A few days ago, I attended a financial conference with a large collection of some of the most powerful and savvy asset managers in America. When asked to vote about the likely path of US interest rates, almost two-thirds of the participants suggested that the Federal Reserve would cut rates this year, rather than keep them neutral (or raise them).

几天前，我与美国一些最有影响力且最精明的资产经理们一道参加了一个金融会议。在被要求就美国利率的可能走势发表意见时，近三分之二的与会者认为，美联储(Fed)今年将降息，而不是让利率保持不升不降（或者加息）。

Yes, you read that right. Less than two months ago, the Fed finally embarked on its long-awaited (and heralded) tightening move. It then signalled that it expected to see four rate rises this year. While investors did not entirely accept this, the Fed Funds futures market suggested that two, not four, rises were likely in 2016.

是的，你没看错。不到两个月前，美联储终于启动了拖延已久（而且预热已久）的加息举措。接着，美联储暗示，预计今年将加息4次。尽管投资者并不完全认同，但联邦基金期货(Fed Funds futures)市场暗示，今年美联储可能会加息两次，而非4次。

But if the group of investors I saw was representative (and I think they are), a US rate cut is now the majority view. Talk about a mood swing; this makes a teenager look consistent.

然而，如果我在会议上见到的这些投资者具有代表性的话（我认为他们有），那么如今的主流观点是美国将降息。瞧这情绪变化得多快，青春期的少男少女也只能自叹弗如。

Is this justified? In economic terms, I would argue not. After all, the fundamental US economic data have not moved so wildly in recent weeks. On the contrary, as Janet Yellen, the Fed chair, pointed out in testimony to Congress on Wednesday, growth is still fairly steady and the wider global picture is far from disastrous. Unsurprisingly, she emphasised that she still thinks that rates are on a modest upward trend.

这种观点有道理吗？从经济的角度来看，我认为没有。毕竟，最近数周，美国的基本经济数据没有出现如此离谱的变动。相反，正如美联储主席珍妮特耶伦(Janet Yellen)上周三在美国国会作证时指出的那样，增长仍相当稳定，全球整体状况远算不上灾难性。毫不意外的是，她明确表示，她仍认为利率处于微幅上行趋势。

But what is also clear is that this swing in views does not just reflect macroeconomic signals. On the contrary, subtle shifts in global capital flows are creating volatility. Moreover, market sentiment is now displaying what billionaire investor and philanthropist George Soros has described as “reflexivity” — prices fall, so people get frightened, and then prices fall further.

但同样明显的是，投资者对美国利率走势看法的180度大转弯反映的不仅仅是宏观经济信号。相反，全球资金流动的微妙变化正引发波动。另外，市场情绪正在体现出乔治∠坽斯（George Soros，亿万富翁、投资人、慈善家）所说的“反射作用”：价格下跌，人们感到害怕，接着价格进一步下跌。

Behind all this is a debate about whether the US could soon follow Japan and Switzerland and produce negative interest rates.

在所有这一切背后是这样一场辩论：美国是否可能很快效仿日本和瑞士推行负利率？

That used to be the stuff of late night bar-room chats between economists. But the fact that Japan has moved into negative territory (after Switzerland) has changed all that. Another development has also had an enormous symbolic effect: the Fed has just launched its annual stress test of the banks, and asked the largest ones to model for the first time how their balance sheets could look with negative rates. (Specifically, they have been asked to model an “adverse market scenario” where three-month treasury bills tumbled to minus 0.5 per cent for a long period.)

这曾经是经济学家们深夜在酒吧闲聊时的话题。但日本（继瑞士之后）已推行负利率政策，这改变了一切。另一项具有重大象征意义的动向也产生了巨大影响：美联储刚刚启动了针对银行的年度压力测试，并首次要求规模最大的那些银行建模演示负利率可能会给它们的资产负债表带来何种影响。（特别是，这些银行被要求就“负面市场情境”构建模型，在这种情境下，3个月期国债收益率长期降至-0.5%。）

The Fed has stressed that this is “hypothetical”. And it is not an entirely unprecedented idea: short-term rates have tumbled briefly below zero in the US before. No matter. The symbolism of this in the Wall Street echo chamber is extraordinarily powerful: what was once almost unimaginable is actually being imagined — and tangibly measured. And this is frightening for investors for at least two reasons.

美联储强调，这是一种“假设”。这并非一种从未有过的想法：美国短期利率以前曾短暂降至零以下。没关系。在人云亦云如一个“回音室”的华尔街，这种象征意义引起的反响特别强烈：曾经几乎不可想象的事情如今真的在被考虑，并正得到实实在在的衡量。这让投资者感到害怕，原因至少有两个。

First, and most obviously, a world with rates below zero is one in which normal economic relationships are apt to break down. In such a world, it feels as if all manner of taboos might tumble, so it is hard to set mental boundaries.

首先，也是最为明显的原因是，在负利率情况下，正常的经济关系容易失效。在这种情况下，似乎所有的禁忌都可能打破，因此很难在心理上设定限度。

Until recently, it was widely assumed among investors that even if central banks did cut rates, these could not fall below minus one per cent. But this week JPMorgan issued a piece of research which suggests that central banks now have the technical tools to cut rates to minus 4.5 per cent in the eurozone, minus 3.45 per cent in Japan, minus 2.7 per cent in the UK and minus 1.3 per cent in the US. But nobody knows any more if even that (unlikely) scenario is the floor.

直到不久前，投资者曾广泛认为，即便央行真的降息，也不可能低于-1%。但上周，摩根大通(JPMorgan)发表一份研究报告称，央行现在具备技术手段，能够将欧元区利率降至-4.5%，日本利率降至-3.45%，英国利率降至-2.7%，美国利率降至-1.3%。但没有人知道，这种（不太可能出现的）情况是否就是底部。

Secondly, as investors confront this bewildering Alice in Wonderland world, they are also discovering great “known unknowns” in the system: nobody knows what this means for banks. Or as the Bank of America Merrill Lynch observed: “Modelling the negative rate scenario is extraordinarily difficult … [since] predicting how Libor would behave in a negative environment is a difficult question.”

其次，在投资者面临这个令人迷惑的“爱丽丝仙境”之际，他们也发现了这个系统中重要的“已知的未知情况”：没有人知道这对银行业意味着什么。或者就像美国银行美林(Bank of America Merrill Lynch)所说的那样：“绘制负利率情境模型特别困难……（因为）预测伦敦银行间同业拆借利率(Libor)在负利率环境下会如何表现是一个难题。”

The good news is that investors may eventually adapt; the idea of negative rates in Switzerland, for example, no longer shocks. The bad news, however, is that this could take a long time. And the path of the underlying economic data looks dangerously patchy.

好消息是投资者可能最终会适应；例如，瑞士的利率为负不再是令人震惊的想法。然而，坏消息是，他们可能需要很长时间才能适应。基本经济数据的走势看上去起伏不定，这很危险。

Either way, two things are now clear: first, this volatility is unlikely to vanish any time soon in a world of increasing reflexivity; and second, the Fed will need to play an astonishingly canny hand in the coming weeks.

不管怎样，现在有两点是明确的：首先，在一个“反射作用”日益增强的世界里，这种波动性不太可能很快消失；其次，未来几周，美联储需要使出出人意料的精明招数。

One place to start would be for it to commit to publishing the results of those novel stress tests on negative rates as quickly as possible — and with all the details. The Fed cannot afford to let market imaginations run (any more) wild.

美联储首先要做的可能是承诺尽快公布新的负利率压力测试结果以及所有细节。让市场想象（更）疯狂发展是美联储承受不起的。