significant if MaP policy countercyclically reacts to the financial cycle. Optimal fiscal policy is countercyclical in the business cycle.     

越南的金融困局及对中国的警示

2008年5月,越南主要经济指标均超过了安全警戒线,金融市场急剧动荡。越南片面追求经济增长的经济政策导向难辞其咎:政府巨额的投资导致财政赤字;大规模的设备进口导致贸易赤字;过于迷信外资作用,金融开放过快;货币政策过于宽松;对资产价格泡沫危害认识不足;在出现通胀苗头时犹犹豫豫,错失最好的调控时机。越南金融动荡对中国的影响有限。借鉴越南教训,中国应严防通胀,防止境外热钱流入境内兴风作浪,对人民币升值采取谨慎态度,防止股市大起大落。     

Optimal Fiscal Policy Rules in a Monetary Union

This paper investigates the importance of fiscal policy in providing macroeconomic stabilization in a monetary union. We use a microfounded New Keynesian model of a monetary union, which incorporates persistence in inflation and non-Ricardian consumers, and derive optimal simple rules for fiscal authorities. We find that fiscal policy can play an important role in reacting to inflation, output, and the terms of trade, but that not much is lost if national fiscal policy is restricted to react, on the one hand, to national differences in inflation and, on the other hand, to either national differences in output or changes in the terms of trade. However, welfare is reduced if national fiscal policy responds only to output, ignoring inflation.     

Quantitative Goals for Monetary Policy

We study empirically the macroeconomic effects of an explicit de jure quantitative goal for monetary policy. Quantitative goals take three forms: exchange rates, money growth rates, and inflation targets. We analyze the effects on inflation of both having a quantitative target and hitting a declared target. Our empirical work uses an annual data set covering 42 countries between 1960 and 2000, and takes account of other determinants of inflation (such as fiscal policy, the business cycle, and openness to international trade) and the endogeneity of the monetary policy regime. We find that both having and hitting quantitative targets for monetary policy is systematically and robustly associated with lower inflation. The exact form of the monetary target matters somewhat (especially for the sustainability of the monetary regime) but is less important than having some quantitative target. Successfully achieving a quantitative monetary goal is also associated with less volatile output.     

Economic policy uncertainty and short-term financing: The case of trade credit

We examine the impact of economic policy uncertainty on trade credit. We document a decline (increase) in accounts payable, receivable, and net credit during periods of high (low) policy uncertainty and that firms react quickly to changes in uncertainty. The relation is long-term and holds after controlling for endogeneity, non-policy economic and political uncertainties, and the Great Recession. Industry competitiveness, proxied by firm market power, moderates the impact of economic policy uncertainty on trade credit. Uncertainty about monetary and fiscal policies, taxes, and regulations are the major drivers of trade credit changes. The reduction in trade credit during periods of increasing uncertainty can be explained by financial distress, constraints, and relation-specific investment channels.     

Trade flow lags, monetary and fiscal policy, and exchange-rate overshooting

In this paper model a is constructed that combines trade slow lags with the model in the appendix to Dornbusch's seminal paper on exchange-rate dynamics. Here output is free to vary and inflation is determined by a simple Phillips curve mechanism. It turns out that, because of the trade slow lags, monetary expansion causes interest rates to decline, but the exchange rate need not oveshoot, as one would expect; whereas fiscal policy always produces overshooting. It follows that monetary policy may be a less important source of exchange-rate variability than is commonly believed, and fiscal policy more important.     

Monetary versus fiscal policy in India: an SVAR analysis

Conventionally, the policymakers relied on three policy alternatives to manage business cycles – debt-financed government spending, debt-financed tax rebate and interest rate. While the first two are fiscal policy instruments, the latter is a monetary policy instrument. This paper aims to capture interactions among Indian monetary and fiscal policy actions, and the impact of such policy actions on select macroeconomic variables for the period 1990Q1–2011Q4. The policy actions are identified using the sign restrictions approach combined with magnitude restrictions in a Structural Vector Autoregression framework, and interpreted using impulse responses and variance decomposition. The results show that Indian monetary policy responds to tax rebate shocks and spending shocks differently. In the case of a tax rebate shock, Indian monetary policy responds by reducing interest rates thereby accommodating fiscal expansion. On the opposite, monetary policy seems not to accommodate expenditure shocks. Interestingly, the monetary policy shock is accompanied by a fiscal expansion that threatens the credibility of the central bank actions, thus indicating fiscal policy dominance. A comparison of the efficacy of the policies suggests that the interest rate is more effective in stimulating output. Out of the two fiscal policy instruments analysed, the tax rebate seems to be the better option for stimulating output considering the output-debt trade-off.