1，奥巴马讲话全球金融危机一周年祭、2，相关报道：金融危机一周年一奥巴马演讲相关新闻汇总2009-09-1511:25:45奥巴马讲话一—全球金融危机一周年祭2009年9月14日，美国总统奥巴马在纽约华尔街的联邦大厅发表关于金融危机一周年的演讲。英文全文如下：Full text of Obama's financial address'Wewillnotgobacktodays of recklessbehavior and unchecked excess人Thank you all for being here and for yourwarm welcome.It'saprivilegetobeinhistoricFederal Hall.It was heremore than two centuries ago that our first Congress servedand our first President was inaugurated. It was here, in the early days of ourRepublic, that Hamilton and Jefferson debated how best to administer a young economyand to ensure that our nation rewarded the talents and drive of its people.Twocenturies later, we still grapple with these questions-questionsmade more acutein moments of crisis.It was one year ago that we experienced just such a crisis. As investors andpension-holders watched with dread and dismay, and after a series of emergencymeetings often conducted in the dead of the night, several of the world's largestand oldest financial institutions had fallen, either bankrupt, bought, or bailedout:Lehman Brothers,MerrillLynch,AIG,Washington Mutual,Wachovia.Aweek beforethis began, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had been taken over by the government. Otherlarge firms teetered on the brink of insolvency. Credit markets froze as banksrefused to lend not only to families and businesses but to one another. Five trilliondollars of Americans' household wealth evaporated in the span of just three months.Congress and the previous administration took difficult but necessary actionin the days and months that followed. Nevertheless, when this administration walkedthrough the door in January, the situation remained urgent. The markets had fallensharply: credit was not flowing.It was feared that the largest banks-those thatremained standing-had toolittle capital andfartoomuch exposuretoriskyloans.AndtheconsequenceshadspreadfarbeyondthestreetsoflowerManhattan.Thiswasno longer just a financial crisis;it hadbecomea full-blown economic crisis, with1
1，奥巴马讲话——全球金融危机一周年祭 、2，相关报道：金融危机一周年-奥巴马演讲相关新闻汇总 2009-09-15 11:25:45 奥巴马讲话——全球金融危机一周年祭 2009 年 9 月 14 日，美国总统奥巴马在纽约华尔 街的联邦大厅发表关于金融危机一周年的演讲。英 文全文如下： Full text of Obama's financial address 'We will not go back to days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess ' Thank you all for being here and for your warm welcome. It's a privilege to be in historic Federal Hall. It was here more than two centuries ago that our first Congress served and our first President was inaugurated. It was here, in the early days of our Republic, that Hamilton and Jefferson debated how best to administer a young economy and to ensure that our nation rewarded the talents and drive of its people. Two centuries later, we still grapple with these questions - questions made more acute in moments of crisis. It was one year ago that we experienced just such a crisis. As investors and pension-holders watched with dread and dismay, and after a series of emergency meetings often conducted in the dead of the night, several of the world's largest and oldest financial institutions had fallen, either bankrupt, bought, or bailed out: Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, Washington Mutual, Wachovia. A week before this began, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had been taken over by the government. Other large firms teetered on the brink of insolvency. Credit markets froze as banks refused to lend not only to families and businesses but to one another. Five trillion dollars of Americans' household wealth evaporated in the span of just three months. Congress and the previous administration took difficult but necessary action in the days and months that followed. Nevertheless, when this administration walked through the door in January, the situation remained urgent. The markets had fallen sharply; credit was not flowing. It was feared that the largest banks - those that remained standing - had too little capital and far too much exposure to risky loans. And the consequences had spread far beyond the streets of lower Manhattan. This was no longer just a financial crisis; it had become a full-blown economic crisis, with 1
home prices sinking,businesses struggling to access affordable credit,and theeconomysheddinganaverageof700,000jobseachmonth.We could not separate what was happening in the corridors of our financialinstitutions from what was happening on factory floors and around kitchen tables.Homeforeclosureslinkedthosewhotook out homeloansandthosewhorepackagedthoseloans as securities.A lack of access to affordable credit threatened the healthof large firms and small businesses, as well as all those whose jobs depended onthem. And a weakened financial system weakened the broader economy, which in turnfurtherweakened the financial system.The onlywayto address successfullyany of these challenges was toaddress themtogether, and so this administration -with terrific leadership by my TreasurySecretary, Tim Geithner, as well the Chair of my Council of Economic Advisers,Christy Romer, and the Chair of the National Economic Council, Larry Summers-movedquickly on all fronts, initializing a financial stability plan to rescue the systemfrom the crisis and restart lending for all those affected by the crisis. By openingand examining the books of large financial firms, we helped restore the availabilityof two things that had been in short supply: capital and confidence. By takingaggressive and innovative steps in credit markets, we spurred lending not just tobanks, but to folks looking to buy homes or cars, take out student loans, or financesmall businesses.Our home ownership plan has helped responsible homeownersrefinance to stem the tide of lost homes and lost home values.And the recovery plan is providing help to the unemployed and tax relief forworkingfamilies,allwhile spurring consumer spending.It's preventedlayoffs oftens of thousands of teachers, police officers, and other essential public servants.Andthousands of recovery projects are underway all across America, putting peopleto work building wind turbines and solar panels, renovating schools and hospitals,and repairing our nation's roads and bridges.Eight months later, the work of recovery continues.And although I will neverbe satisfied while people are out of work and our financial system is weakened, wecan be confident that the storms of thepast two years arebeginningto break.Infact,whiletherecontinuestobea needforgovernmentinvolvementtostabilize the financial system, that necessity is waning.After months in whichpublic dollars were flowing into our financial system, we are finally beginning toseemoney flowing back to the taxpayers.This doesn'tmean taxpayers will escapethe worst financial crisis in decades unscathed. But banks have repaid more than$70 billion, and in those cases where the government's stake has been sold completely,taxpayers have actually earned a 17-percent return on their investment. Just a fewmonths ago, manyexperts fromacrosstheideological spectrumfeared that ensuring2
home prices sinking, businesses struggling to access affordable credit, and the economy shedding an average of 700,000 jobs each month. We could not separate what was happening in the corridors of our financial institutions from what was happening on factory floors and around kitchen tables. Home foreclosures linked those who took out home loans and those who repackaged those loans as securities. A lack of access to affordable credit threatened the health of large firms and small businesses, as well as all those whose jobs depended on them. And a weakened financial system weakened the broader economy, which in turn further weakened the financial system. The only way to address successfully any of these challenges was to address them together, and so this administration - with terrific leadership by my Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, as well the Chair of my Council of Economic Advisers, Christy Romer, and the Chair of the National Economic Council, Larry Summers - moved quickly on all fronts, initializing a financial stability plan to rescue the system from the crisis and restart lending for all those affected by the crisis. By opening and examining the books of large financial firms, we helped restore the availability of two things that had been in short supply: capital and confidence. By taking aggressive and innovative steps in credit markets, we spurred lending not just to banks, but to folks looking to buy homes or cars, take out student loans, or finance small businesses. Our home ownership plan has helped responsible homeowners refinance to stem the tide of lost homes and lost home values. And the recovery plan is providing help to the unemployed and tax relief for working families, all while spurring consumer spending. It's prevented layoffs of tens of thousands of teachers, police officers, and other essential public servants. And thousands of recovery projects are underway all across America, putting people to work building wind turbines and solar panels, renovating schools and hospitals, and repairing our nation's roads and bridges. Eight months later, the work of recovery continues. And although I will never be satisfied while people are out of work and our financial system is weakened, we can be confident that the storms of the past two years are beginning to break. In fact, while there continues to be a need for government involvement to stabilize the financial system, that necessity is waning. After months in which public dollars were flowing into our financial system, we are finally beginning to see money flowing back to the taxpayers. This doesn't mean taxpayers will escape the worst financial crisis in decades unscathed. But banks have repaid more than $70 billion, and in those cases where the government's stake has been sold completely, taxpayers have actually earned a 17-percent return on their investment. Just a few months ago, many experts from across the ideological spectrum feared that ensuring 2
financialstabilitywould requireevenmoretaxdollars.Instead, we've been able to eliminate a $25obillionreserve included in our budget because that fear has notbeen realized.While full recovery of thefinancial system willtake a great deal more time and work, the growingstability resulting from these interventions means wearebeginningtoreturntonormalcy.ButwhatIwanttoemphasize is this:normalcy cannot lead to complacency.Unfortunately,there are some in the financial industrywho aremisreading thismoment.Instead of learning the lessons of Lehman and the crisis from which we arestill recovering, they are choosing to ignore them. They do so not just at theirown peril, but at our nation's. So I want them to hear my words:We will not go backto the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess at the heart of this crisis,where toomanyweremotivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses.Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences,and expect that next time, American taxpayers will be there to break their fall.That's why we need strong rules of the road to guard against the kind of systemicrisks we have seen.And we have a responsibility to write and enforce these rulesto protect consumers of financial products, taxpayers, and our economy as a whole.Yes, they must be developed in a way that does not stifle innovation and enterprise.And we want to work with the financial industry to achieve that end. But the oldways that led to this crisis cannot stand. And to the extent that some have so readilyreturned to them underscoresthe need for changeand changenow.Historycannot beallowed to repeat itself.Instead, we are calling on the financial industry to join us in a constructiveeffort to update the rules and regulatory structure to meet the challenges of thisnew century. That is what my administration seeks to do. We have sought ideas andinputfromindustryleaders,policyexperts,academics,consumeradvocates, andthebroader public.And we've worked closely with leaders in the Senate and House,including Senators ChrisDodd andRichardShelby,andCongressmanBarneyFrank,whoare nowworking to pass regulatory reform through Congress.Taken together, we are proposing the most ambitious overhaul of the financialsystem since the Great Depression.But I want to emphasize that these reforms arerootedin asimple principle:we ought to set clearrules oftheroad that promotetransparency and accountability.That's how we'll make certain that markets fosterresponsibility, not recklessness, and reward those who compete honestly andvigorously within the system, instead of those who try to game the system3
financial stability would require even more tax dollars. Instead, we've been able to eliminate a $250 billion reserve included in our budget because that fear has not been realized. While full recovery of the financial system will take a great deal more time and work, the growing stability resulting from these interventions means we are beginning to return to normalcy. But what I want to emphasize is this: normalcy cannot lead to complacency. Unfortunately, there are some in the financial industry who are misreading this moment. Instead of learning the lessons of Lehman and the crisis from which we are still recovering, they are choosing to ignore them. They do so not just at their own peril, but at our nation's. So I want them to hear my words: We will not go back to the days of reckless behavior and unchecked excess at the heart of this crisis, where too many were motivated only by the appetite for quick kills and bloated bonuses. Those on Wall Street cannot resume taking risks without regard for consequences, and expect that next time, American taxpayers will be there to break their fall. That's why we need strong rules of the road to guard against the kind of systemic risks we have seen. And we have a responsibility to write and enforce these rules to protect consumers of financial products, taxpayers, and our economy as a whole. Yes, they must be developed in a way that does not stifle innovation and enterprise. And we want to work with the financial industry to achieve that end. But the old ways that led to this crisis cannot stand. And to the extent that some have so readily returned to them underscores the need for change and change now. History cannot be allowed to repeat itself. Instead, we are calling on the financial industry to join us in a constructive effort to update the rules and regulatory structure to meet the challenges of this new century. That is what my administration seeks to do. We have sought ideas and input from industry leaders, policy experts, academics, consumer advocates, and the broader public. And we've worked closely with leaders in the Senate and House, including Senators Chris Dodd and Richard Shelby, and Congressman Barney Frank, who are now working to pass regulatory reform through Congress. Taken together, we are proposing the most ambitious overhaul of the financial system since the Great Depression. But I want to emphasize that these reforms are rooted in a simple principle: we ought to set clear rules of the road that promote transparency and accountability. That's how we'll make certain that markets foster responsibility, not recklessness, and reward those who compete honestly and vigorously within the system, instead of those who try to game the system. 3
Protecting consumersFirst, we're proposing new rules to protect consumers and a new ConsumerFinancial Protection Agency to enforce those rules. This crisis was not just theresult of decisions made by the mightiest of financial firms. It was also the resultof decisions made by ordinary Americans to open credit cards and take on mortgages.And whilethereweremanywho took outloans theyknewthey couldn'tafford,therewere also millions of Americans who signed contracts they didn't fully understandoffered by lenders who didn't always tell the truth.This is in part because there is no single agency charged with making sure itdoesn't happen. That is what we'll change. The Consumer Financial Protection Agencywill havethepowerto ensurethat consumersget information that is clear and concise,and to prevent the worstkinds of abuses.Consumers shouldn't have toworry aboutloan contracts designed to be unintelligible, hidden fees attached to theirmortgages, and financial penalties -whether through a credit card or debit card- that appear without warning on their statements. And responsible lenders,including community banks, doing the right thing shouldn't have to worry aboutruinous competition from unregulated competitors.Now there are those who are suggesting that somehow this will restrict thechoices available to consumers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The lackof clear rules in thepast meant we had innovation of thewrong kind:thefirmthatcould make its products look best by doing the best job of hiding the real costswon. For example, we had "teaser" rates on credit cards and mortgages that luredpeople in and then surprised them with big rate increases. By setting ground rules,we'll increase the kind of competition that actually provides people better andgreater choices, as companies compete to offer the best product, not the one that'smost complex or confusing.Second, we've got to close the loopholes that were at the heart of the crisis.Where there were gaps in the rules, regulators lacked the authority to take action.Where there were overlaps, regulators often lacked accountability for inaction.These weaknesses in oversight engendered systematic, and systemic, abuse.Underexistingrules,somecompaniescanactuallyshopfortheregulatorof theirchoice-and others,like hedge funds, can operate outside of the regulatory systemaltogether. We've seen the development of financial instruments, like derivativesand creditdefault swaps, withoutanyone examining the risks or regulating all ofthe players. And we've seen lenders profit by providing loans to borrowers who theyknew would never repay, because the lender offloaded the loan and the consequencesto someone else. Those who refuse to game the system are at a disadvantage.4
Protecting consumers First, we're proposing new rules to protect consumers and a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency to enforce those rules. This crisis was not just the result of decisions made by the mightiest of financial firms. It was also the result of decisions made by ordinary Americans to open credit cards and take on mortgages. And while there were many who took out loans they knew they couldn't afford, there were also millions of Americans who signed contracts they didn't fully understand offered by lenders who didn't always tell the truth. This is in part because there is no single agency charged with making sure it doesn't happen. That is what we'll change. The Consumer Financial Protection Agency will have the power to ensure that consumers get information that is clear and concise, and to prevent the worst kinds of abuses. Consumers shouldn't have to worry about loan contracts designed to be unintelligible, hidden fees attached to their mortgages, and financial penalties - whether through a credit card or debit card - that appear without warning on their statements. And responsible lenders, including community banks, doing the right thing shouldn't have to worry about ruinous competition from unregulated competitors. Now there are those who are suggesting that somehow this will restrict the choices available to consumers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The lack of clear rules in the past meant we had innovation of the wrong kind: the firm that could make its products look best by doing the best job of hiding the real costs won. For example, we had "teaser" rates on credit cards and mortgages that lured people in and then surprised them with big rate increases. By setting ground rules, we'll increase the kind of competition that actually provides people better and greater choices, as companies compete to offer the best product, not the one that's most complex or confusing. Second, we've got to close the loopholes that were at the heart of the crisis. Where there were gaps in the rules, regulators lacked the authority to take action. Where there were overlaps, regulators often lacked accountability for inaction. These weaknesses in oversight engendered systematic, and systemic, abuse. Under existing rules, some companies can actually shop for the regulator of their choice - and others, like hedge funds, can operate outside of the regulatory system altogether. We've seen the development of financial instruments, like derivatives and credit default swaps, without anyone examining the risks or regulating all of the players. And we've seen lenders profit by providing loans to borrowers who they knew would never repay, because the lender offloaded the loan and the consequences to someone else. Those who refuse to game the system are at a disadvantage. 4
Now, one of themain reasons this crisis could takeplace is that many agenciesand regulators were responsible for oversight of individual financial firms andtheir subsidiaries, but no one was responsible for protecting thewhole system. Inother words, regulators were charged with seeing the trees, but not the forest.Andeven then, some firms that posed a"systemic risk"were not regulated as stronglyas others, exploiting loopholes in the system to take on greater risk with lessscrutiny. As a result, the failure of one firm threatened the viability of many othersWe were facing one of the largest financial crises in history and those responsiblefor oversight were caught off guard and without the authority to act.That swhywe'llcreate clear accountabilityand responsibilityforregulatinglarge financial firms that pose a systemic risk. While holding theFederal Reservefully accountable for regulation of the largest, most interconnected firms, we'llcreatean oversight council to bring together regulators fromacross markets to shareinformation, to identify gaps in regulation, and to tackle issues that don't fitneatly into an organizational chart. We'il also require these financial firms tomeet stronger capital and liquidity requirements and observe greater constraintson their risky behavior. That's one of the lessons of the past year. The only wayto avoid a crisis of this magnitude is to ensure that large firms can't take risksthat threaten our entire financial system, and to make sure they have the resourcesto weather even the worst of economic storms.Even as we'veproposed safeguards tomakethefailureof large and interconnectedfirms less likely,we've also proposed creating what's called"resolution authorityin the event that such a failure happens and poses a threat to the stability of thefinancial system. This is intended to put an end to the idea that some firms are"too big to fail."For a market to function, those who invest and lend in that marketmust believe that their money is actually at risk. And the system as a whole isn'tsafe until it is safe from the failure of any individual institution.If a bank approaches insolvency,we have aprocess through the FDIC that protectsdepositors and maintains confidencein the banking system. This process was createdduring the Great Depression when thefailure of one bank led toruns on otherbanks,which in turn threatened the banking system. And it works. Yet we don't have anykind of process in place to contain the failure of a Lehman Brothers or AIG or anyof the largest and most interconnected financial firms in our country.That's why, when this crisis began, crucial decisions about what would happento some of the world's biggest companies-companies employing tens of thousandsof people and holding trillions of dollars in assets - took place in hurrieddiscussions in the middle of the night. And that' s why we've had to rely on taxpayerdollars. The only resolution authority we currently have that would prevent a5
Now, one of the main reasons this crisis could take place is that many agencies and regulators were responsible for oversight of individual financial firms and their subsidiaries, but no one was responsible for protecting the whole system. In other words, regulators were charged with seeing the trees, but not the forest. And even then, some firms that posed a "systemic risk" were not regulated as strongly as others, exploiting loopholes in the system to take on greater risk with less scrutiny. As a result, the failure of one firm threatened the viability of many others. We were facing one of the largest financial crises in history and those responsible for oversight were caught off guard and without the authority to act. That's why we'll create clear accountability and responsibility for regulating large financial firms that pose a systemic risk. While holding the Federal Reserve fully accountable for regulation of the largest, most interconnected firms, we'll create an oversight council to bring together regulators from across markets to share information, to identify gaps in regulation, and to tackle issues that don't fit neatly into an organizational chart. We'll also require these financial firms to meet stronger capital and liquidity requirements and observe greater constraints on their risky behavior. That's one of the lessons of the past year. The only way to avoid a crisis of this magnitude is to ensure that large firms can't take risks that threaten our entire financial system, and to make sure they have the resources to weather even the worst of economic storms. Even as we've proposed safeguards to make the failure of large and interconnected firms less likely, we've also proposed creating what's called "resolution authority" in the event that such a failure happens and poses a threat to the stability of the financial system. This is intended to put an end to the idea that some firms are "too big to fail." For a market to function, those who invest and lend in that market must believe that their money is actually at risk. And the system as a whole isn't safe until it is safe from the failure of any individual institution. If a bank approaches insolvency, we have a process through the FDIC that protects depositors and maintains confidence in the banking system. This process was created during the Great Depression when the failure of one bank led to runs on other banks, which in turn threatened the banking system. And it works. Yet we don't have any kind of process in place to contain the failure of a Lehman Brothers or AIG or any of the largest and most interconnected financial firms in our country. That's why, when this crisis began, crucial decisions about what would happen to some of the world's biggest companies - companies employing tens of thousands of people and holding trillions of dollars in assets - took place in hurried discussions in the middle of the night. And that's why we've had to rely on taxpayer dollars. The only resolution authority we currently have that would prevent a 5