克里斯托夫•金 (Christopher Jing)
20世纪80年代末赴美留学，从事金融投资与危机管理、高科技风险基金和跨国企业战略。近期访问中国和日本，旅途中博文断续，敬请谅解。
熊、熊市和华尔街可轻而易举地串在一起。
熊，食肉目，属于熊科的杂食性大型哺乳类，主要分布于寒带和热带。
棕熊（Ursus arctos）是一种体魄庞大的熊，古称罴，常常给人憨厚和傻冒的假象，实际上，一旦发怒，棕熊铁掌的“断劈式突袭”胜过虎狼。
熊市(Bear market)，也称空头市场，指行情普遍看淡延续时间相对较长的贬值大市，市场跌幅通常在20%以上，时至半年、两年不等。
目前的市场肯定不是牛市，而是熊市的超常态表现。
熊市名称的来源，众说纷纭，一般认为来自19世纪初期美国西部拓荒时代，当时散居在美国和墨西哥边境的牛仔游俠生来粗犷彪悍、豪放、喜聚，闲暇时常常赛马、斗牛，有时擒来灰熊与野牛决斗，众牛仔围观下注，喝彩斗乐，好不欢喜。
后来，美国人逐渐习惯将熊和牛视为水火不容的对头动物，从而衍生出牛角向上顶式攻击代表多头市场，即牛市，将健步向前的牛作为涨升的象征，利多和股价往上走，不可阻挡；而熊掌向下劈挥式攻击为空头市场，则是熊市，代表利空和股价下跌，视倔强好纠缠的熊作为下降的象征，危机四伏。
史上记载的最令人震撼的熊市，莫过于美国1929年爆发的经济“大萧条”。
搏击熊市，“与熊共舞”，求生第一，审慎为重，智慧和胆略并重，只有制服熊的强者，才有希望脱离熊口，解救他人。
目前，在美国、中国、欧盟以及世界各国政府鼎力相挺全力救助的态势下，熊市显然处于“探底”的阶段，没有充分的证据显示美国经济已经戛然“触底”，也没有经得起敲打的数据断言实体经济危机滑入“萧条”的泥滩，“衰退”仍然是朝野上下学商各界一致的共识。
与“衰退”对接，超常态的“熊市”横空出世，压倒一切，是这一忐忑时期的真实景象和敏感话题。
华尔街，如何度过熊市的漫漫长夜?
华尔街的金融机构，如何通过剥离有毒资产机构重建卷土重来恢复投资人的信心?
华尔街是冒险家的乐园，也是黑暗的地狱，曾经把一个个穷困潦倒的追梦人变身为成叱咤风云的金融大亨，也曾经让无数商贾名流达官显贵功败垂成破产身亡。
伴随着华尔街的旋律，各种力量心怀个胎、相互博弈，在“看不见硝烟的熊市战场”，阴谋阳谋地“与熊共舞”，艰难角逐、强者胜出。
成也萧何，败也萧何，华尔街，引爆了2008年百年不遇千夫所指的金融危机，千夫所指。
同样，在过去6至7周美国股市接近25%的强劲攀升中，华尔街依旧重操旧盘，透过3月间花旗银行(NYSE: C)和美国银行(NYSE: BAC)的盈利预期，再次引发了全球经济瞬间转向气势如虹的熊市反弹。
熊市反弹中热络的纽约证劵交易所大厅，4/10/09
无论牛市或熊市，对“始作佣者”、“推手”和“弄潮儿”的华尔街抄盘高手们，可谓良莠不分，黑白难辨，恨爱交加。
美国领军的全球经济正在从低谷走出，或许已经渡过了最严重的危机阶段，但危机并没有因此结束，远非股市短期反弹所彰显的那样急促、冲动和乐观。
华尔街短期的“探底”警醒投资人 —— 它只不过是一个再自然不过的熊市中的强劲反弹!
如果这只是市场历经“熊式大劈杀”之后的一次自然的经典式反弹，那么，无论从哪个角度，市场在未来无法确定的多重时段，必将出现若干次巨浪般大起大落的技术性调整，直到经济复苏的曙光穿云破雾，雨过天晴，迎来一次真正的刻骨铭心痛快淋漓的大和弦、大合唱。
否则，股市谈不上安然“触底”。
市场有足够的理由相信，这是一次“结构性经济危机”而不是“周期性经济危机”，是一次“衰退”而不是“萧条”，因此，必须针锋相对，有的放矢，对症下药。
按传统思维，目前发生的经济危机定义为短期的“衰退”(Recession)，而不是长期的“萧条”(Depression)。
1929年“大萧条”记忆犹新，危机中美国国民生产总值(GNP)整体下跌30%，消费者价格指数(CPI)递减25%，失业率从3%飙升至 25%，1931年至1940年10年间的失业率平均为18.8%。
当前的情形，今非昔比，还不至于沦落到上世纪初叶的水平。
尚若危机继续发酵、升温，特别是当失业率飙升至10%，甚至更高，并持续数年，衰退就极有可能演变成萧条。
堵截萧条必须从结构上着手，比如，结构性经济危机需要通过结构性调整，甚至颠覆或推倒现有市场体制来加以改造和重建。
在各国政要的强力干预下，全球经济虽然疮痍满目，困难重重，但远未失控，仍然有救，政府的全力救助不断显示正面效果。
今天，受经济衰退的影响，华尔街分析师们早已大幅度下调了企业未来收益的期望值。
这一“灌水”后的期望值或者盈利预测，基本上是一个闭门造车偏离事实的“误导”，并不能客观准确地反映企业在动态环境中的真实内幕和生存挑战。
人们更关注的是整体行业和“领头羊”在2009年和2010年甚至以后两三年的盈利状况、宏观层次的领先经济数据、失业率、通货膨胀、消费者信心指数，以及金融机构去杠杆化后资产亏损等重要指标。
股市是经济的“晴雨表”，一遇风吹便草动，一旦出错便转向，冷面无情，金融机构和对冲基金亏的是大众的钱，没有担当，无所谓。
苦的倒是以勤奋型中产阶级为主体的投资大众，自生以来就贴上“劳碌命”标签，他们始终抓不住进出市场的最佳时机，鲜少买底卖高，即使股市大反弹也不一定赚钱，常常来不及转手出仓获利套现，反被“断劈式” 熊掌击得头晕眼花，在犹豫彷徨中坐失良机，再陷熊市陷阱。
“钱”难赚，是自然规律，牛市难，熊市更难!
如果有人告诉你，他是“神算子”，屡战屡胜，是股市上的“再生巴菲特”，你就戏之为“骗子”，一笑置之。
股市的反应是超前的，股市的起伏是持续的，而实体经济的“水落石出”是滞后的和渐进的，股市和实体经济非同步，一前一后，永远隔着“时间差”。
通俗地讲，当钱花完了，购买力没有了，企业无法盈利了，最后到房主不得不靠变卖房子和家产来维持生活所需，真正的实体性危机便显山露水，暴露无遗。
历史上，几乎所有的危机都惨痛地经历过这样的过程，当年的美国和日本如此，中国也不会例外。
各种经济回暖和复苏的流言，实际上都在传递一个接一个令人心烦意乱推波助澜的信息，缺乏一致的证据和时间的考证，不堪一击。
几个月的正面消息说明不了什么，最多佐证一个不确定的趋势。
信息，猜对了，股市，一瞬间顺理成章了，也只是一时的征兆!
下一个时段，明天、后天、未来，又该怎么办?
现代信息社会，是一个“布朗”现象的集合，杂乱无章，时空交错，动态动感，好的也好，坏的也好，令人心颤胆寒。
世人，没有选择，只有适应。
---马克思在《资本论》中写道：“资本主义周期性的危机不可避免，资本主义经济危机的实质，是生产的相对过剩，即生产的商品相对于劳动人民的有效需求来说是过剩的。”
美国30年代的经济危机，主因确是生产过剩。在那以后，资本主义国家已经基本找到了解决的办法，即:建立广泛的社会保障制度，使绝大多数失业人士不会陷入绝对贫困状态；发展服务业，吸收大量富裕劳动力；完善税收制度，采取累进税率政策，消除贫富差距，避免财富过份集中在少数人手里和由此产生的消费不足；对部份商品实行限量生产，限价收购和补贴，如农产品生产；制定最低工资制。因此在今天资本主义不会发生严重的生产过剩，也不会由于生产过剩导致严重危机。
---次贷危机实质上是相对于美国人消费能力的商品房屋大量过剩，大量穷人买不起房，却又在政府推动和银行低利率零首付的诱惑下去买房，再加上华尔街金融机构火上加油，推波助澜，通过“金融衍生品杠杆无限放大”来刺激消费和过度消费，引爆房地产市场崩盘，结果泡沫破裂，演变成金融危机，最终导致全球性实体经济危机。
从表明上看，次贷危机是因为房屋过剩，大量穷人买不起房，却又在政府推动和银行低利率零首付的诱惑下去买房，，，，，
实际上是因为政府不合理的购房优惠政策，鼓励了市场的投机炒作，把房价无限推高，最后由于经济波动，造成原本买不起房的消费者和部份投机者无法承担这样的高价，引起房屋断供连锁反应。
所谓的房屋过剩，是因为房价太高，想买者却买不起而造成的相对过剩，而不是真正意义上的过剩。这和30年代的粮食生产能力那样的过剩不一样。
Keep in mind, I am giving a clue as to how the US and China should consider different scenarios in face of challenges and opportunities, and not in anyway to either endorse or oppose. You want to provide an in-depth meaningful thinking to those in power to make decisions, rather than to order and coach them as to how.
资本主义制度 —> 生产过剩,贸易失衡，市场投机+政策失误 —> 过度消费(低息贷款) —> 违约掉期 —> 金融危机 —> 实体经济危机。
资本主义制度 —> 有效需求不足 —> 生产过剩 —> 供需失衡 —> 过度消费(零息贷款) —> 违约掉期 —> 金融危机 —> 实体经济危机。
我感觉不准确，也太粗略。生产过剩在此次危机中存在，但不是主因。而且此次危机本是可以避免的，老马的资本主义危机的模式不适用于当代资本主义。
谢谢网站连接。一定去看看。
Again, given the changing daily situation on short-run, it's hard to convince anyone for the direction that the economy goes and the market follows. I am very interested in how we facilitate the structural change for long-run.
谢谢空谷的回音。请看刚刚贴到网上的随想,与你的问题有关。
http://blog.ifeng.com/index.php?action=home&uid=2050792
由于美国的大多数消费产品产自中国，所以尽管美国大量的印刷钞票，只要人民币和美元汇率保持不变，物价基本可以保持不变。这可能也是为什么最近美国政府压人民币升值的声音减弱的原因。否则美国就要面对不断攀升的失业率和物价上涨的双重打击。美国政府真该好好谢谢中国。
对奥巴马的经济策略不看好，主要是因为现在的经济措施基本上是头疼医头，脚痛医脚短期措施。在消除产生危机的因素方面没有措施。如在房市方面，如何打击投机炒作，消除造成房市危机因素。
楼主过奖了. 小的不是学经济出身,只是要赚个菜钱而已.
楼主忧国忧民的精神值得学习.鲁宾尼（Roubini)之流沽名钓誉的,跟您不在一个层次. Look forward to your new book.
There is no such things as 1+1=2 in financial or stock market. You could engage in endless disputes with others in terms of where the money derives from and how it should be used for. While for stock traders, sense, disciplines and cut-loss is even more crucial than IQ. Actually, I am catering to turn academic and technical theories into common language or defined as 华尔街文学 by myself. So, you might see the difference of my writing from others.
If we get a chance to meet, it should be much effective to getting messages across face-to-face.
I am impressed by your in-depth knowledge of economics and financial market. Very solid indeed. Though a consulting prof at Stanford and venture partner at SV, I am prone to focusing on actions. My upcoming book is probably against a lot of people's conventional wisdom, by giving a bottom-fish Wall Street strategy through which China is able to streamline with the real world predominated by top financial giants, such as GS and MS. You might be interested.
Three sources for where the money is created by government, taxing, borrowing by selling bond or notes and bills at home and abroad, and money printing. Yes, they could be understood as one money, namely all from your "deep pocket".
Worth to note, By using borrowing and money to rescue the crisis, Chairman Bernanke 的解释是，“通货膨胀稀释了政府的债务，因此制造通货膨胀符合政府的利益。”
That is how the government decision-makers view toward the huge money injection.
Both. 1. China and other countries keep buying Treasurys to fund the stimulus package (what do you think what happened at the G20 summit?). 2. Loose monetary policy to flood the market /w liquidity. As the case now with Fed's quantitative easing. The ultimate goal is to stimulate demand and get banks to start lending. That's why the extent of government intervention is unprecedented. Things are looking up as economic activities are picking up (lending, production, consumer spending and etc.). Most banks got money, they are just hoarding cash. Goldman Sachs, Citi, BoA all want to return the bailout money, but the government would not allow. Anyway, from all the early signs, the economy will start recovery within this year.
You are pretty much right when it comes to following where the smart money goes. I believe that the economic crisis this time is not cyclical but structural, so that conventional wisdom won't work in that the recession is soon over as of strong government rescue plan by injecting huge liquidity to the market and artificially drive the consuming on demand side.
My attention is paid more to how we as a whole are able to create the new purchasing power, which is not through government bond selling, taxing or money printing. If fails to do so, there is not a sign to see the recovery coming back, since the government is limited and soon to be dry out. I found no cross points between supply and new demand. I will give a hint as to how I put that way in my next blog.
Bouncing back strong from a deep down, say from 6500, the questions is how we can sustain at this level that requires for new demand of consumption. I did not see that to happen at least at this point.
有道理，MV=PQ是一种理论，实际情况上不一定符合公式。
按我的理解，政府刺激经济和解救房市，银行和公司的钱的来源只有两种1>借债筹措。2>印钞票。你认为是那种可能，还是另有其它途径呢?
Keep in mind that we're in the new inventory cycle as the old property cycle went busted. I don't think the economy will have high growth this time around. Besides, unemployment rate will remain high for a while as no company will do a lot of expanding. So raising interest rate should be a no-brainer to curtail inflation without hurting growth in the near future.
Like Warren Buffet said, "Investment is simple, but not easy." We just have to follow where the smart money goes. Right now, the smart money is in the market, so is mine. If the smart money leaves the market, so does mine.
One correction to your definitions: GDP should be P*Q.
MV=PQ is a theory. I don't think at any point of time they are equal. That's why Bernanke's job is so tough, but he's been doing a fantastic job.
V=PQ/M. M was increasing but is stable right now. GDP=PQ. based on the latest GDP data, it dropped 6.1% last quarter. When you read into the numbers, excluding inventories, GDP dropped by 3.4% with consumer spending rose by over 2%. As inventories got depleted and consumers are willing to spend (consumer confidence index is rising), economic activities are picking up and GDP most likely already bottomed.
As for Q, because PMI and durable goods order are going up, Q is going up too. GDP is a lagging indicator, so as we see the horrendous number, it just shows that the past was terrible. Leading indicators will tell you the worst is over.
For P, lastest CPI is -0.1%; less food and energy, it's 0.2%. So there's no inflation.
When MV increase, we'd like to see Q goes up to keep P low.
开个玩笑，格老手里有着全面的经济数据和一大堆的数学公式，可能他早就知道这次经济危机要来到，只是因为某种原因不能说而已。
从古希腊先哲们推测地球是圆的，到麦哲伦完成环球航海，彻底证明，人类花了2000年。可如果你是一名宇航员，在太空中望向地球，只要一秒钟，你就能够证明这一点。这不是因为宇航员比希腊先哲更聪明，而是因为视野不同。
在经济学界也是一样，现在我们有太多的精通充满复杂数学公式的经济学理论专家，但是缺少一位能够高瞻远瞩的人。能够用复杂数学公式建立经济模型的人，牛!但能深入浅出地解释经济规律的人更牛。楼主好好努力吧。
你的恶补复杂的经济学令人敬佩.
My next view 卡尔8226;马克思的复活 —— 科学共产主义的闪现 could partially respond to your big question as to 资本主义国家奉行的市场经济理论是否应该修改了?
资本主义国家奉行的市场经济理论是否应该修改了?计划经济是否一无是处?
恶补了一下货币理论。为了方便其它网友理解方便，简述如下，如有不对，请更正。
MV=PQ
M:货币供应量
V:货币流通速率(次/年)
P:物价指数(按年计算)
Q:实际GDP,即扣除通涨后的GDP
请教一下，你为什么认为V和Q有增长迹象?一般不是认为V在长时间内通常保持稳定吗?而Q在经济危机中是在下降吗?P值感觉在上升。因为现在什么东西都贵了，处了少数商品。如果PQ值变大，M不也要变大吗?
In changing market, I am trying neither to be too rush giving definitive answers nor to stay in one place without a move. Today's good could be tomorrow's bad. Any bad reports, stern economic data underway to disclose... will encourage either way for investors to take profit or sell quick.
Inflation is my concern since the big printed money by the government has been injected to the market to create liquidity. Yes, high interest rate in future could help curtail the inflation,but it is also bad for the economic recovery if that to happen.
The challenge for economics and financial market lies in the fact that no one has crystal ball given what is happening and challenging every minutes, hours and days. A good example that you can see, Nobel laureates split for political parties, evenly 50% for republicans and 50% for democrats.
Traditionally defined bear market is within 20% down during 6-24 months, while at extreme and particular in short-run, it could go much deep or much quick. For instance, within 3 months since last September through Feb this year, Dow dropped over 40%, before bounced back to what is today.
You can see the market is still in such defined range except there was a strong rebound from deep 6500. It is surely a bear market protracting and prolonging.
I am not terribly bearish about the market, but trying to search for big "why". You, as a sophisticated investor, you would be much comfortable seeing the volatility when you take account the downside risk.
I am not certain about the effect of the intensive government rescue plan since it is limited, short-sighted and artificial. Further, it is against the very foundation of capitalist market system and law.
Will post new articles these couple of days to touch upon how far the crisis can go and what could be reshaped next.
印钞票不一定引起恶性通货膨胀，只要Fed到经济起来时sell Treasurys来收回过多的money. 就如同现在Fed buy back Treasurys来制造liquidity.
MV=PQ.现在V跟Q都有增长迹象，不必担心通货膨胀。
美元独大的局面是不会改变的,所以经济起来，Fed肯定raise interest rate. 恶性通货膨胀更不会发生。
"在过去60年裡，标准普尔500指数通常在经济衰退週期结束前4个月触底，在失业率达到高峰前9个月开始反弹."
印钞票?何出此言?
----------------------
解决危机，就是要消除造成危机的因素。如何消除呢?俺不是学经济的，暂且胡言乱语如下:
产业外移目前没办法解决，只能等中国发展后，人民币对美元升值为1:7，而不是现在的7:1。那时中国人力成本比美国还高，产业自然回流。
巨额外债，可以靠多印钞票来逐步偿还。
楼市股市不能救，应该任其价位下跌，由此引起的银行坏帐，也要靠多印钞票弥补。
人力过剩，要靠加大公共建设解决，最终也要靠印钞票筹措资金。
所以说印钞票是解决这次危机的唯一办法，中国的外汇储备算是玩完了。
印钞票?何出此言?
是啊，如何解决这次经济危机呢?看样子只能是大量印钞票，将危机转移到中国，印度，阿拉伯石油大亨这类国家的身上。
怀疑奥巴马的拯救房市计划是否能成功?甚至高度质疑他的救市措施是否正确?楼主是财经专家，你对此有何评价?
Thanks for feedback. You view is insightful.
现在美国的经济危机具有了30年代危机的一切要素，是30年代危机的翻版。楼主断言:"当前的情形，今非昔比，还不至于沦落到上世纪初叶的水平."未免过于乐观。