分类：
2008-12-12 19:34:42
归类于： — Eco Team @ 10:47 am
Savings
储蓄
Where have all your savings gone?
你们的储蓄上哪儿去了？
Dec 4th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Investors may draw the wrong lesson from history
投资者从历史中吸取的可能是错误的教训
FOR American and European savers it has been a lost decade. After two booms and two busts, stockmarkets have earned them nothing, or less, in the past ten years. Low interest rates have made bonds and bank deposits unrewarding too. Were it not for the tax relief they receive, contributors to personal pension plans would have been better off keeping their money under their mattresses. It will be little consolation to Westerners that savers in Japan have known this empty feeling for far longer.
美国和欧洲的储蓄者经历了一个失去的十年。过去十年里，股市经历了两轮兴衰，投资者几乎没有赚到任何钱，甚至出现了亏损。低利率让债券和银行存款也都失去了投资价值。如果不是有税收减免，与其将钱放到养老金计划里，还不如藏到床垫下面。日本的储蓄者经历这种空乏感觉的时间要长得多，不过这对西方人来说也算不上什么安慰。
This year’s figures are enough to put anybody off saving. American mutual-fund assets have declined by $2.4 trillion-a fifth of their value-since the start of 2008; in Britain, the drop is more than a quarter, or almost £130 billion ($195 billion). The value of global stockmarkets has shrunk by maybe $30 trillion, or roughly half. These figures put the losses on credit-related securities-where the financial crisis began-into the shade.
今年的数据足以让任何储蓄者却步。自2008年以来，美国共同基金资产已经缩水2.4万亿美元，是其市值的1/5；英国共同基金资产下跌超过25%，约 1300亿英镑（1950亿美元）。全球股市市值已经缩水近半，约30万亿美元。与这些数字相比，引发这场金融危机的信贷相关有价证券的损失只是小巫见大巫。
Nor has the bad news been confined to equities. This year the value of all manner of risky investments, from corporate bonds to commodities to hedge funds, has been clobbered. The belief that diversification into “alternative assets” could prevent investors losing money in bear markets has proved false. And of course housing, which many people counted on for their retirement nest-eggs, has lost value too.
坏消息不止出现在股票上。今年以来，从公司债券到大宗商品，再到对冲基金，各类形式的风险投资都遭受重挫。多样化投资到替代型资产上可以让投资者避免在熊市损失的信念已经被证明是错误的。至于房地产，许多人都指望靠它退休养老，也已经失去了价值。
As a result, saving seems like pouring money into a black hole. Any American who has diligently put $100 a month into a domestic equity mutual fund for the past ten years will find his pot worth less than he put into it; a European who did the same has lost a quarter of his money.
结果就是，储蓄像是将钱扔进一个黑洞。如果一个美国人在过去十年坚持每个月投100美元到国内共同基金上，他会发现他的投资越变越少了；如果一个欧洲人做同样的投资，他的钱已经损失了1/4。
Save your cake and eat it
省下你的蛋糕，并吃了它
It may seem an odd time to worry about savings. This week the National Bureau of Economic Research declared that the world’s largest economy, America, had been in recession since December last year. The economies of Japan and much of western Europe have been shrinking. A rapid, global, private-sector shift to thrift is exactly what the world economy does not need. That’s why governments around the world have been passing hurried measures to try to encourage people to spend more of their incomes.
现在担忧储蓄可能有些奇怪。本周，国家经济研究局宣称，全球最大的经济体美国已经从去年12月开始进入衰退。日本和大量西欧国家的经济一直在收缩。快速的、全球性的私人部门转向节约恰恰不是世界经济所需要的。正因为如此，世界各国政府都在快速通过各项措施来鼓励个人多消费。
In some countries, they should. Asians (and Germans too-see article), have been squirreling their money away with excessive enthusiasm. But other countries’ citizens have been putting too little aside for their old age. In America, the household savings ratio (the proportion of disposable income not used for consumption) has been below 2.5% since 1999; in Britain, it has been below 3% in each of the past two years. The Asians’ parsimony made the Anglo-Saxons’ profligacy possible. Through their increasingly sophisticated financial systems, the Americans and British were able to borrow from the thrifty Asians to finance their spending spree. And, because their house prices were rising so fast, they had the collateral and the confidence to do so.
在一些国家，人们必须如此。亚洲人（德国人也是）一直对储蓄有着过高的热情。但其他国家的居民却几乎没有为养老存下什么钱。在美国，家庭储蓄率（没有用于消费的可支配收入的比例）自从1999年来一直低于2.5%；英国家庭储蓄率连续两年都低于3%。亚洲人的过度节约给盎格鲁撒克逊人创造了肆意挥霍的可能性。通过日益复杂的金融系统，美国人和英国人从节约的亚洲人筹措到支持他们无节制消费的经费。与此同时，由于房价一直在上涨，他们同时拥有抵押品和信心来这么做。
In other words, Anglo-Saxons were able to save their cake and eat it. They did not have to sacrifice consumption in order to build up assets for the future, because lax monetary policies encouraged borrowing that pushed up the prices of housing and other assets, which gave them the illusion of having saved enough. But now this debt burden is being unwound, asset prices are collapsing and savings rates are rising because consumers are unwilling, or unable, to borrow.
换句话来说，盎格鲁撒克逊人能够省下他们的蛋糕并享用它们。他们不必牺牲消费来为未来积攒资产，因为宽松的货币政策鼓励借贷，推高了房价和其他资产的价格，这给了他们错觉–已经有了足够的储蓄。但是如今，债务负担正被释放出来，资产价格在崩溃，储蓄率在上升，因为消费者不愿也无力再借贷。
Though this is bad news for the American and British economies in the short term, it ought to be good news in the long term. How good, though, depends as much on where people put their savings as on how much they put aside.
尽管短期内，这对美国和经济经济来说是个坏消息，但长期来说应该是一个好消息。至于有多好，取决于人们将存款放在哪里以及储蓄多少。
Careless caution
草率的谨慎
If savers treated financial assets as they do other goods, they would sell them when they are expensive and buy them when they are cheap. Actually, they do the opposite. They piled into the market in 1999-2000, at the peak, and are piling out of it now. They should, of course, have got out in 2000, when the global price-earnings ratio was 35; shares look relatively much more attractive now, since the ratio is down to ten. A recent analysis shows that, when American price-earnings ratios are low, returns on equities over the next decade average 8%; when they are high, returns average 3%.
如果储蓄者像对待其他物品一样处理金融资产，应该高价卖出低价买进。事实上，他们的做法正好相反。他们在1999-2000年挤入市场，正值高点，如今纷纷撤出。他们当然应该在2000年离场，当时全球市盈率是35倍；如今的股价看起来反而更有吸引力了，因为市盈率已经降到了10倍。最近一份分析显示，当美国市盈率处于低位时，未来10年股票的平均收益率超过8%；当市盈率高时，收益率平均为3%。
But people’s recent losses have made them cautious. They are putting their money into cash or money-market funds, rather than equities or corporate bonds. The returns they are getting on their savings look increasingly pitiful. Interest rates are falling sharply, with more central banks announcing cuts this week. Savers may initially be shielded from the full impact of those reductions, because commercial banks are competing for retail deposits. But rates in many big economies are heading for, or have already reached, 1-2%.
然而，最近的损失让人们谨慎起来。他们将钱投到货币市场基金或是留存现金，而不是购买股票或公司债券。储蓄的收益越来越可怜。随着本周更多央行宣布降息，存款利率急剧下滑。起初储蓄者可能会免受这些利率削减的全部压力，因为商业银行正在为小额零星存款竞争。但许多大型经济体的利率正在或已经接近1-2%。
Caution is understandable, after the trauma of this year. Equity and corporate bond markets could yet fall further, especially as the news on the economy seems to get worse every week. But it is still perverse that investors were happy to buy shares nine years ago, when the ratio of share prices to profits was three times what it is today, and are now determined to keep their money in cash and bonds.
经历过今年的创伤后，小心谨慎是可以理解的。股票和公司债券还可能进一步下滑，尤其是考虑到有关经济的新闻一周比一周糟糕。但这种情况仍然是有悖常理的：9年前投资者乐于购买股票，当时股价与利润的比率是现在的三倍，而如今人们却坚决地持有现金或是购买债券。
That approach will be hopelessly inadequate for those who want to build a decent pension, especially in defined-contribution, or money-purchase, schemes, where the employee bears all the investment risk. The average American scheme member contributes just 7.8% of salary to his pension scheme. His employer, on average, contributes only 4.4%. He has a pot worth only $68,000. A rule of thumb is that total contributions need to be around 20% of wages to match a traditional final-salary scheme.
对那些想要建立一个体面的退休金的人来说，尤其是在界定供款、货币购买年金这类雇员承担所有投资风险的年金计划上，这种做法将是无可救药地不合适。美国的雇员为养老金计划平均只缴纳工资的7.8%，雇主平均只缴纳4.4%，员工的平均养老金只有68,000美元。一条经验法则是，应该缴纳工资的20%才符合传统的最终薪金计划。
Inadequate savings, badly invested, are a problem for individuals and the economy. Cautious savers are putting their money in banks; banks are reluctant to lend; companies therefore find it hard both to borrow money and to raise equity capital. This timidity hurts companies and, in the long term, savers. Implausible as it may sound, right now equities and corporate bonds are a better long-term bet than cash.
储蓄不足，过度投资，既是个人的问题，也是整个经济的难题。小心谨慎的储蓄者将钱存入银行，银行不愿借贷，公司因此很难借到钱，也很难增加股本。这种胆怯伤害了公司，长远来看，还将损害储蓄者。听起来可能难以置信，但目前来说，股票和公司债券是比现金更好的长期投资品。
****************************
文中有一些企业年金的专业术语，简单查了一下，主要是UK的划分。下面列出了encyclopaedia的英文解释。不清楚国内有没有通用的翻译，但从搜索的情况来看，应该是没有，至少普及度不高。所以字面上翻译应该是比较灵活的。
名词注解：
defined-contribution schemes: 界定供款计划。
根据雇主和雇员的供款总额以及供款上所赚的投资回报去提供收益的退休计划。这类计划通常由雇员承担投资风险。
money-purchase schemes: 货币购买年金计划。
A Money Purchase scheme is a type of pension arrangement in the United Kingdom.
It can either be sponsored by an employer or an individual arrangement with an insurance company. Basically, with type of arrangement a sum of money is accrued which is then used to secure a pension in retirement. It is sometimes known as a Defined Contribution scheme to distinguish it from a Defined Benefit scheme where the benefits are payable are linked to salary.
final-salary scheme：最终薪金计划。
Traditionally, a large number of UK employers offered their employees access to a Defined benefit or Final salary occupational pension scheme. In such an arrangement, the employee was promised a fixed level of pension based on their final salary to which he or she would become entitled on retirement. The amounts payable are restricted by taxation rules, but are typically either a pension of one-sixtieth of their final salary for each year of membership or a pension of one-eightieth of their salary plus a tax free lump sum of three-eightieths.
标题出处–著名的反战歌曲Where Have All the Flowers Gone。经过很多艺人演绎，有很多版本。以下是从网上搜到的简单介绍。
《Where Have All the Flowers Gone》是一首著名的反战歌曲，源自于一首乌克兰民谣。
《Where Have All the Flowers Gone》这首歌曲是受到小说《静静的顿河》中哥萨克摇篮曲的启发而创作的。小说开头写顿河岸边的一个哥萨克村庄，时间是二十世纪初，村中的一些年轻人正要出发到白军营地去，他们不久将卷入俄国的内战。
其中一位哥萨克的妻子正唱着摇篮曲哄孩子入睡：”鹅在什么地方啊？–进芦苇去啦。”"芦苇在什么地方啊？–姑娘们砍掉啦。”"姑娘在什么地方啊？–姑娘嫁给哥萨克啦。”"哥萨克在什么地方啊？–上战场去啦……”
1961年，美国著名的民歌手Pete Seeger改写了这首歌词。他反对侵略战争，而眼看着二次大战和朝鲜战争的爆发，他感到每一个美国青年就像哥萨克一样，命中注定要去打仗。于是他把”芦苇”改成”花儿”，就像那首哥萨克摇篮曲一样，花儿被姑娘们摘走了，姑娘们嫁人了，她们的丈夫打仗去了。 这些年轻人战死了，他们的坟墓很快被人遗忘了。下一代的姑娘们又来摘花，并不意识到花儿下面是坟墓，这些姑娘们又嫁人，她们的丈夫又去打仗。因此，作者问道：”我们什么时候才能明白这个道理？
