【24h】

Letters

机译:字母

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Your otherwise excellent special report on international banking (May 17th) perpetuated a myth that should surely by this time have been firmly put to rest. If a house price or an equity price falls there is a genuine loss in economic value, at least over the time period concerned. If a derivative contract is entered into between two parties based on the house or equity price (or anything else, such as the value of a credit instrument like a loan or mortgage) the change in value of the underlying asset will generally give rise to a profit for one party and an equal and opposite loss for the other (leaving aside second-order effects).rnOverall, economic value is neither created nor destroyed, it is just redistributed. To describe credit derivatives as an "amplifier" of the credit crisis is, therefore, simply wrong. Certainly credit derivatives change the distribution of gains and losses, but they do not amplify them. The sheer size of the credit-derivatives market and problems with settlements within it may give rise to genuine concerns, but this is not one of its faults.
机译:您在5月17日发表的关于国际银行业务的特别出色的报告延续了一个神话,这个神话应该在这个时候肯定已经被平息了。如果房价或股票价格下跌,至少在有关时期内,经济价值确实会遭受损失。如果两方基于房屋或股票价格(或其他任何条件,例如贷款或抵押之类的信用工具的价值)签订了衍生合同,则相关资产的价值变化通常会导致一方的利润,而另一方的利润则是相等且相反的损失(不考虑二阶效应)。总的来说,经济价值既不会被创造也不会被破坏,它只是被重新分配。因此,将信贷衍生工具描述为信贷危机的“放大”是完全错误的。当然,信用衍生产品会改变损益的分布,但不会放大损益的分布。信贷衍生品市场的庞大规模及其内部的结算问题可能引起真正的担忧,但这不是其缺点之一。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The economist》 |2008年第8584期|20-21|共2页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号