[2012.09.08] My little crony 我的官场哥们
[color=#444444][font=Tahoma,][table=98%][tr][td][url=http://www.ecocn.org/thread-82144-1-1.html]http://www.ecocn.org/thread-82144-1-1.html[/url]【导读】：中国股市是出了名的政策市，股价和政策高度相关。而美国教授发表了一篇关于立法对股价影响的论文，深入分析了无论市场走势如何，如何在短时间内投资获得高收益率。请看文章分析。
[size=2][color=Red][b]Legislation and investing
立法和投资
[/b][/color][/size]
[size=4][b]My little crony【1】
我的官场哥们
[/b][/size]
[b]You too can enjoy the benefits of Beltway capitalism【2】
你也能享受裙带资本主义的好处
[/b]
[size=2][color=Silver]Sep 8th 2012 | NEW YORK | from the print edition[/color][/size]
THE nexus between politics and commerce may conjure thoughts of whispered deals in smoke-filled corridors. But connections are not everything. A new NBER working paper*, by Lauren Cohen and Christopher Malloy of Harvard Business School and Karl Diether of Dartmouth College, shows how ordinary investors can also get in on the action by predicting the impact of new legislation on American firms.
政治和商业的关系可能使人想到在烟雾缭绕走廊上窃窃私语地进行交易。但是关系并不是一切。由哈佛商学院的劳伦•科恩、克里斯多佛•马洛伊以及达特茅斯学院的Karl Diether共同制作的国家经济研究局工作论文解释了普通投资者如何能够通过预测新立法对美国公司的影响而采取行动。
The authors first assigned firms domiciled in a senator’s home state to one of 49 standard industry classifications. That allowed them to identify the industries of interest to each senator: if an industry ranked in the top three in terms of sales, it was labelled “important” to that state.
作者首先将位于参议员家乡州的公司按照49个标准行业分类之一进行划分。这可以让他们确定与每位参议员有利益关系的行业：如果一类行业在销售额方面排名前三，就被确定为对该州“很重要”。
Next they looked at bills that were voted on by the Senate between 1989 and 2008 and screened them for industry-related keywords, such as “crude oil” or “military”. If a bill affected an industry that mattered in a specific state, the relevant senator was tagged as “interested”.
下一步他们查看了在1989年到2008年参议院投票的法案，并且用与该行业相关的关键词分类，比如“原油”或者“军事”。如果一项法案对一个州举足轻重的行业造成影响，对应参议员就被标记为“利益相关”。
Armed with these data, the authors could start ploughing through voting records. If the proportion of interested senators voting “yes” exceeded the proportion of uninterested senators giving their assent, the bill was presumed to be positive for the industry in question. If the ratios of negative votes fitted the same pattern, then the law was bad for the industry. On this basis, the authors tested a simple investment strategy that bought or shorted industries accordingly when bills were passed, and found that the portfolio would have delivered steep annualised returns of 9-12%, independent of how the overall market had moved.
拥有了这些数据后，作者开始对投票记录进行分析。如果利益相关参议员投赞成票的比例超过了无利益瓜葛投赞成票的比例，这项法案就被认定为对讨论中的行业有积极影响。反之，如果投反对票的比例也像上述一样，则该法案对行业有消极影响。在这个基础上，作者检验了一个简单的投资策略：当法案通过时，相应地增持或减持相关行业的股票。结果发现无论整个市场的走势怎样，这种投资策略能够带来高达9%-12%的年度收益率。
The more interested senators voted in favour of bills, the more positive it was for their industries’ shares. The biggest returns of all came from picking out individual firms that were likely to be particularly affected by a bill. Although specific firms are not mentioned in laws, the authors found success with a strategy of investing in companies headquartered in the states of interested senators.
投赞成票的参议员与相应行业越有利益关系，则对该行业的份额影响越积极。而挑选出那些极有可能受法案影响的私人公司，可以获得最大的收益。尽管特定公司没在法案里提及，但是作者发现对那些总部位于利益相关参议员家乡州的公司投资，能够取得成功。
The mystery is why the broader market is so slow to recognise the effect of legislation. You might expect gains or losses to materialise in the run-up to a vote or on the day of passage, but it actually takes a long time for the impact of a bill to show up in share prices. The prospect of wading through pages of legalese might be one explanation: returns increased if a bill went back and forth between the House【3】 and the Senate【4】, a process that typically adds to laws’ complexity and unreadability. Whatever the explanation, [color=Red]a clever observer of Washington, DC, has 60 trading days to front-run the broader market. [/color]At least, he did until the paper was published.
奥秘在于为什么更广阔的市场如此之慢才意识到法律的影响。你可能期待能够在投票前夕或者法案通过的那一天将得失精确化。但是事实上需要花上很长的时间才能看到法案的影响力在股价中得到体现。可能那些法律文件理解起来有点难度也是一个解释：如果一项法案在众议院和参议院之间反复不定，收益会增加。因为这样的过程通常能够增加法律的复杂性和难理解性。无论解释是什么，[color=Red]华盛顿一个聪明的观察者有六十个交易日来领先于更广阔的市场。[/color]至少他是在这篇论文发表以后这样做的。
* “Legislating Stock Prices”, August 2012
“立法影响股价”，2012年8月
[color=Silver][size=2]from the print edition | Finance and economics
[/size][/color]
[color=Purple]译者注：[/color]
【1】crony：a friend-used about powerful people who will help each other even if it is slightly dishonest.
从这个解释来看，是说官场上的朋友，而cronyism是任人唯亲的意思，再者，整篇文章是说立法会对相应行业的公司股价造成影响，从而进行投资。crony在这里我的理解是由于立法会对股价造成影响，因此人们会接助于那些在官场的朋友得到信息，进行投资。这是个人理解，如理解有误，望指出。
【2】Beltway capitalism：关于Belyway其实是个隐喻，维基百科对“inside the Beltway”的解释是："Inside the Beltway" is an American idiom used to characterize matters that are, or seem to be, important primarily to officials of the U.S. federal government, to its contractors and lobbyists, and to the corporate media which cover them—as opposed to the interests and priorities of the general U.S. population.
The Beltway refers to Interstate 495, the Capital Beltway, a circumferential highway (beltway) that has encircled Washington, D.C. (the capital of the United States) since 1964. Some speakers of American English now employ the word as a metonym for federal government insiders (cf. Beltway bandits). [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_the_Beltway]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_the_Beltway[/url]
从这可以看出。Beltway其实是指华盛顿的政治圈，与普通人区别开来，我在这里理解为裙带关系。其实整个这句话有个批评的意思，批评的是裙带资本主义的作风。个人理解，如理解错误，望指出。
【3】the House：House of Representatives 美国众议院。美国众议院为美国国会两院之一，另一院为参议院。美国每一州以人口为基准在众议院中行使代表权，但各州至少有一名议员。院内议员总数经法律定额为435名。众议员一任两年。两院制国会的起源是因为国家的创建者希望拥有一个贴近且跟随民意公论的“人民议院”；以及与一个较为慎重且具贵族气派的参议院，以防护集体情绪的狂乱。宪法规定法律之通过须经两院允许。 众议院一般被认为较参议院更具党派色彩。宪法制定者中有很多人企图让参议院（一开始是由州议会选举）成为公民直选的众议院的制衡机构。于是“建议与同意”权（如批准条约的权力）授权仅由参议院单独行使。众议院也有其独有的权力：倡议岁入法案之权、弹劾政府官员、以及在选举人团僵持不下时选举总统。然而，所有这些权力都可由参议院反制（counter-check）。参议院一般较众议院及众议员更具威望。参议员任期较长、人数较少、且（多数情况下）较众议员代表更多的选民。 众议院会议厅位于首都华盛顿特区的国会山庄南翼。参议院在同一建筑物的北翼开会。[url=http://baike.baidu.com/view/811117.htm]http://baike.baidu.com/view/811117.htm[/url]
【4】the Senate：美国参议院是美国的立法部门──美国国会的两院之一。美国每一州于参议院中均有两位议员作为代表，与各州人口无关，全院员额为100名议员。参议员任期六年，相互交错，每隔两年改选约三分之一席。美国副总统任参议院议长，无参议员资格。参议院公认较众议院更为审慎；参议员名额较少而任期较长，容许学院派看法与党派之见，较众议院更易自外于公共舆论。参议院拥有若干列于宪法而未授予众议院的权力，被喻为白宫内政外交的把关人。[url=http://baike.baidu.com/view/946964.htm]http://baike.baidu.com/view/946964.htm[/url]
[color=Purple]生词：[/color]
nexus ：A nexus is a connection or series of connections within a particular situation or system. n.联系，关系
conjure： make sth appear as a picture in the mind V.使某事物浮现于脑中
domicile：Your domicile is the place where you live. n.住所
legalese：language used by lawyers and in legal documents, which is difficult for ordinary people to understand n.法律术语[/td][/tr][/table][size=12px][img=32,32]http://www.ecocn.org/static/image/filetype/pdf.gif[/img][url=http://www.ecocn.org/forum.php?mod=attachment&aid=NDg1MTV8YzJhNWI2MTV8MTM0NzE1MjQwMnwxMDg4MHw4MjE0NA%3D%3D]Legislating Stock Prices.pdf[/url]
494.17 KB, 下载次数: 0
[/size]
[/font][/color] 挺有意思的研究，a股也可以套用，只是a股的政策更不透明。
页:
[1]