????美國總統(tǒng)巴拉克?奧巴馬上周五的講話應(yīng)該是已經(jīng)講得清清楚楚，明明白白。他愿意向共和黨人做出妥協(xié)，以免美國跌落財(cái)政懸崖，但不會再次同意延長給美國富人帶來實(shí)惠的布什減稅措施。

????我們應(yīng)該預(yù)料到他會堅(jiān)持這樣的立場，即便美國國內(nèi)對這個(gè)問題的擔(dān)心大幅上升——這個(gè)問題如果處理不好，必定會將美國推入又一場代價(jià)沉重的衰退；我們應(yīng)該預(yù)計(jì)他能獲勝。

????給最高收入人群加稅，是美國新的一年將自動生效的很多財(cái)政措施之一。財(cái)政懸崖預(yù)計(jì)將直接造成財(cái)政收縮，達(dá)到GDP的4%左右。此外，它還會造成負(fù)面的經(jīng)濟(jì)和金融乘數(shù)效應(yīng)，以及一些不得力的財(cái)政政策導(dǎo)致的效率低下。

????總的來說，結(jié)果將是伴隨著高失業(yè)率和有限的政策靈活度（政策利率早已低到不能再低，接近于零），緩慢增長的美國經(jīng)濟(jì)將變得更加虛弱。而且，我們也不應(yīng)該忘記，美國還面臨著歐債危機(jī)、中國經(jīng)濟(jì)放緩和中東局勢不穩(wěn)等外圍不利環(huán)境。

????這個(gè)財(cái)政方案似乎就是故意要造成不可收拾的經(jīng)濟(jì)局面，令即便是支持中期財(cái)政調(diào)整者也不由得心生猶豫。事實(shí)上，這個(gè)方案本來也沒打算要付諸實(shí)施。這個(gè)方案可能產(chǎn)生的嚴(yán)重后果是為了唬住我們的政客們，讓他們接受另一套更可行的財(cái)政改革方案。

????但這個(gè)策略的設(shè)計(jì)者并沒有充分考慮到困擾美國政治系統(tǒng)的極端兩極化現(xiàn)象。兩黨互不信任，沒有可信的執(zhí)行工具，因此，這個(gè)威脅并不管用。因此，現(xiàn)在美國看到的可能前景是：人憂心忡忡：2013年可能再次陷入衰退、失業(yè)率重新回到9%上方以及年輕人和長期失業(yè)數(shù)據(jù)更加糟糕。

????美國總統(tǒng)奧巴馬愿意從“小處”妥協(xié)避免這樣的局面，但前提是對美國最富人群的稅率要恢復(fù)到原有的水平，回到布什時(shí)代的起點(diǎn)。針對最富人群的這項(xiàng)減稅政策原本計(jì)劃是臨時(shí)的、可逆轉(zhuǎn)的(如今已執(zhí)行了12年)。

????共和黨人說，沒門。對他們而言，任何妥協(xié)都必須包括維持減稅方案這個(gè)條件。

????President Barack Obama's remarks on Friday should leave no doubt in anyone's mind. While he is willing to compromise with the Republicans to prevent the United States from going over the fiscal cliff, he will NOT do so by again agreeing to extend the Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans.

????We should expect him to maintain this position, even as the nation's anxiety increases with respect to this self-inflicted problem that, if handled badly, would unambiguously push the country into another costly recession; and we should expect him to prevail.

????Higher tax rates for top earners are one of the many fiscal measures that would automatically go into effect in the New Year. The projected economic impact of this fiscal cliff is a direct fiscal contraction of some 4% of GDP. There would also be negative economic and financial multiplier effects as well as inefficiencies arising from the rather blunt composition of the fiscal measures.

????In combination, the consequences would be debilitating for our slow-growing economy with high unemployment and limited policy flexibility, on account of policy interest rates that are already floored at zero. And we also should not forget that the U.S. faces headwinds from the European debt crisis, a slowing China and instability in the Middle East.

????This fiscal package was purposely designed to be extremely unpleasant for the economy – even for one that needs medium-term fiscal consolidation. Indeed, it was never meant to be implemented. Instead, its nasty potential consequences were meant to scare our politicians into agreeing to a much more sensible set of fiscal reforms.

????But the designers of this strategic approach failed to fully consider the extreme polarization besetting our political system. With each party lacking trust in the other, and with no credible instrument of cohesive enforcement, the threat has not worked. So America is now looking at the worrisome possibility of a recession in 2013, joblessness surging back above 9%, and the young and long-term unemployment languishing even more.

????President Obama is ready to compromise on a "mini bargain" to avoid this, but only if taxes on the richest Americans are allowed to go back up – thus completing the Bush era round-trip voyage for what were meant to be temporary and reversible tax cuts for the highest earners (and that have now persisted for 12 years).

????Republicans say no way. For them, any compromise must include maintaining the cuts.