????對(duì)于一個(gè)緊密關(guān)注最近全球金融市場(chǎng)動(dòng)蕩的權(quán)威人士來(lái)說(shuō)，這樣的結(jié)論可謂令人恐慌,。但另一方面,，雖然美股市值已跌去10%，但即便在牛市,，市場(chǎng)出現(xiàn)回調(diào)也很正常,。在上周之前，美股已有將近1000天未出現(xiàn)回調(diào),，而根據(jù)德意志銀行的統(tǒng)計(jì),，每輪股市回調(diào)的平均周期是357天。

????股市的修正調(diào)整時(shí)有發(fā)生,，而薩默斯等人甚至在此次處境惡化之前就提出美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)不應(yīng)加息,。然而如果依美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)所說(shuō)，即以經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)為依據(jù)來(lái)采取行動(dòng),，那么我們就不該認(rèn)為美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)會(huì)因?yàn)榇舜喂墒斜┑鴨?dòng)新的購(gòu)債項(xiàng)目,，甚至實(shí)施負(fù)利率,。

????Renaissance Macro經(jīng)濟(jì)研究主管尼爾·多塔在周一早間在一份客戶(hù)聲明中指出，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)密切關(guān)注的經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù),，如失業(yè)率,、銀行借貸、經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)等都顯示美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)至少在持續(xù)前行,，并且失業(yè)率還有比較明顯的改善,，“因此，美國(guó)近幾周的經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)并不足以導(dǎo)致金融市場(chǎng)重新定價(jià),?！?/p>

????此外，他還指出,，對(duì)太平洋沿岸地區(qū)的出口僅占美國(guó)GDP總額的2%,，即便該區(qū)域貿(mào)易額下跌10%，對(duì)于全年GDP的影響也只有0.2%,。雖然這一情況美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)應(yīng)持續(xù)監(jiān)控,，但中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的急劇下滑并不會(huì)改變美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)的決策。

????即便如此,，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)如果決定等到12月甚至明年再加息也不是沒(méi)有理由,。有關(guān)經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)一直存在合理爭(zhēng)論。薩默斯就指出：“消費(fèi)者價(jià)格指數(shù)成份股中超過(guò)一半的股價(jià)在過(guò)去六個(gè)月有所下跌,，而該情況是‘10多年來(lái)首次出現(xiàn)’”,。

????這是事實(shí)，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)一直在設(shè)法解決一段時(shí)間內(nèi)通脹水平不高的問(wèn)題,。由于失業(yè)率在明顯下降,，緊縮的勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)并沒(méi)有為美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)帶來(lái)它所期望的小幅通脹上升。更準(zhǔn)確地說(shuō),，在通脹問(wèn)題上,，美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)是拿“預(yù)期”做依據(jù),，因?yàn)樗仨氃谕浀絹?lái)前盡量做好預(yù)測(cè),，等到發(fā)現(xiàn)通脹不足就晚了。

????換句話(huà)說(shuō),，如果只看那些讓人捉摸不清,，甚至有時(shí)候相互矛盾的經(jīng)濟(jì)數(shù)據(jù)，要決定是否在9月份加息實(shí)屬不易,。就算近幾周股市動(dòng)蕩沒(méi)有加劇,，要做出這樣的決策也一樣困難。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：Donna

????This sort of commentary is pretty scary coming from a guy who watched the most recent global financial panic from the front row. But it’s also true that stock market corrections, in which the market loses more than 10% of its value, are very common, even in bull markets. Before last week, it had been nearly 1,000 days since the last correction, when the average span between such events is 357 days, according to Deutsche Bank.

????Stock market corrections happen all the time, and folks like Summers didn’t think the Federal Reserve should raise rates this year even before markets hit this rough patch. But if we take the Federal Reserve at its word—that its actions will be dependent on economic data—there’s no reason to believe that the Fed will take the latest market rout as a reason to step in and launch another bond buying program or even implement a program of negative interest rates.

????As Neil Dutta, head of economic research for Renaissance Macro, pointed out in a note to clients Monday morning, the economic data that the Fed pays close attention to—like the unemployment rate, bank lending, and economic growth—suggest that the U.S. economy continues to, at the very least, tread, water or, in the case of employment growth, make clear progress. “Thus, the performance of the US data in recent weeks is not a sufficient reason for the re-pricing in financial markets,” he writes.

????Furthermore, he points out that since exports to the Pacific Rim account for just 2% of U.S. GDP, even a 10% decline in trade to that region would only shave 0.2% off GDP growth for an entire year. This is certainly a situation worth monitoring for the Fed, but a sharp slowdown in China is not a game changer for the Federal Reserve.

????That said, there has always been the chance that the Fed would decide to wait until December or even next year to begin raising rates. There’s a legitimate argument over just what the economic data says. Summers points out that, “more than half the components of the consumer price index have declined in the past six months, and that this is “the first time this has happened in more than a decade.”

????This is true, but the Fed has publicly been wrestling with the question of why inflation hasn’t been higher for some time. While unemployment is clearly trending downward, there hasn’t been the sort of uptick in inflation that Fed leaders expect to result from a tighter labor market. When it comes to inflation, it’s actually more accurate to say that the Fed is “forecast dependent” because it must try to predict when inflation is on its way; it can’t be satisfied with a lack of inflation in its rearview mirror.

????In other words, the decision to raise rates in September will be a difficult one based on fuzzy and sometimes conflicting data. But that would have been the case even if stock market volatility hadn’t increased so much in recent weeks.