2016年7月19日星期二

白銀才是貴金屬價格上漲的背後主角

  受英國脫歐等問題影響,世界經濟不透明感增強,黃金作為分散投資的目標受到廣泛關注。由於吸引了新近投資,黃金價格處於上漲趨勢,但還有一個比黃金的漲勢 還明顯的貴金屬也不可忽視,那就是白銀。雖然與黃金相比,白銀的價格不足幾十分之一,但從2016年初開始,在主要貴金屬中銀價的漲幅超乎一般。到底是什 麼原因呢?
 

       作為白銀國際價格的指標,紐約期貨價格目前為每金衡盎司20美元左右,較英國脫歐公投前上漲了16%。年初以來的漲幅超過40%,幾乎達到2年來的最高 點。相比之下,黃金和鉑金年初以來的價格漲幅僅為約20%~30%。金融及貴金屬分析師龜井幸一郎表示「白銀主導貴金屬價格上漲的局面也十分突出」。

       推高白銀價格的是投資需求。涉足貴金屬市場調查的湯森路透的數據顯示,2015年用於投資的銀塊或銀幣的需求達到歷史最高的9092噸,較上年增長 24%,創下了歷史新高。特別是在美國,作為投資商品,銀幣很受歡迎。據美國造幣局提供的數據顯示,具有代表性的美國鷹揚銀幣2016年上半年(1~6 月)累計銷量較上年同期增長20%。從全年來看有超過去年創下的歷史新高的趨勢。

       白銀人氣攀升的原因是,持續至2015年的長期的價格低迷所引發的投資樂趣。白銀與黃金價格行情聯動性傾向很強,金價除以銀價得出的「金銀比價」是進行投 資判斷的一個標準。過去數十年間的金銀比價的平均值被認為在55~60倍之間,今年上半年金價先行上漲時,金銀比價攀升至70倍以上。中國工商銀行旗下的 工行標準銀行 (ICBC Standard Bank)的東京支店長池水雄一表示「銀價處於歷史性低位的狀態曾一直持續。」

       2011年,希臘債務危機引起的市場對歐洲信用的不安將黃金行情推上了歷史最高點。在這一年,銀價也漲至40美元區間,創下了約30年來的最高值。然 而,2015年銀價暴跌至13美元區間。銀的需求方面,有超過一半為電路觸點和焊接等工業需求。由於中國經濟減速等原因,金屬資源需求整體陷入低迷,這對 銀價産生了影響。

在貴金屬店等,30公斤重的白銀塊也十分暢銷
       另外,2011到2012年間的白銀行情走高也導致産業方面的需求進一步減少。此前普遍應用於電子材料的白銀被相對廉價的銅等材料取代,「省銀化」舉措得 到推進。2015年,工業用白銀需求為約1萬8300噸,在5年間減少了13%。特別是隨著數位相機的普及,曾經作為主要用途的照片薄膜用白銀的需求10 年裏減少至3分之1。

       也有部分領域的白銀需求出現增長。用於光伏發電面板的導電膏是白銀需求增長的少數市場之一。中國以及東南亞等新興國家轉向推進可再生能源的普及,增設光伏 面板的進程推動了白銀需求增長。日本三菱綜合材料指出「因光伏發電而增加的白銀需求正在彌補照片薄膜減少的部分」。即便如此,從中長期來看,白銀在所有産 業的市場需求擴大難以預期,因而投資需求的增減對相關市場的影響正在增強。

       著眼低廉的價格,日本也漸漸掀起了白銀投資熱。白銀缺少像黃金和鉑金那樣的稀有性,因此在貴金屬店等銷售的銀塊重量也大多在1公斤以上。日本某大型貴金屬 店表示「最大規格的30公斤重的銀塊也變的暢銷了」(日本貴金屬商石福金屬興業)。30公斤重的銀塊按目前的市場行情換算價格將達到220萬日元(約合人 民幣13.9萬元)左右。

       同樣的投資熱潮也出現在鉑金市場。在中國經濟減速,工業用鉑金需增長停滯不前的背景下,鉑金價格在去年大幅下跌。正是在這一時期,日本國內貴金屬店的鉑金塊銷量開始增長。似乎正是那些瞄準市場價格谷底的「打折獵人」主導著各種貴金屬價格走勢的轉變。

       日本經濟新聞(中文版:日經中文網)商品部 小野嘉伸

http://zh.cn.nikkei.com/

2016年7月18日星期一

金價連升6週斷纜現疲態

石林:
上周全球發生數宗地緣政治不安事件,金市卻結束了早前連升6週的走勢,價格從高峰向下回調,週末以1337.1美元收市,較前週回落28.3美元。
銀市亦結束了連升6週的走勢,但相對於金市而言,前者表現出較頑強的抗跌力,週末收報20.195美元,較前週只回順0.03美元。
地緣政治事件除非後果深遠且曠日持久而未平息,一般而言,對金銀市勢的影響是較為短暫,上周則可說是起著減輕金銀價格調整幅度的作用。事件過後,金銀市大多數回復到原來軌跡運行。
隨著英國新首相正式上台,英國脫歐公投所產生的衝擊得以較明顯緩和,金融市場對風險的偏好又再回增,股市復升,令金銀的避險功能有所下降。因而金銀兩市在接近超買的狀態下,作出調整是完全可理解的事。
金價與美債關係密切
較早前,美債、美元及金銀均扮演資金避難所角色。細看近數月金銀與美債及美元的表現,可察覺金價經常脫離與美元反向的關係,但與美債價格保持相當密切的同向且同步的關係;可見金價在反映其他因素的同時,更主要是反映美國利率的可能動向。
上週此事態演變得較前明顯,美國長期和中期債券價格從高位回落,孳息率相應從低谷回揚。以10年期債券孳息為例,上週收報1.6厘,略為升越短期阻力1.57厘水平。此行情在暗示,美國經濟表現並不壞,全球經濟亦不能說是太壞,故美國聯儲局即使大大放緩加息步伐,但未致有必要掉過頭來減息,甚至是實施負利率政策。
因此,早前英國脫歐帶來的恐慌有點過度,當時的美債價格及金銀升幅亦有點過分。如今美債價格與金銀價同告調整,應當說是合理的。
從美國10年期債券價格圖表看,自今年6月至今的上升軌正受到考驗,該升軌有失守可能。但金價目前距相應的個多月來上升軌尚有一定距離,所以說金市表現仍屬相對較強。但考慮到近年其與美債價格如此密切的同向且同步關係,估計金市續作若干調整的可能性,較實時回頭下行的可能性為大。
金市在今年上半年持續反復回升,至今畢竟有點疲態了。反映投資需求的SPDR持金量,已從本月初的回升高峰982.72噸,到上週末回降至962.82噸。敝欄曾說,全球金飾需求停滯不前,使金價大升欠缺了最基本的堅實支持。最近有數據顯示,印度金條進口量今年迄今約只有215噸,乃低於去年一半的水平,許多人預期今年全年進口總量會較去年為低。此外,中國金飾銷售年內已下滑20%至40%,金價不能單靠投機需求而無止境地上升。
至於金市的投機需求最近亦呈放緩,此首先表現在期金的未平倉合約量從高峰迴降,其次為大投機者的淨多倉量亦從歷來高峰減少,因此估計金價將繼續從1375美元的高峰調整,升越1360美元的機會恐不大,在1350美元已有回升阻力;目前支持在1318美元,而1306美元是良好支持。
投機者續在銀市再下大賭注,認為未來銀價升幅會大於金價,但銀市短期超買狀態未獲改善,若金市調整,銀價亦難再升。相信銀市在21.2美元已有大阻力,難以問鼎21.6美元,而短期回升阻力在20.75美元;目前支持在19.9美元,而19.3美元仍是良好支持。現時須留意美元匯價是否繼續回強,如是者日後將起到壓抑金價及銀價的傳統作用。

2016年7月15日星期五

Helicopter Money——The Biggest Fed Power Grab Yet

Jim Sinclair

My Dear Extended Family,      

This is not an easy read, but it is the most IMPORTANT read of your lifetime.

I have asked Editor Dan to post Stockman's article in total today on JSMineset because here is where we are now and where we are going in the future in a much larger way than anything before.

I have been looking for the reason for the Fed's Chair visit at the White House recently. What this will do is bury the fiat currency system in terms of buying power. It is already dead as a storehouse of wealth. The carrot on the string to own money, interest rates, are presently history. This is what the present administration and its economic clone democratic candidate are counting on. This is the substance that the meeting between the Federal Reserve and the White House was all about. This has just been made public down under by a Fed female personality where it is least apt to be publicly discussed. It is simple money printing hidden in complexity so you have to change your understanding of the expanded QE theory. If you will not first read this then make the effort, you are lost. Please make that effort.

Unless we get rid of the Fed we the 99% are all dead financially and literally.

There is no better reason to own the limited supply of gold that is above ground and therefor freely obtainable. It is the reason that this gold and silver market has many more years to move forward to the final price determined not in the paper gold make believe futures market, but the Real Free Gold cash physical market.

The bull market that never ended has many more years in front of it than you can imagine and a final and permanent price dictated by Russia and China. This is the world war of all world wars where there are no borders. This is why this is the last time to protect yourselves, the gold rally that you do not sell. This financial power grab of all historical power grabs that you must understand, no matter how many times you must read the article below, will be discussed for years to come by the Freedom Bloggers of the modern world, as Patrick Henry was to the foundation of the Constitution. This work is to save you from yourselves via knowledge. This time it is the knowledge of the plan accepted by Chair Yellen at the recent and rare White house meeting between the occupant of the Oval Office and the occupant of the Chair.

We will work to help you, but this you must understand if you are to avoid the execution of everything we hold from the formation of this nation as true, good and holy. This is the end of all that. It has come. It is not coming in the future. It is here today.

It has the power to be the end of elections and permanent power resting between the oval office
and chair, making the 1% the new aristocracy of the globe. You think Putin does not understand this? This proves one more time there are no atheists in the fox hole. War in a different form is now being practiced and all out application is close. GOTS while you can.

The end:

Standing watch, The western economic Texas Ranger and the man with the longest career in finance and metals anywhere - 56 years. The Sinclair/Holter combined effort to save the 99% from the 1%.

Helicopter Money--The Biggest Fed Power Grab Yet 
by David Stockman * July 13, 2016

The Cleveland Fed's Loretta Mester is a clueless apparatchik and Fed lifer, who joined the system in 1985 fresh out of Barnard and Princeton and has imbibed in its Keynesian groupthink and institutional arrogance ever since. So it's not surprising that she was out flogging--albeit downunder in Australia-- the next step in the Fed's rolling coup d' etat.

We're always assessing tools that we could use," Mester told the ABC's AM program. "In the US we've done quantitative easing and I think that's proven to be useful.

"So it's my view that [helicopter money] would be sort of the next step if we ever found ourselves in a situation where we wanted to be more accommodative.

This is beyond the pale because "helicopter money" isn't some kind of new wrinkle in monetary policy, at all. It's an old as the hills rationalization for monetization of the public debt--that is, purchase of government bonds with central bank credit conjured from thin air.

It's the ultimate in "something for nothing" economics. That's because most assuredly those government bonds originally funded the purchase of real labor hours, contract services or dams and aircraft carriers.

As a technical matter, helicopter money is exactly the same thing as QE. Nor does the journalistic confusion that it involves "direct" central bank funding of public debt make a wit of difference.

Suppose Washington issues treasury bonds to the 23 primary dealers on Wall Street in the regular manner. Further, assume that some or all of these dealers stick the bonds in inventory for 3 days, 3 months or even 3 years, and then sell them back to the Fed under QE (and most likely at a higher price).

So what!

The only thing different technically about "helicopter money" policy is the suggestion by Bernanke and others that the treasury bonds could be issued directly to the Fed. That would just circumvent the dwell time in dealer (or "investor") inventories but result in exactly the same end state. In that event, of course, Wall Street wouldn't get the skim.

But that's not the real reason why helicopter money policy is so loathsome. The unstated essence of it is that our monetary politburo would overtly conspire and coordinate with the White House and Capitol Hill to bury future generations in crushing public debts.

They would do this by agreeing to generate incremental fiscal deficits--as if Uncle Sam's current $19 trillion isn't enough debt--which would be matched dollar for dollar by an increase in the Fed's bond-buying or monetization rate. That amounts not only to teaching children how to play with matches; it's tantamount to setting fiscal forest fires across the land.

There are a few additional meaningless bells and whistles to the theory, which we will dispatch in a moment, but the essential crime against democracy and economic rationality should be made very explicit. To wit, this is a central bank power grab like no other because it insinuates our unelected central bankers into the very heart of the fiscal process.

Needless to say, the framers delegated the powers of the purse-spending, taxing and borrowing--to the elected branch of government, and not because they were wild-eyed idealists smitten by a naïve faith in the prudence of the demos.

To the contrary, they did so because the decision to spend, tax and borrow is the very essence of state power. There is no possibility of democracy--for better or worse--if these fundamental powers are removed from popular control.

Yet that's exactly what helicopter money policy would do. Based on some Keynesian gobbledygook about the purported gap between full-employment  or "potential GDP" and actual output and employment, the Fed would essentially set the Federal deficit target.

In practice, it would also likely throw-in some gratuitous advice about its composition between tax cuts, infrastructure spending and social betterment. The recommended mix would arise from an economic whim, of course, as to whether the FOMC in its wisdom thought household consumption or fixed asset investment needed to be goosed more.

Alas, the peoples' elected representatives would relish this "expert" cover for ever bigger deficits and the opportunity to wallow in the pork barrel allocation of the targeted tax cuts and spending increases. There is not a hard core New Dealer turning in his grave who could have imagined a better scheme for priming the pump.

And that's not the half of it. Helicopter money turns the inherently dangerous idea of fiscal borrowing in a democracy into an outright monetary fraud.

Even "New Deal" FDR worried about the rising public debt and "Fair Deal" Harry Truman positively loathed it.

Likewise, the power-mad Lyndon Johnson essentially vacated the oval office when he finally agreed to a substantial tax hike in early 1968 order to stem the deficit hemorrhage from his guns and butter policies.

Even the greatest deficit spender of all time--Ronald Reagan--thought the resulting explosion of the public debt was half Jimmy Carter's fault and half due to defense spending increases, which didn't count in his unique way of reckoning the national debt.

So what makes helicopter money so positively insidious is that it relieves elected politicians entirely from their vestigial fears of the public debt and from accountability for the burdens it imposes on future generations. And that's especially true owing to the Bernanke fillip.

Folks, the Bernank is no hero whatsoever--notwithstanding his self-conferred glorification for the courage to print. He is a demented paint-by-the-numbers Keynesian who has a worse grasp on the real world than the typical astrologer.

Indeed, the crucial element in his helicopter money scheme, as explained in a recent Washington Post op ed, is an explicit and loud announcement by the Fed that the incremental debt will be permanent. It will never, ever be repaid--not even in today's fictional by-and-by.

Providing a purportedly scientific monetary cover story so that elected politicians can issue non-repayable public debt is a truly reprehensible idea in its own right. But the reason for it is downright lunatic.

To wit, unless current taxpayers are assured that future taxes will not rise owing to Washington's helicopter money handouts and tax breaks, says the Bernank,  they won't spend the government gifts they find strewn along the path of flight!

That's right. When a road building boom from helicopter money appropriations results in surging demand at the sand and gravel pits, the small-time businessman involved won't buy any additional trucks or hire any additional drivers until Washington assures them that they won't pay higher taxes 20 years hence!

Only in the Eccles Building puzzle palace does such drivel not elicit uncontainable guffaws. Only in Sweden do they give Nobel Prizes for the academic obscurantism called "rational expectations theory" that is the basis for Bernanke's toxic assault on fiscal discipline and sound money.

At the end of the day, the operative words here are "groupthink" and "coup d' etat". These baleful conditions flow from the essential predicate of modern central banking.

We are referring here to the erroneous notion that economic wealth can be permanently elevated through more public and private borrowing and that central bank falsification of financial asset prices will facilitate the achievement of those ends.

In fact, as we have repeatedly demonstrated, the Fed's purported macro-management of the economy and business cycle is simply a variation of the old Keynesian parlor trick that is over and done.

That is to say, so long as households and businesses have unused runway on their balance sheets, they can be induced to leverage-up with cheap money, and thereby be enabled to spend more for consumption goods and capital goods than could otherwise be financed out of current incomes and cash flows, respectively.

But we are now at Peak Debt. There is no balance sheet runway left.

Accordingly, the impact of the massive flow of new central bank credit and the Fed's sustained falsification of financial asset prices after 2008 never left the canyons of Wall Street. It did not stimulate the main street economy one bit; it merely generated vast windfalls to the top 10% and 1% who own most of the financial assets, while fueling ever more unstable, extreme and dangerous financial bubbles.

In short, the real issue is that the Fed was foolishly given a so-called Humphrey-Hawkins mandate to deliver full-employment and stable inflation 40 years ago. But in today's global economy and financialized world, the FOMC's crude tools of interest rate pegging, bond-buying and wealth effects pumping are utterly unsuited for the task.

And well they should be. In the first place, no politburo of 12 people can define full-employment in a gig-based, labor-driven globalized economy. The Fed can do nothing about an auto job that migrates to Germany because American consumers like Mercedes cars better than Cadillacs.

Nor can it fully employ a worker who scams the social security disability system or a road warrior who prefers to work only six months per year and party the rest of the time. Likewise, fiddling with interest rates can't help a McDonald's fry cook who gets canned because the Seattle City Council foolishly raised the minimum wage to $15 per hour and invited robots to take over the job.

Pure and simply, there is no such measurable as "full employment".  Nor is there a chance in the world that the Eccles Building can cause the true creators of jobs--enterprise, capital and technology--to make more of them by fueling every larger financial bubbles.

As for the inflation side of its dual mandate, there is not a word in the 1977 Act that says a 2% annual gain in consumer prices is what Congress had in mind-even in the midst of its confusion about what central banking can actually do.  I remember well voting against it at the time, and not hearing a single speech in behalf of the magic 2%.

That's because the sacred 2% inflation target was only adopted by the Fed 34-years later in 2011 under Bernanke's relentless prodding. In fact, the very idea of "inflation targeting" is a stupid academic hobby horse invented by Bernanke in the 1990s- long after the Act was passed--and which bears no empirical relationship to the rate of GDP growth, jobs or anything else.

But it is a thinly disguised excuse for a power grab. That is, the Fed has been massively intruding upon financial markets and distorting and deforming prices in the capital and money markets for nearly two decades now on the pretext that there is a "shortfall" in the inflation rate.

Well, there hasn't been. Not even close.

Based on what we call the "flyover CPI", which weights the four horseman of inflation--energy, housing, medical and food--at 64% or by what most of America spends its paycheck on, inflation has been 3% or better for nearly two decades.



So the single most important thing that could be done by Congress to get the American economy functioning again would be to repeal the Humphrey-Hawkins Act and thereby eliminate the Fed's legal basis for its rolling coup d'état.

At the same time, it could launch a modern equivalent of the Pecora hearings of the 1930s. Only this time they would be focused on the Fed's role in generating massive Wall Street bubbles and their subsequent devastating collapses--including for what will soon be the third time this century.

Such a probe could readily bring to the surface what amounts to the raging elephant in the room of national economic policy. Namely, that the Fed's massive intervention in the financial markets and its feckless pursuit of ZIRP and QE is a battering ram of dangerous and worsening financial instability.

But the Eccles Building and its 12 branch offices are so mummified in Keynesian groupthink that they cannot even see the obvious. Thus, in touting its next grab for helicopter money power, the aforementioned Cleveland Fed President let loose of the following whopper:

Maintaining stability in financial markets should not be an explicit goal for the Federal Reserve, which should use interest rates to head off a crisis only if more precise and better-suited tools fail, a top Fed official said on Tuesday.......Cleveland Fed President Loretta Mester said in remarks prepared for delivery in Sydney, adding that the Fed's key price stability and maximum employment goals usually align with its desire for a stable financial sector.

Oh, c'mon. The purpose of the systematic financial repression by the Fed and the rest of the world's central banks is to flush savers and investors out of the money market and out the risk curve.

That's why there is $13 trillion of subzero sovereign debt and growing by the day. That's why there is a mad scramble for yield; and that's why the global financial system is riven with FEDs (financial explosive devices) waiting to be ignited.

Today, Fitch Ratings spotlighted one more example of the Fed's destructive regime of Bubble Finance at work.

The trailing 12-month junk-bond default rate hit a 6-year high in June at 4.9%, says Fitch Ratings, highlighting the ongoing pain from the oil patch.

Energy companies defaulted on $28.8 billion of debt the first half of this year, Fitch calculates, putting the sector's default rate at 15%. For exploration and production, the rate is 29%.

A 29% default rate in the E&P sector!

Does Ms. Mester really believe that in a honest free market several hundred billions of high yield debt could have been sold by the rank commodity speculators who ply the shale patch?

Not in a month of Sundays.

By contrast, modern central banking is a doomsday machine of financial booms and busts and ever intensifying financial instability. One of these days--perhaps when the current mother of all bubbles implodes--even the somnambulant Congressional Republicans may figure out the real enemy of American prosperity and productive capitalism.

That is, a rogue central bank that has seized plenary financial power already, and that is so mummified in groupthink that it will stop at nothing in the expansion of its remit. Even to the extent of sending clueless career apparatchiks like Loretta Mester to the ends of the earth to flog the unspeakable folly of "helicopter money".

Link to full article...

上半年自港進口飈1.4倍 大增384億 內地否認走資 稱從港大量購金

 - 20160714 - 經濟

【明報專訊】內地今年上半年自香港進口貨值按年增長1.4倍,按金額計大增384億元(人民幣‧下同)。雖然市場一直質疑內地由香港進口急速增長,是通過「虛假進口」實現資金出逃,但昨日海關總署首次回應稱,增長主要是內地將黃金進口的來源地由其他地區轉移到香港。本地業界人士亦稱,上半年香港黃金出口確實翻兩倍。不過,仍有分析師希望當局能提供更多細節以釋疑慮。


海關總署:港進口黃金增5.5倍

中國內地從香港進口的貨值由今年1月開始持續增長超過或接近一倍,年初已有不少大行猜測,當中涉及報大進口金額,即所謂「假進口」,以便把內地的資金匯到香港,達到走資的目的。海關總署新聞發言人黃頌平昨天回答記者提問時特別解釋,內地自香港進口在上半年突增主因是黃金進口增長,「從原來傳統的進口地,轉移到香港」。

今年上半年,內地進口黃金按年下跌15%至1730億元;其中自瑞士、南非和澳洲進口分別減少30%、23%和31%,自香港進口增長5.5倍,至458億元,佔進口黃金總量26.5%,去年同期僅佔2.8%。

他進一步表示,由於瑞士等主要黃金出口國在香港設立了黃金精煉廠,香港地區黃金庫存量增加,價格也相對廉宜,使得內地進口黃金的渠道發生了轉移。

張德熙:黃金冶煉廠遷港趨增

金銀業貿易場永遠名譽會長張德熙昨日接受本報查詢時亦稱,香港黃金的出口量,由去年上半年約200噸增加到今年的600噸左右。過去黃金市場淡靜時,很多黃金冶煉廠從香港撤離,如今又重新返回香港。由於中國和印度成為全球黃金的最大買家,為節省成本,瑞士、南非等傳統出口國都開始將冶煉廠東移,未來一兩年香港的精煉廠有增加趨勢,目前內地七成的金飾便是由深圳生產的。本報查閱資料,2014年本港有兩間黃金冶煉廠,分別是賀利氏(Heraeus)和美泰樂(Metalor Technologies)。

彭博經濟學家陳世淵則認為,內地首次澄清,代表政府開始重視與市場溝通,希望打消市場對於進口虛假增長的疑慮,不過,市場對於數字的細節和背後成因仍然有疑問。他認為黃金需求上升,本身就表明了不確定性增加。

興銀:不排除有真實需求

興業銀行首席經濟學家魯政委認為,不能排除進口黃金有真實的需求,但其中也有套利和轉移資金的需求,「在內地黃金進口需要許可證,有一些人就開一個首飾公司,將資金送出去」。他認為無論是哪種情况,都證明了資金在外流,體現了市場對於人民幣貶值的預期。

明報記者 顧冷冰

施永青 補充美國禁金的歷史

施永青 am730C觀點 2016年7月15日


有讀者來電指出,網上不是沒有美國禁止民間藏金的資訊,而是我的搜尋方式不得法;我用「美國禁金令」這個欄目去查,當然沒有結果,因為「禁金令」這個名詞並不通用,谷歌才沒有反應。他說,要知道詳細一些,可以查"Executi

ve Order 6102"(羅斯福總統所簽署的行政命令)。

經 過進一步搜查資料後,我發現昨文在有些地方需要修正與補充。之前,我把違令藏金的罰款弄錯了,其實只是1萬美元而已。不過,以今天的幣值計,這1萬美元已 相等今天的18萬美元,折合140萬港元。若然,連同被無償沒收的藏金一起去計,犯令者可以損失慘重。因此,把禁金令視作嚴刑峻法並不為過。

羅 斯福總統當年之所以要這樣做,一方面是因為美國人爭相向銀行擠兌黃金,必須加以制止;另一方面,為了避免通縮惡化,聯儲局有需要增加貨幣的供應量。然而, 按聯邦儲備法,聯儲局在發行貨幣時,必須有40%或以上的黃金儲備,而當時聯儲局發行的貨幣已接近這個上限,如果再任由人民以官價100%兌黃金,儲備很 快會不足,不但不可以增加貨幣供應,還要收縮貨幣供應,這不符合羅斯福要帶領美國走出大蕭條的政治綱領。在形勢緊逼之下,羅斯福總統不惜侵犯私有產權,簽 署行政命令,限制人民不得在1933年5月1日之後私藏黃金,否則政府可以全部沒收。亦即是說人民都得在這個日子前,以官價20.67美元一安士的價格把 黃金賣給政府。

為了令這個禁令迅速產生效果,美國出動了United States Secret Service的秘密特務去執行這條行政命令。

 三藩市珠寶商Gus Farber,因賣出了13個20美元的金幣,被特務人員查悉,竟累及他的父親與12個涉嫌參與交易的人士,分別在美國四個城市同時被捕,大陣仗過對付有組織的毒販。

紐 約有個社會地位不低的律師Frederick Barber Campbell,因為沒有在限期前把他存放在銀行的5,000安士黃金兌成美元,結果這筆黃金再也沒法提出來,因為給美國政府全部沒收。5,000安士 的黃金,現值港幣五千萬元,可不是一筆小數目,在毫無犯錯的情況下竟被充公,不知當事人有何感受?可見美國的「禁金令」不是開玩笑的,而是雷厲風行的。

今 天,美國已放棄金本位,聯儲局有權自行發鈔,無需理會手上有多少黃金儲備。因此,美國應該不用再像羅斯福年代那樣,要把黃金收歸國有。然而,世人若是對持 有黃金的偏好過高,多少會破壞美元在國際上的認受性;而為了維持美國的國力,美國極需要繼續向全球收取發鈔紅利。因此,貶低黃金的貨幣功能,仍會是美國的 當然國策;投資黃金的人一定要關注美國政府在這方面的舉措。

2016年7月14日星期四

施永青 無限發鈔 後果堪虞

在金本位年代,政府承諾所發出的鈔票可兌換一定數量的黃金。鈔票是可以提取一定數量黃金的票據。使用鈔票可以省卻帶著實金去做買賣的麻煩。鈔票的價值存在於它可提取得多少黃金。 

這種制度限制了政府可以任意發鈔,因為政府先要

有了黃金,才能按鈔票的含金比例來發鈔。如果政府不遵守規劃胡亂發鈔,持有鈔票者就會擔憂鈔票的兌金能力,要麼及早把鈔票兌成黃金,或用來購買有用的東西;要麼就把它兌成信用更好的其他國家的貨幣。 

聽長輩講過他們生活在國民黨政府胡亂發鈔的年代,鈔票上印的面額愈印愈大,但鈔票的購買力卻愈來愈低。結果,僱主發工資的時候要用麻包袋才裝得下,金額大到要數也要數幾個鐘頭。為了趁鈔票的購買力未全部貶值之前,盡快去買東西,大家數也數不了,用秤來秤一下大約的重量就算了。拿到工資後的第一件事,就是飛奔去街市買所需要的東西,買得慢,就會買不到那麼多,因為物價會不斷上升。 

在這種惡性通脹的年代,人們除了會把鈔票盡快買東西外,還會把餘錢第一時間兌換成購買力較穩定的外幣。所以在市場上流通的都是劣質的法幣(國民政府發行的法定貨幣),儲存起來的則是優質的外幣。經濟學上稱這種現象為「劣幣驅逐良幣」。其實,不懂經濟學的販夫走卒都懂得這樣做。 

阿根廷在惡性通脹時流傳一個笑話,就是坐的士平過巴士。因為坐巴士是上車時付鈔,坐的士是下車時付鈔。這段車程的時間裏,鈔票貶值的幅度已超過巴士與的士的票價差。如果把付費時的幣值兌成黃金或外幣計算,坐的士會比坐巴士便宜。 

據長輩說,他們不會把法幣存入銀行等貶值,而是兌成外幣或黃金儲存,到要買東西時,才兌成法幣。每次兌法幣前,都要一早計劃好,打算買些甚麼東西,出動家人一齊分頭去購買,以節省時間。有時,用小量黃金換到的法幣實在太多,一家人一時用不完,所以要與親友約好,一齊去盡快買東西,把手上的法幣用光。由此可見,人們是如何急切地參與這場劣幣驅逐良幣活動。 

現時,各國政府都在靠QE去救經濟,他們雖然沒有像中國國民政府年代那樣,由政府直接印鈔,但實際上,一樣在向市場提供大量的鈔票。金本位被放棄後,世上已沒有機制阻止政府這樣做。 

政府印鈔的程序比較複雜,老百姓弄不明白,被蒙在鼓裏也不知道。簡而言之,QE是靠央行(在美國是聯儲局)向市場買債,既可以買國債,又可以買企業債,還可買按揭證券。這樣,政府就可以繼續有錢去搞福利,搞軍備競賽;企業就有錢去擴張業務,而按揭證劵公司亦可以不斷有錢借給老百姓買樓。至於央行哪來這麼多的錢,因為債券是一種資產(如無意外,將來可以本息收回),央行手上有資產,就可以此為基礎去發鈔。某種程度來說,可謂是無中生有。 

然而,為何近年各國這樣大量地造錢,仍然未見通脹出現呢?這個問題明天再 

JohnMauldin:央行失信黔驢技窮

John Mauldin - 偶顏投資 2016年7月14日

- 偶顏投資 2016年7月14日


聯儲局主席耶倫(Janet Yellen)及歐央行行長德拉吉(Mario Draghi)等中央銀行首腦發言,背後往往有推銷自身政策的動機,大家不能照單全收。

國際結算銀行(BIS)也有自身關注事項,但不與任何一個經濟體或政府掛

鉤,其分析師關注的是世界總體表現,此所以該組織發出警告,大家不能掉以輕心。本文將審視BIS最新年報,看看該行的觀點如何與別不同。

年報第一章題為「當未來變成今天」(When the Future Becomes Today)具啟發性。關于未來有一點可以肯定:未來不斷來臨,大家要做的是坦然面對。

歐 洲實行負利率,對銀行及保險商而言實屬災難一場,退休基金及固定收入投資者承受的打擊更不用說。當前經濟思潮堅信經濟由消費推動,甚至認為人為地以政府負 債取代民間消費,就能刺激通脹升至理想水平。多得諾貝爾經濟學獎得主克魯明(Paul Krugman)大肆宣揚,這個原則街知巷聞,但最終只會造成反後果,累及所有人,這正是BIS年報最重要的訊息。

債台高築釀三合一風險
該報告並沒有說世界經濟很糟糕,經濟增長步伐的而且確令人失望,總算還可以;失業率仍然太高, 但逐步改善;在大多數地區,通脹更不成問題【圖】。

然 而,BIS最擔心的是,生產力增長低得異乎尋常、負債水平居高不下,加上政策調度空間無多,這三大風險三位一體(risky trinity),長遠上不知會產生什麼後果。這很重要,因為超低利率、零利率,甚至負利率本身都不是問題,只是「三合一風險」的症狀而已。症狀既可以亦 必須治理,但單單治理症狀卻不能藥到病除。

有一點毫無疑問,就是負債節節上升影響深遠。世界今天舉債成癮,就如同當年依賴石油出口國組 織(OPEC)原油成癮一樣。大家可能以為,金融危機後監管機構嚴厲打擊,杠杆活動理應放緩,事實並非如此。所有界別的負債總額相對于國內生產總值 (GDP)而言繼續穩步增長,只有家庭負債除外(發達經濟體家庭負債2010年至今輕微收縮)。

利率一大功能是發出訊號,假使訊號錯 誤,結果會如何?大家當然會因此作出錯誤決定。遠的不說,至少在最近6年,利率訊號實則大錯特錯。訊號扭曲衍生出大量不智決定,像流行病一樣擴散;更糟糕 的是,其中不少不智決定是由中央銀行作出,由于它們規模龐大兼且地位崇高,令問題廣泛蔓延。結果,商業市場出現當前金融化局面,企業寧願收購對手而不互相 競爭;寧願以便宜資金回購自身股份,也不願花錢投資新生產程序。收購對手及回購股份都無助推動就業及勞工生產力,這正是經濟放緩的原因。

BIS報告談及利率問題,暗示世界當前困局正是由利率而起:

倚 重市場訊號以判斷何謂均衡及可持續,也許太過輕率。中央銀行、政府及市場參與者在任何一段時間內的聯合行為,是否能調節市場利率至合理水平,亦即與可持續 良好經濟表現一致的水平,實在沒有保證。畢竟,鑒于過程中存在極大變量,大家又可以有多少信心,相信長遠上可達致理想結果?難道利率不會一如任何一種資產 價格一樣,有可能長期偏離正軌嗎?只有時間及事件能證明一切。

依筆者之見,利率毫無疑問已偏離正軌好一段時間。12人或27人圍桌而坐,決定世上最重要商品的價格(亦即金錢的息率),行得通嗎?事實擺在眼前,他們往往無法得出正確答案。

利率長期偏離正軌
我 們建立的經濟及政治體系既鼓勵又補貼債務, 結果債務供應過剩,何奇之有?問題是先使未來錢不過把消費提前,意味未來消費將會減少。BIS指出,「跨期取舍」(intertemporal trade-offs)終歸令大家的選擇更少;所謂「終歸」的真正意思其實是「當下」,正好呼應本年報主題:「未來很快就會成為今天」(The Future Will Soon Be Today)。

當下問題在于,貨幣政策所承擔的責任已偏離其設計原意。BIS報告指出,在危機中,央行采取強而有力的行動既必須也恰當,只是央行遲遲不肯鳴金收兵,卻未能達致理想目標。經濟長期依賴非常貨幣政策會帶來風險,令大家對政策制訂者失去信心。BIS以下這番話令人不安:

金融市場愈來愈依賴中央銀行支持,但政策調度空間卻買少見少。假如情況持續下去,以至動搖公眾對央行官員信心的地步,對金融市場及經濟的後果可能很嚴重。令人憂慮的是,今年2月市場動蕩,正是信心動搖的實質先兆。

換 句話說,假使銀行、投資者及公眾對聯儲局、 歐央行、英倫銀行及日本央行失去信心,將會如何?BIS所指的並非大家慣常對央行的抱怨,無論經濟好與壞,總有人對聯儲局的決定指指點點,雖然長年感到煩 厭,但大家骨子里仍對聯儲局懷有基本信任,相信局方會采取行動避免大災難發生。假如事實並非如此,聯儲局真的已經無計可施,結果會如何?

問問任何聯儲局相關人士,他們必會異口同聲指出,聯儲局仍有選擇及彈藥。問題是央行還有沒有「實彈」?筆者頗為憂慮,他們日後只會發射「空彈」,無法收到預期經濟後果。

對于上述問題,相信大家都不願知道答案,但BIS已作出相當露骨的暗示。從那句「令人憂慮」可見,BIS認為大家擔心央行行動能否持續發揮作用,不無道理。剖析過制訂政策的種種憂慮後,BIS作出幾項政策建議,分為審慎、財政及貨幣三大類。

BIS所指的「審慎」政策就是銀行監管及資本要求。金融海嘯以後,相關監管出現重大改變,《巴塞爾資本協議III》(Basel III)迫使銀行持有更多資本,以抵消業務風險。不少交易商指出,債券市場流動性正是因為相關規定而一落千丈。

BIS承認確有此問題,但提出的理據卻是筆者前所未見。該行指出,金融海嘯以前,流動性價格其實過低,流動性供應者提供了價值,卻沒得到合理回報;其後當大家真正需要流動性時,供應者卻不見影蹤,中央銀行及政府惟有介入,填補流動性缺口。

為避免曆史重演,BIS建議,大家應當樂意付出比現時更高的代價以取得流動性,好景時要給予市場莊家優厚回報,他日風雨飄搖,他們不會一走了之。

財政政策方面,BIS認為,應當重新思考評估主權風險的方法。鑒于政府──至少所有擁有自身貨幣的政府──有權「印鈔」,投資者就假設其信貸風險很低,甚至毫無風險。事實很明顯是兩回事,問問任何幾年前押注過阿根廷政府債券的投資者就知道。

假如審慎及財政政策安排到位,就毋須過度依賴中央銀行,這不代表央行應該不作為。BIS明確支持貨幣政策扮演重要角色,認為相關角色應有別今天。

BIS建議的重大改變之一是減少依賴通脹目標,2008年金融危機以來貨幣政策一直保持寬松,無非因為通脹持續低迷。事後回想,在通脹回複「正常」(不管那是什麼水平)前就收緊貨幣政策,讓利率逐步恢複「正常」(不管那是什麼水平),也許更可取。

聯儲局以失業率高得不能接受為由實施寬松政策,3、4年過後,失業率接近「正常」水平時,局方仍然拒絕加息,皆因他們擔心股市多于自己一手造成的失衡問題。長此下去,聯儲局可能會喪失公信力,對所有人都有害無益。

BIS指出,無論如何,現時極需要一些當未來成為今天時,不會令大家再次後悔的政策。