“负翁”变“富翁” 最年轻富豪空手套来7.6亿

四川明星电力股份有限公司（以下简称“明星电力”）原董事长周益明已锒铛入狱，但针对明星电力国有股权转让引发的案件侦查并没有结束。顶着“福布斯最年轻富豪”光环的周益明，在入主明星电力时净资产实际为负数，那么他是如何取得明星电力价值3.8亿元控股权的？

“新华视点”记者通过深入调查，一幅“民营企业家”掏空国有上市公司的犯罪流程图跃然纸上：第一步，中 介机构疯狂造假，一夜之间虚构出周益明27亿元的身价；第二步，银行高管出谋划策，让周益明用贷款收购股权；第三步，国有股权转让决策草率，引狼入室；第 四步，国企高管内外勾结，放任周益明大肆侵吞国有资产。

这四步欺诈术其实并不高明，但是几乎所有监管环节都被击穿，周益明顺利地实现了“空手套白狼”，涉案金额高达7.6亿元。

11万元买来27亿元身价

明星电力是遂宁市380万人口水、电、气的主要供应商。2002年8月，周益明得知明星电力欲转让28.14％的国有股，价值为3.8亿元。当时的明星电力没有外债，企业流动资金达1亿元，良好的资产状况引起了他的强烈兴趣。

周益明立即着手成立深圳市明伦集团与遂宁接洽，但当时他的净资产实际为负数，而按照规定，收购上市公司的资金不能超过集团公司净资产的50％，周益明和他的明伦集团根本没有资格和实力收购明星电力股份，这似乎是个“不可能完成的任务”。

为了达到收购资格，2003年3月，周益明让人找到深圳市中喜会计师事务所，要将公司净资产做到10亿 元以上。而在拿到公司资料的第二天，这家事务所就做出了一份总资产27亿元、净资产12亿元的2002年度资产审计报告。更离谱的是，由于收购上市公司需 要有连续两年的财务审计报告，中喜会计师事务所又补充了一份2001年度的假审计报告。

周益明一夜之间从“负翁”变成了“身价27亿元的富翁”，而付出的代价仅仅是给中喜会计师事务所11万元业务费。

中喜会计师事务所所长吴光影承认，整个审计报告出炉过程中，事务所根本没有派人到明伦集团进行资产核 对，在此之前他甚至都没听说过有明伦集团这么一家公司。事实上，这家于1995年成立的会计师事务所曾因违规受到过警告处分，后于2005年更名，同年又 因违规被注销。多年来，这样一个屡次违规的会计师事务所一直活跃在这一行业，据公安机关透露，中喜会计师事务所两年内出具的虚假审计报告竟然多达5000 份！

银行高管出谋划策贷款成为收购资金

在明星电力案中，银行内部“潜规则”被周益明发挥得淋漓尽致，他不仅用银行贷款组建了集团公司，还凭借与几个银行高管的“深交”，违法获取贷款直接用作收购资金。

据遂宁市公安机关侦查，2002年8月，周益明一边虚构明伦集团与遂宁市洽谈收购事宜，一边临时组建所 谓的集团公司。他先以10万元买来深圳某公司，用8000万元银行贷款进行反复倒账，虚增母公司及7个子公司的注册资本金3亿元，直到2002年12月， 明伦集团才正式完成了工商注册。

此时的周益明虽然顶着“27亿元身价”的光环，但他仍拿不出一分钱来收购明星电力股权，他的眼睛又盯在了银行贷款上。而按证券市场管理的有关规定，银行贷款严禁用于上市公司收购，这似乎又是个“不可能完成的任务”，但周益明与银行高管的“深交”发挥了关键作用。

据公安机关侦查，周益明与华夏银行广州分行行长郭俊明和上海浦东发展银行深圳罗湖支行行长韩茂胜等人 “交情匪浅”。郭俊明曾接受过周益明的两台高级小轿车，逢年过节还有银行卡等“过节费”可拿，周还曾许诺送他一栋别墅。而韩茂胜曾为了增加银行存款业绩， 找周益明帮过不少忙，韩也在其中得到“政绩”和“实惠”。

据郭、韩等交代，2003年周益明向他们明确提出收购明星电力资金上有缺口，希望他们能“支持一下”。 但银行资金不得用于上市公司收购，为了规避监管，华夏银行广州分行、浦发行深圳罗湖支行及广发行深圳分行春风路支行都做了一个“过桥贷款”的方案：以企业 流动资金的名义给周益明放贷，使得他获得了3.8亿元资金，完成了“空手套白狼”式的资本运作。

“瞎子”“聋子”和“家贼”

在周益明并不高明的骗术面前，层层监管部门，竟变成了“瞎子”和“聋子”，而公司国有股东代表不仅没有履行监管职责，反而收受贿赂，与犯罪分子沆瀣一气。

在股权转让前，遂宁市曾派出考察组到深圳市考察明伦集团。周益明经过精心安排，带着他们到自己合作伙伴的企业参观，并称是自己的企业。这样赤裸裸的欺诈，竟然成功地蒙混过关。

记者接触的许多当地干部表示，揭穿周益明的骗术其实并不难。明伦集团号称有27亿元总资产，那样大的规 模总该有各方面的数据和事实支撑。只要到当地工商部门查一下注册资本金、到税务部门查一下税收、到企业库房看一看产品、参观企业时看一下营业执照，就不难 发现明伦集团的真面目。

记者拿到中喜会计师事务所出具的两份审计报告，粗略一看，发现漏洞百出。如反映2002年“借款”一项，期末数有13笔，其中上千万元的达10笔，仅5000万元的就有2笔，但合计仅313万多元。如此漏洞百出的假报告，竟成了“购买”明星电力的“通行证”。

而据案发后对周益明提供的这两份假报告的重新审计，2002年底明伦集团的总负债已高达2.8亿元，净 资产实际为负647万元。事实上，遂宁当地干部对记者透露，当时曾有人提出，明伦集团到底有没有实力，不能光凭周益明提供的审计报告下结论，应该聘请会计 师事务所重新审计一下，但建议最终没有被采纳。

周益明在被捕后交代，他原本打算“捞”上几亿元后，就让明伦集团破产，以便抽身退出。他在入主公司后不 到4个月，就从明星电力划走了5亿元。然而面对这样庞大的可疑资金流出，作为公司国有股代表的总经理周某不仅没有履行自己的监管职责，反而收受周益明的贿 赂，坐看国有资产大量流失。目前明星电力原总经理已被“双规”，初步查明其收受贿赂达百万元以上。

“合同诈骗罪”，中国资本市场的“达摩克利斯剑”？

尽管周益明是以“涉嫌挪用资金罪”被逮捕的，但记者了解到，公安机关是以“合同诈骗罪”对明星电力案进 行侦查的，目前案件即将进入诉讼阶段。有学者认为，一旦将最高可判无期徒刑的“合同诈骗罪”引入明星电力案的审理，将为中国资本市场的规范发展祭起一把 “达摩克利斯剑”，从而极大地改变当前对资本市场犯罪打击不力的现状。

西南政法大学经济法学院院长唐清阳认为，近年来大股东违法犯罪的手法大多类似，表现为虚假注册资金、挪 用资金、违规担保等，但最终目的都是为了套取上市公司资金。而目前中国司法实践中，往往将大股东这一系列行为割裂对待，仅以虚假注册、挪用资金等罪名分别 定罪量刑，而忽略了其行为从整体上看就是一种欺诈行为，不仅在量刑上会大大降低打击力度，也无法从根本上保护国有资产和广大股民的利益。因此，在遵循“罪 刑法定”的原则下，对待类似案件应该有新的思维，加大刑法打击力度。

泰国金融动荡内幕：与中国无关

西方投机资本惹的祸却拿人民币当替罪羊

泰国最近两天突然发生的金融动荡令世界为之一惊。但更出人意料的是，几家著名的西方媒体毫不犹豫地把泰币及股市的动荡归罪到人民币的头上，宣称根本原因是 “人民币长期不升值”，并趁机指责中国政府“操纵汇率”，“伤害地区间小国利益”。然而这种极端的观点连泰国专家和媒体都不认可。西方传出的声音让人想 到，“人民币汇率”正在成为挂在某些西方评论家嘴上的口头禅，全球经济不论出了什么问题，人民币都有可能被用来当挡箭牌、替罪羊。《环球时报》记者12月 20日采访了中国和泰国的经济专家，他们一致认为，此次泰国金融动荡的原因与中国没有关系。恰恰是西方的投机资本酿成了泰国等东南亚新兴市场近日的金融动 荡。西方媒体从“同情弱国”的角度，攻击中国的汇率政策，或者是没搞明白泰国在发生什么，或者是故意向人民币泼脏水。

西方媒体假扮道义君子

美国《国际先驱论坛报》12月19日发表文章，题目叫《泰国金融危机的背后，是中国的重手》。文章一开头就说这次动荡是“1997年那次汇率危机的缩 影”，并称在1997年，亚洲大国的态度是“对小国施压，迫使他们改变汇率”——暗示这一次泰国金融动荡也是因为“大国的原因”，文章由此得出结论：“泰 国和其他小国也像美国财政部长保尔森一样，有足够的理由来抱怨中国的汇率政策——如果这样的小国想要开放市场的话。”

接着，文章开始指责中国“仍然像蜗牛一样慢慢地升高它的币值，在过去16个月只涨了5%”，还说中国一直“压制它的币值来吸引投资和促进出口”，从而对区 内小国构成挑战。文章不乏挑拨意味地说：“不幸的是，这些国家太依赖中国而不愿公开反对。它们应该谴责中国和日本没有在一些对周围国家意义重大的课题上起 到领头羊的作用。”文章还说，“对于一个缺乏宏观货币调控的亚太地区来说，泰国的遭遇是很令人同情的”。

有意思的是，文章里也有批评日本使“日元一直在很小范围内浮动”的内容，但不知为什么只把“中国的重手”写到标题里。

与此相类似，12月20日英国《金融时报》也发表了一篇社论，称泰铢的“被迫贬值”就是因为人民币不肯升值。文章说，对资本市场的控制是“共产主义经济政 策的一个工具”，“当东南亚地区被低估价值的人民币以固定汇率大行其道的时候，泰国的对外贸易就会受到很严重的危害。而泰国中央银行无力使人民币升值，致 使泰铢的贬值成为必然”。文章还批评中国一边“囤积大量外汇储备”，一边维持着“非常不合理的”人民币低币值。

泰国金融动荡之真相

面对西方两大著名报章劈头盖脸的指责，了解这次泰国金融动荡的真相就显得非常关键。泰国媒体没有任何报道将它与中国的人民币汇率联系起来，甚至完全没有提 到中国。据泰国媒体报道，事情的起因是遭受外国短期游资(投机资本)的冲击，今年以来泰铢升值累积已达16%，从年初41铢兑换1美元，12月18日早盘 升抵35铢兑1美元，刷新9年来的最高价位。在刚刚过去的三个星期内，泰国央行发现，有1000亿铢游资流入，而今年前10个月流入的游资总数也只有 130亿铢。这是一个危险的信号，央行担心在外国游资炒作下，泰铢将再一次先升后跌，再现1997年金融危机的一幕。

因此，12月18日，泰国央行重拳出击，严打境外游资，宣布自19日起，海外投资人用外币兑换泰铢后，只能拿其中70%投资泰国金融市场，其余的30%将被泰国银行扣留，存满1年以后才能取回。

此举一出，立竿见影，泰铢应声回贬至35.97铢兑1美元。

这是泰国1997年金融风暴以来最严厉的资金管制措施，但意想不到的负面结果也出现了。12月19日，泰国股市重挫14.84%，创下31年来的最大单日 跌幅，泰股总市值1天内蒸发约8200亿铢。这种情绪迅速蔓延至整个东南亚市场，新加坡、马来西亚、印尼、菲律宾股市纷纷遭受重挫。

但与1997年不同，这次的风暴很快得到控制。12月19日晚间，泰国政府宣布修正短期外资管制措施细节，从20日起，用于直接投资和流入股市的海外资金，不需要扣留30%。20日，泰国股市开盘即回升9%。东南亚其他股市也随之反弹。

西方舆论的险恶用心

泰国盘谷银行顾问林宏先生20日接受《环球时报》记者采访时说，这次动荡并不算非常严重，纯粹是泰国内部政策调整造成的，看不到与中国的关系。泰国本身与 中国结汇量微乎其微，两国间币值影响本身就不大。前一天他与泰国银行界人士讨论时，没有听到一个人说是因为人民币的问题。

中国东盟商务理事会的常务副秘书长许宁宁先生听说一些西方媒体居然把泰铢资产的动荡归罪于中国，他表示不理解。他说，这是哪跟哪呀，根本就不沾边。许宁宁 说，这次泰铢动荡主要原因是资金流动出现了大幅波动，直接导火索是泰国出台了过于严厉的限制短期投机资本的政策，那些投机资金是哪里来的？主要来自于西方 的对冲基金，和中国有什么关系？

关于一些人担心泰国有可能重蹈1997年金融危机的覆辙。许宁宁认为，这种可能性极小，因为从经济角度看，这次泰铢动荡和上次东南亚金融危机有质的不同。 他说，表面上看，1997年的东南亚金融危机也是起于泰铢的大幅贬值，但那时的情况是泰国外汇储备大幅下降、出口受阻，而现在的情况完全不同，泰国的外汇 储备相当充足，经济的基本面也相当好，今年上半年的经济增长率是5.5%，贸易顺差20.3亿美元。因此投机资本和政策失误带来的也就是一时的影响，泰国 政府立即调整对策后，局面迅速改观也证明了这一点。

中国人民银行的一位金融政策研究官员也说，西方媒体把泰铢动荡的原因加在人民币升值缓慢上实在是太牵强了。人民币升值对谁有利？在双边贸易中中国处于大量 顺差的美国、欧盟会得利，而中国和泰国等东盟国家的贸易是逆差，如果人民币大幅升值，泰国的对华出口就会受损，这对泰国是好事吗？西方媒体借泰铢波动来攻 击人民币，哪里是站在泰国的立场上，无非为自己的利益罢了！许宁宁也说，在上次东南亚金融危机中，恰恰是中国宁愿遭受巨大的损失，坚持人民币不贬值，东南 亚才没有雪上加霜，得到了复苏的机会。说人民币升值对东南亚国家有利，这种观点或者是没动脑子，或者就是出于某种目的。

中国人民银行的那位金融官员认为，这一次，对泰铢的炒作和应声而起的归罪人民币的舆论，绝对应当引起中国的警惕，那极有可能就是在制造人民币应当大幅升值 的市场预期。事实上，国际投机资本已经买了大量人民币资产，还在继续狂购，就是等着高价抛售人民币资产的“良机”，而这种投机将对中国的金融、经济产生不 可忽视的负面影响。他还认为泰铢之所以相对比较脆弱，一个重要原因是泰国在还没有具备成熟应对国际游资冲击的能力的情况下就过早地开放了资本账户，人民币 汇率机制的调整恰恰应该重视这一前车之鉴。

保尔森：中国没有操纵汇率

就在西方媒体无端攻击中国人民币汇率的同时，从美国白宫传来了不同的声音，刚刚参加完中美战略经济对话的美国财长保尔森，回国后向国会递交了一份报告，称 “从技术角度看，中国没有操纵人民币汇率”。美联社注意到，半年前，当时的美国财长斯诺曾在记者会上说，布什政府对中国的汇率制度改革缓慢“非常不满”， 而保尔森的报告中指责中国的语气与之相比“低调多了”。

据报道，保尔森的报告已经遭到民主党和美国一些工商界人士的强烈批评。事实上，欧美国家内部要求人民币升值的压力一直存在，只是越来越多的政府采取了更加 理性的态度。12月18日，当欧盟统计办公室公布今年前9个月欧中贸易的逆差同比增长了19%，达到634亿欧元后，西方媒体对人民币汇率的批评也达到了 一个高潮。欧盟贸易委员曼德尔森19日在就此问题接受采访时说，中国政府“有能力、也应该继续让人民币升值”。但他同时也说，在这个问题上向中国政府施压 “并不是他的工作重点”，他认为“一些人夸大了人民币升值后会给平衡欧中贸易带来的好处”。

赚钱冲动的控制和利用

　　赚钱是所有股市投资人的最崇高的目标，如果有人说，来股市只是为了练练手，赚钱赔钱无所谓，那大多是对自己投资失误的解嘲。赚钱作为终极的目标，往往成为投资者眼光最集中的"焦点"，因此很容易被人为放大，再放大，放大了之后，就会产生心理的偏差，进而是判断的偏差。

　　有朋友在进入股市的初期，不敢贸然行动，就进行模拟操作。就是30万元资金，先只动用1万元操作。结果，还挺满意，觉得自己还行，于是全盘实战。实战的结果，却让他大失所望，成功远远小于模拟，而失败又远远大于模拟。于是叹息：手气不好，运气不好。其实，运气手气确实重要，也存在，但是，模拟的好于实战，这首先是心理上的因素在起作用。尽管模拟的时候，和实战的方式差不多，但是赔钱的时候心情大不一样。模拟赔钱，虽然不舒服，还不至于心痛，关键是总结经验，赢的要求没那么急切；而实战就不一样，赢的要求就特别的高，一旦赔钱，心态受挫，心性受到干扰，自然影响判断。

　　于是在现实操作中，赚钱的冲动就随时干扰着你的判断。

　　比如现在的行情，大盘每天都跌幅很大，但是每天都有大涨的股票。按照理性的方法，在这样急跌市场的中途，你如果没有比较大的把握，参与的时候要特别的小心，因为一旦出现失误，可能在一个小时之内让你损失5%，甚至更多。大跌的股票可能还要继续大跌，大涨的股票可能忽然转为大跌。弄不懂就看，看不懂就玩，只有在大盘出现大跌放巨量的时候，或者跌幅累计较大的时候--比如再来一两根大阴线，才可以尝试动手。因为毕竟，现在大盘还是处于牛市格局中。牛市的特征极是涨的慢，跌得快。相反，如果每天缩量阴跌，那参与的价值也就不大了。

　　最近有几位朋友，对我说：明明某股票涨的不错，也有机构吸筹的迹象，但是我不敢买，不买他就表现不错；忍不住买进，结果一下子就套死了，这是怎么回事？

　　我说，你的资金肯定不大。大资金在吸筹的时候，希望一边吸纳，股价还有下跌，这样可以使自己的成本逐渐降低。因此，在这样的下跌中，有一些大资金确实在吸纳。但你的资金少，一口吃个饱，那就不一样。比如你在11元吃进某股，30万元满仓，成本价在11元以上；人家3000万资金，在11元吃进300万元，然后在下跌中不断吸纳，到了10元已经吸纳2/3，然后再上涨途中一路吸纳到11元之上，均价10.5元，结果，人家已经赚钱，你才保本。因此，小资金和大资金，在吸筹的操作上往往是方向相反的：小资金喜欢在上涨的途中吸纳，因为下跌的时候不知道要跌到哪里。看懂了方向，胆子大了，就吸纳；大资金不然，本轮行情的主流资金，在2003年上半年就动手了，一直到年底，才开始发动行情，而发动行情的途中，他们依然在不断地吸筹，这就是大资金。而几千万的中等资金，则喜欢在股价呈现低估，主力资金已经在悄然吸纳的时候，跟着吸纳，这样节省时间，短平快地赚钱。

　　现在的问题是，不论是中等资金，还是小资金，都有两个问题需要特别注意：一是吸纳的时机。如果你在调整的初期开始吸纳，价格明显太高，虽然是牛市，成本的因素也是要特别考虑的。何况，任何时候风险都要第一重视呢？调整的势头衰竭了，你买进，即便有风险，也不会很大。同样的关键，就是要控制赚钱的冲动。别听说某股有利好，也不顾大盘的疲弱，只想着赚钱，就冲进去。即便你没有买进，股价上去了，也不必后悔，主要考虑概率，控制风险。赚钱的欲望要用理性的缰绳来束缚，不可以没有，但不可以泛滥。

　　相反，我们可以利用人性的这个弱点，在大众都容易产生赚钱冲动的时候，我们考虑适当减仓或者退出--每次大盘到了阶段性顶部的时候，都是大众最疯狂抢盘的时候；在大众都恐慌抛售的时候，我们就可以来捡一点便宜--每次大盘到了阶段性底部的时候，恰恰就是大买家动手的时候。

The Securities and Exchange Commission Under surveillance

A top regulator tastes its own medicine

THESE are trying times for America's chief markets watchdog, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is being blamed for acting too tough and not tough enough both at the same time. A report last week by an independent panel suggested it was overzealous in enforcing its rules. At Senate hearings this week, the question was whether it pulls its punches when investigating the great and good.

The hearings focus on the SEC's handling of a probe into alleged insider trading. A former investigator with the agency, Gary Aguirre, claims his supervisors there blocked his efforts to look into whether a hedge fund, Pequot Capital Management, traded on private information provided by John Mack, chief executive of Morgan Stanley, ahead of mergers. Mr Mack was chairman of Pequot briefly last year before taking over at the big investment bank.

Mr Aguirre was fired last year after claiming that the SEC was reluctant to tackle influential figures. Mr Mack was eventually interviewed in connection with the probe, after Congress had started to take an interest. Senior SEC staff insist there was never enough evidence to link him to dodgy trades. The case was formally dropped last month. Mr Mack and Arthur Samberg, Pequot's founder, have repeatedly denied wrongdoing.

On December 5th Mr Aguirre's former supervisors testified that he was generally erratic, aggressive towards colleagues and obsessed with nailing Mr Mack. To some, this characterisation sits oddly with the fact that he received a merit-based pay rise less than a month before leaving. Moreover, it has emerged that he was not alone in his suspicions: a market-surveillance lawyer who is still at the SEC confirmed to senators that he had given warning in an e-mail that “something smells rotten” about the investigation. The politicians seem to be siding with Mr Aguirre too. “At best, it looks like extraordinarily lax enforcement... At worst, it has the overtone of a possible cover-up,” said Arlen Specter, head of the Senate's judiciary committee.

Getting to the truth will take time. Further testimony will be heard, with the Senate expected to publish a report early next year. To make matters worse, the SEC's enforcement and compliance departments are being investigated by the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress. The watchdog has arguably never been so closely watched.

Rebalancing act

The past week's ructions in the currency markets are a sign of changing perceptions of the world economy

WELL before it happened, it looked obvious. America's economy is slowing; the Federal Reserve last raised interest rates five months ago; and the country has a vast current-account deficit. Europe's economies have been springing mostly happy surprises: the European Central Bank is almost sure to increase rates on December 7th (see article) and will probably carry on doing so next year. Asia looks strong as well, and Japan's central bank has been wondering when it will be safe to raise interest rates again. Sooner or later, the dollar had to fall.

And so it has. Against the euro, the dollar had been dropping, little by little, for more than a month before it broke through $1.30 on November 24th, going on to hit a 20-month low (see chart). Against the pound, on November 28th the greenback was at its weakest for two years. It slipped against the yen too, though it later made up the ground. Against the yuan—politically the most sensitive exchange rate these days—it continued a stately decline.

Markets have been pricing in not only changes in relative growth rates—notably America's and Europe's—but also their implications for monetary policy. This global rebalancing was emphasised this week by the OECD in its twice-yearly Economic Outlook. In the spring the OECD forecast that America's economy would grow by 3.6% this year and 3.1% next year; now it reckons on 3.3% in 2006 and only 2.4% in 2007. For the euro area, it has raised its forecasts, from 2.2% this year and 2.1% in 2007 to 2.6% and 2.2% respectively.

So far, America is following the OECD's script. A bevy of statistics this week pointed to a weakening economy. There was more bad news from the housing market. New-home sales fell by 3.2% in October, the first drop in three months, and the stock of unsold new properties continued to rise. Although sales of existing homes picked up a bit last month, here too the unsold stock increased, to 7.4 months' supply.

The message on prices was mixed. Officially, the median price of new homes rose in October; that of existing homes fell by 3.5% from a year ago, the biggest drop since estate agents began keeping records in 1968. Both numbers should be taken with a pinch of salt. They do not take into account changes in the type of houses sold, nor, for new homes, the incentives that builders offer.

The main reason for the dollar's jitters was evidence that the housing bust may be infecting the broader economy. Consumer confidence, as measured by the Conference Board, fell further than expected this month. Wal-Mart, America's biggest retailer, has had a dismal November. And judging by their orders of durable goods, businesses may be scaling back spending. Orders for capital goods, excluding aircraft and defence, fell by 5.1% in October, the first drop in six months.

The gloom was partly countered by unexpectedly rosy revisions to America's third-quarter GDP. The dollar firmed on November 29th as new figures showed output was up by 2.2% at an annual rate between July and September, compared with the original estimate of 1.6%. On careful inspection, however, the figures are less cheery. Much of the increase is thanks to higher inventories, which bodes ill for future output.

Pessimists argue that recession is just around the corner: Nouriel Roubini, of Roubini Global Economics, predicts a recession by the middle of 2007. That is still a minority view, but financial markets clearly expect things to get at least bad enough for the Fed to start cutting interest rates soon. The prices of federal-funds futures suggest that investors think short-term interest rates are likely to decline within a few months.

One person who does not sound gloomy is Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Fed. This week, in his first speech on the economic outlook since July, Mr Bernanke painted a much brighter picture. Yes, the economy was slowing, but this “deceleration” was “roughly along the lines envisioned” by the Fed in July. Mr Bernanke said output growth could be “modestly below” its trend rate in the very short term, but made clear that he expected the economy to be growing at its sustainable rate within a year. Far from hinting at lower interest rates, he noted that inflation was still “uncomfortably high”: “whether further policy action against inflation will be required”, he added, would “depend on incoming data”.

Such talk may burnish the Fed's inflation-fighting credentials but is unlikely to mean much. The economy is clearly slowing and the news on inflation is benign. The latest GDP figures revised down the deflator for personal-consumption expenditures, the central bank's favourite inflation gauge, to an annual 2.4%. The pace of wage and salary growth was also much slower than first reported.

America's interest rates are clearly not going up. Nor, however, are cuts imminent. Mr Bernanke's speech showed that he is not unhappy about the economy's deceleration. That suggests a bout of weak growth will not mean lower rates. So dollar bears may be right about the direction of America's economy, but wrong about the consequences for monetary policy.
Those chirpy Europeans

There are two sides to any exchange rate: Europe's prospects matter as well as America's. In 2006 the euro area looks likely to grow at its fastest pace for six years. That its GDP growth is modest by American standards, largely because of its slower population growth, is not the point: what matters is that this year it has surprised the soothsayers time and again. That has lifted its currency, and not just against the dollar. A euro now buys more yen than at any time since the single currency was created.

Detailed figures for euro-area GDP, published on November 30th, confirmed a slowing from a stunning second quarter to a much duller third. But the 0.5% growth in the third quarter—roughly in line with the zone's sustainable rate—seems to have been built largely on domestic demand rather than net exports. Europe may therefore be well placed to withstand an American slowdown.

By no means is everything in the euro zone wonderful: thanks in part to a fall in companies' stocks, French GDP was flat in the third quarter. But there are plenty of good signs, notably in the euro area's biggest member, Germany, which for many years was a source of unremitting misery.

Despite disappointing retail sales in October and weak wage growth, German consumer confidence is at a five-year high. It helps that unemployment is falling, as it did in November. Business sentiment is also strong. The index of current conditions prepared by Ifo, a Munich economic-research institute, is at a 15-year high; Ifo's expectations index is also on the rise. Granted, the economy may be flattered at the end of this year by people's anticipation of an increase in value-added tax in January, as they spend now rather than pay more later. Although a dip is likely once the tax goes up, the economy looks unlikely to buckle.

All of this, coupled with rapid monetary growth in the euro area, suggests that the ECB will raise rates not only next week but also next year: when and by how much may well depend on how the zone copes with Germany's VAT increase and a planned tax rise in Italy. With the doubts about America's growth and interest rates, this makes the euro attractive.

So attractive, perhaps, that some wonder whether its rise could clobber Europe's exports, slow its economy and persuade the ECB not to raise rates after all. That looks a long way off. David Mackie, of JPMorgan, says that the euro would have to rise to $1.43 to make the ECB raise rates by a quarter of a percentage point less than it would otherwise have done. With rates only at 3.25%, there may be much more than a quarter-point increase to come.

Even the euro zone's finance ministers, who met this week, do not sound perturbed by the currency's climb. France's Thierry Breton was an exception, but his nervousness was dismissed as a “Pavlovian response” by Nout Wellink, the president of the Dutch central bank and one of the ECB's rate setters. As long as it has a stronger economy, Europe seems ready to live with a stronger currency.