In 1978, Alfred Kahn, an adviser on inflation to President Jimmy Carter, used the word “depression”. So angry was the president that Mr Kahn started to call it “banana” instead. But the recession Mr Kahn foretold happened all the same. The same may well happen with nationalisation. Indeed, it already has: how else is one to describe the actions of the federal government in relation to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG and increasingly Citigroup? Is nationalisation not already the big financial banana?
1978年，美國(guó)總統(tǒng)吉米?卡特(Jimmy Carter)的通脹事務(wù)顧問(wèn)阿爾弗雷德?卡恩(Alfred Kahn)使用了“蕭條”這個(gè)詞。總統(tǒng)對(duì)此大為光火，于是卡恩開(kāi)始用“香蕉”一詞代替。不過(guò)卡恩預(yù)言的蕭條還是發(fā)生了。同樣的事情很可能發(fā)生在“國(guó)有化”身上。事實(shí)上，國(guó)有化已經(jīng)發(fā)生了：不然你要如何描述聯(lián)邦政府針對(duì)房利美(Fannie Mae)、房地美(Freddie Mac)、美國(guó)國(guó)際集團(tuán)(AIG)以及越來(lái)越多地對(duì)花旗集團(tuán)(Citigroup)采取的行動(dòng)呢？難道國(guó)有化不是已經(jīng)成為巨大的金融香蕉了嗎？