저자: MohamedEl-Erian · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 중앙은행 정책의 한계로 재정정책 전환이 필요하지만 정치적 교착으로 실행이 지연되고 있으며, 마이너스 금리의 부작용이 누적되어 현 체제는 2~3년 내 한계에 도달할 것이다. 재정정책 합의 관련: 경제학자들 사이에서는 중앙은행 의존의 한계와 재정정책 병행 필요성에 기술적 합의가 있다. 현실적으로는 반反기득권 정치 세력 부상으로 전통 정당의 정책 실행이 마비된 상태다. 미국 의회가 분열된 상태면 대통령 선거 결과보다 실질적 영향이 적다는 전망이다. 유럽은 브렉시트 논쟁과 반체제 정당 부상으로 더 초기 단계다. 정책 교착 해소 전망: 대형 위기나 충격 없이는 정치적 해법이 나오기 어렵다고 보며, 충격의 크기가 문제라고 진단한다. 현재로서는 중도 합의의 징후가 보이지 않는다고 평가한다. 마이너스 금리 관련: 글로벌 국채의 약 1/3, 투자등급 회사채의 약 16%가 마이너스 금리 상태로 보고 있다. 마이너스 금리는 정상적인 시장경제 운영을 어렵게 하는 부작용을 낳는다고 본다. 주식시장은 펀더멘털과 괴리되어 있으며, 금리 10~15bp 손실을 감수하고 채권을 보유하는 것이 주식 리스크보다 낫다고 언급한다. 규제 요인으로 은행 등이 국채 보유를 강제받아 수요가 가격을 밀어올렸다고 분석한다. 부작용 사례: 일본에서는 금고 판매가 급증했고, 현금 보관 선호가 나타난다는 점을 예로 든다. 일본은 마이너스 금리를 한 번 시도한 뒤 정치적 압박으로 되돌렸으며, 엔화가 강세인데도 과감한 조치를 못 하는 상태다. 생명보험 등 장기 금융서비스 제공자는 마이너스 실질금리에서 수익을 내기 어려워 신규 상품 제공이 불가능해진다고 지적한다. 리스크·조건: 현 체제가 지속될 수 없으며 정치권의 선택에 따라 결과가 크게 달라진다는 양면적 시나리오를 제시한다. 저성장과 과도한 중앙은행 개입이 지속되면 일본이 선행지표 역할을 한다고 경고한다. 출연자 전망: 현 체제는 2~3년 내 종료될 것이며, 이후 결과는 정치권 대응에 달렸다고 본다.
다듬은 글
Baban thank you very much for joining us today it's a pleasure to be here in the book you published earlier this year the only game in town you're indicating what you believe are based upon your analysis are the limits of monetary policy as a means globally to support economic growth and you're indicating based on your analysis that there should be a shift over towards the fiscal policy side in order to help sustain economic growth do you think that there is a political consensus within the OECD countries and other Economic Forum's to bring that about there is a technical consensus so most economists agree that we cannot continue relying on central bank's that we are starting to see the exhaustion of central bank policies and that we need a handoff a policy handles and that handoff includes more active fiscal policy as one of the four components so the good news is you have a technical agreement the less good news is that the political configuration is such that nothing is getting implemented there is complete paralysis part of that has to do with the growth of the anti-establishment movements on both sides of the Atlantic that has tended to paralyze the ability of traditional parties to act and the result of that is while you have technical agreement we do not have political implementation how do you unblock this I worry that it only gets unblocked with some sort of crisis some sort of shock and the only question in my mind is how big does that shock need to be in looking at the run-up to 2016 election here in the United States and then also other political contests elsewhere in the world do you think you see any signs of hope that perhaps a centrist consensus absent a crisis may come about not as yet and I think that while the focus in the other states it is rightly on the race for the White House it's Congress that's gonna really matter if Congress remains divided then it doesn't ultimately matter that much who comes into the White House because we have a system of checks and balances there's a limit to what you can do by executive order Europe is an even earlier stage they got the tea party later than we did and they're still trying to cope with what does it mean to have the amount of anger within the population you see it in a brexit debates you see it in the emergence of the antics optional and so I do not think that we're gonna solve the political problems without a major shocking enough that we have more than 10 trillion dollars in sovereign debt securities with negative interest rates is this something we're really it's a view and the part of fixed income investors that long-term rates of return are going to be going negative or is it perhaps more an instance of where the quantitative easing that has been used as one of the monetary policy tools since the 2008 recession has perhaps going too far it speaks all this and basically speaks to what a strange world we're living in and investors should take pause and think a little bit about must have been going on negative interest rates you lend you money and you pay to borrow so the privilege of giving them money now that's absurd and yet it is to reality on almost 1/3 of global government that over 30 percent on 16 percent of investment grade corporate that's become the reality so something that was an unthinkable it's now why several reasons one is central banks have experimented too much and we're now seeing the collateral damage the unintended consequences of that and there is collateral damage you cannot run a modern market-based economy at negative normal interest rates things start to break down second we are seeing people recognize that has been a wonderful ride in the equity market but equity valuation now are very decoupled from fundamentals we can no longer rely on central banks as much as we did before and therefore you know what I'd rather know that I'm gonna lose just ten basis points or 15 basis points then take risk in the equity market and the third element is regulatory driven banks other institutions have been forced to hold more of the save bonds that has driven demand up has pushed prices up in your son I think the key issue is to recognize that this cannot continue for a long time and it feeds into the basic hypothesis of the book which is we are in this t-junction the world we're on is slowly coming to an end probably within the next two or three years we're not going to be able to continue as is but there are two very different outcomes depending on what the political class does you've indicated that outside of entities that have regulatory requirements negative interest rates are a significant disincentive if we look at say those economies that may have seen these negative interest rates for longer have we seen an actual disintermediation where depositors whether from an individual standpoint or an institutional standpoint have opted to withdraw their funds from the system rather than to have them remain within the financial system we're seeing in Japan the sale of home safes has shut up why because people say I'd rather keep the money at home then pay for back to keep it you're seeing the damage politically the back of Japan is on this tremendous political pressure that's why after it's experimented once with negative interest rates it's won back to the I'm too scared to do anything even though the yen has strengthened enormously you've seen it now in the circumstances facing any provider of long term financial services you know we can't ensure our life individually we pool to ensure our life but no new provider of life insurance would provide us life insurance today why because there's no way they can make money and keep our money safe with negative real interest rates so you started with negative nominal straight so you're starting to see the damage being created in the system and yes individuals are responding Japan for me is the leading indicator keep a close eye on Japan because it tells you what can go wrong if we continue with this low growth excessive central bank involvement scenario you
Comments 0