英国政府承诺投入最多500亿英镑，通过直接投资（包括优先股）改善陷入困境的银行的资产负债表。该救助方案还包括：通过扩大“特别流动性计划”提供2000亿英镑的紧急资金，该计划使银行能够借入资金以满足“短期”流动性需求；以及由政府担保的2500亿英镑债务发行。

The UK government committed to pay up to £50 billion to improve the balance sheets of stricken banks, by way of direct investment including preference shares. The bailout package also included £200 billion to provide emergency funding via extension of the Special Liquidity Scheme which enables banks to borrow for “short term” liquidity needs and £250 billion for debt issuance backed by the government.

英国政府向苏格兰皇家银行和哈利法克斯苏格兰银行紧急注入资本，这不能被视为一项资本投资，因为英国政府手中并没有可供投资的资本。因此，这笔资金将被计入其借款之中。再加上对北岩银行以及布拉德福德和宾利银行的国有化，政府已经打破了其"黄金法则"，即只在整个经济周期内为投资而借款，而不为满足日常开支需要而借款。

The emergency injection of capital into the Royal Bank of Scotland and Halifax Bank of Scotland, could not be seen as an investment of capital because the UK government did not have the capital available to invest. Consequently the money will be added to their borrowings. When coupled with the nationalisation of Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley the government has broken its golden rule of only borrowing to invest over the economic cycle and not for funding day to day spending needs.

相比之下,美国于10月2日承诺投入7000亿美元,购买受重创金融机构的"有毒"资产,以提供流动性,直至资产价格回升。该计划后来作了修订,纳入了美国政府对部分机构进行资本重组并持有其股份的内容。

In comparison the US on the 2nd of October committed to $700 billion to buy “toxic” assets of stricken financial organisations to provide liquidity until asset prices recover, a plan which was amended later to include the US government taking positions in the recapitalisation of some institutions.

“toxic”这个带有情绪色彩的词会让人联想到切尔诺贝利式的灾难，这种类比或许恰当，但与“toxic”相关的意象远不止于此。对于某种有毒的东西，很难给出一个正面的价值或价格，除非是要用它去伤害别人。救市方案的表面理由是：尽管向华尔街这座赌场注入纳税人的钱未必公平，但这是一种必要的恶，它将释放那些“问题资产”，在金融市场中创造流动性，从而引发急需的新一轮放贷、借贷和下一轮增长。这种做法存在几个问题。

The use of the emotive word “toxic” conjures up images of some form of Chernobyl disaster, and whilst that may be an appropriate analogy, that’s not the only imagery associated with toxic. It would be difficult to find a positive value or price for something toxic, unless one was using it to injure someone. The apparent rationale for the bailout plan is that while the injection of tax payers' money into the Wall Street casino may not be fair, it is a necessary evil that will free up the “troubled assets” and create liquidity in the financial markets, thereby triggering a much-needed new wave of lending, borrowing and the next round of growth. There are several problems with this approach.

"有毒资产"这一说法本身就自相矛盾，无法找到买家并不是流动性问题，而是价格问题。市场上确实存在这类资产的交易，问题在于市场给出的价格对于那些想要生存下去的银行和投资基金来说难以接受。如果市场把它们定价为垃圾，政府又凭什么把它们定得更高？这恰恰暴露了真正的问题：信心危机。问题在于缺乏信任，而这源于相对于实体资产而言，垃圾资产或被严重高估的资产过多。流动性危机并不是说没有可用的流动性，而是拥有资金的人在严重衰退和资产价格虚高的情况下不愿花钱。持有流动性的人不愿把钱借给持有垃圾资产的人，尤其是当对方可能倒闭的时候。

1. The inability to find buyers for the “toxic assets” (such a contradiction in terms) is not a liquidity problem but a price problem. There is a market for them, but the problem is that the price in the market is unpalatable to banks and investment funds that want to survive. If the market prices them as junk, who is the government to price them otherwise? This betrays the real problem of confidence. The problem is one of a lack of faith and trust, and this is because of too much junk/overblown assets relative to real assets. The liquidity crisis is not that there is no liquidity available, simply that those with it will not spend in a serious downturn and with overblown asset prices. Owners of liquidity are not willing to lend it to owners of junk, particularly if they may fail.

2. 尽管7000亿美元是一个非常庞大的数字，但它远远不够。它只是已累积的坏账和未来可能产生的坏账中的一小部分。《华盛顿邮报》于9月29日报道称，美国20家最大的金融机构持有4.7万亿美元的抵押贷款及抵押支持证券（此外还有未记录的担保债务凭证）。信用违约互换（CDS）的损失现在也开始显现，而这一领域同样缺乏监管、未经报告，且规模巨大。美国、英国和欧洲各国政府提供的各类救助、贷款和担保最终能否收回，现在已经大有疑问。截至2008年12月4日，这些金额已超过10万亿美元。

2. Although $700 billion is a really large number, it is no way large enough. It is only a fraction of the accumulated bad debts and likely debts moving forward. The Washington Post reported on the 29th of September that 20 of the US’s largest financial institutions owned $4.7 trillion in mortgages and mortgage backed securities (with non recorded CDOs on top of that). CDS losses are also now beginning to hurt and this too is unregulated, unreported, and huge. It is now very questionable as to whether the assorted bailout, loans, and guarantees from the US/UK/European governments will ever be paid. Amounts which as of December 4, 2008 were in excess of $10 trillion.

3. 次贷危机和次级抵押贷款的根本问题并未得到解决。因此，美国将有数百万人失去住房，并进一步陷入贫困。与此同时，政府正在救助大型金融机构，而这些机构此前大力推销抵押贷款，导致数百万人将失去一切（他们的住房、财富和工作）。这些救助方案中没有为房地产泡沫的受害者提供任何安排，媒体也迅速将责任归咎于他们，说他们“过度借贷”或贷款了自己负担不起的抵押贷款。然而，那些激进的销售政策却没有受到惩罚。为什么不救助这些受害者，让他们能够保住住所？如果政府这样做，至少它们将获得真实的资产（房屋）。

3. The main underlying problem of the housing bubble and sub prime lending is not addressed. Consequently millions in the US will lose their homes and be driven even further into poverty. At the same time that the government is bailing out major financial institutions, following aggressive mortgage selling by those same institutions there are millions who will lose everything (their homes, wealth, and jobs). There is no provision in these bailouts for the victims of the housing bubble and the media is quick to point blame at them for “over-extending” or taking out mortgages they couldn’t afford. Yet the aggressive sales policies are not punished. Why are the victims not being bailed out to enable them to keep a roof over their heads? If the governments did this then they would at least be taking on real assets (houses).

4. 经济刺激计划只是一个令人不便的“附加项”。汽车行业以整体经济萎靡和自身行业衰退为由，请求获得250亿美元的救助。金融救助则会把真金白银（来自纳税人，或通过货币供应膨胀——即印发更多美元）输送出去，用来弥补投机者的有毒亏损。这笔钱将如同落入黑洞，填补（银行的）损失，却无助于房主或普通公众。

4. The economic stimulus packages are only an inconvenient “add-on”. The auto industry pleaded for a $25 billion bail out due to the overall economic malaise and decline in their own industry. The financial bailout will send good money (from the taxpayers, or via inflated money supply – printing of more dollars) to cover the toxic losses of the speculators. That money will fall into a black hole to cover their (bank’s) losses and will not help homeowners or the general public.

对美国政府挥霍无度的救市政策的担忧正在加剧。《纽约时报》于11月27日报道称，美联储与财政部于11月25日（周二）宣布新增8000亿美元的贷款计划，这等于向外界释放信号：为了重振陷入困境的国家银行体系，他们将印发所需数量的钞票。

Concerns about the profligacy of the US government’s spendthrift bailout policies have accelerated. The NY Times reported on the 27th of November that with the Federal Reserve and the Treasury announcing a new $800 billion in lending programs on Tuesday the 25th, that they were sending a message that they would print as much money as needed to revive the nation’s crippled banking system.

“在过去一年里，政府承担了约7.8万亿美元的直接和间接财务义务。这相当于全国整个经济规模的约一半，远远超过国会为财政部金融救助计划批准的7000亿美元。”

“In the last year, the government has assumed about $7.8 trillion in direct and indirect financial obligations. That is equal to about half the size of the nation’s entire economy and far eclipses the $700 billion that Congress authorized for the Treasury’s financial rescue plan.” 1

除了政府救助之外，陷入困境的放贷机构还寄希望于暂停“按市价计价”（mark to market）的会计规则，将其视为自救的途径。这些规则要求金融机构按照最近一次的成交价格对其抵押贷款资产进行估值。然而，财务会计准则委员会（FASB）近期实施了一系列调整，这些调整是在大型银行的施压下作出的，允许采用对其更有利的基于模型的估值方法，现已正式生效。如今，放贷机构可以假装损失并不存在，或是推迟对这些损失进行会计确认，由此危险地抹去了投资者迫切需要的透明度。

In addition to the government bailouts, distressed lenders are looking to the suspension of "mark to market" accounting rules as a means of salvation. These rules required institutions to value their mortgage assets according to the most recently traded price. However, changes recently implemented by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) under pressure from the large banks to allow more advantageous model based valuations have now been brought in. Lenders are now able to pretend that the losses do not exist, or defer accounting for them, thereby dangerously removing the transparency that investors so desperately need.

“它让公司在许多情况下有更大的余地运用估计和自身判断，即当它们认为市场“失序”或陷入流动性问题时。” 2.

“It gives companies more leeway to employ estimates and their own judgment in many cases when they deem the market to be "disorderly" or seized by liquidity problems” 2.

因此，银行现在可以为其抵押资产呈报被高估的价值，并使其资产负债表显示资本充足。它们因此无需为发放新贷款而筹集更多资本。然而，正如对疼痛毫无感觉的人会面临严重受伤的风险一样，这一举措也会鼓励这些金融机构承担更大的风险。最终，这很可能导致更多损失，使它们试图通过赌博来摆脱困境，同时不如实披露其真实的经济状况。

As a result the banks can now present inflated values for their mortgage assets, and that their balance sheets are well capitalized. They would not need to raise more capital in order to fund new loans. However, like the person with no sensitivity to pain runs the risk of serious injury, this move encourages the same financial institutions to take greater risks. In the end this will likely lead to more losses, allowing them to try to gamble their way out of the problem without reporting their true economic position.