自由放任与对金融业的管制:基于斯密与凯恩斯的理论比较

Laissez-Faire and Regulation of the Financial Industry:Theoretical Comparison Based on Smith and Keynes

关于亚当·斯密的研究文献表明,斯密虽然基本上坚持“自然自由体系”,主张对于一般的产业都要任其完全自由发展,但对于他那个时代的金融业的主体——银行系统,他却主张予以严格管制,这就使得他的理论出现了前后逻辑上的不一致。本文认为,斯密的这一思想转变的确受到了他一生中遭遇多次银行业危机的影响,尤其是1772年艾尔银行破产危机的影响。正是这些银行业危机使得他不断深入思考货币和银行业的运行方式,及其对自然自由体系的冲击,并提出了对该行业进行管制的主张。因此,斯密并不是现代自由主义者所塑造的那种市场原教旨主义者,他根植于对人性的深刻洞察,对自己的理论和政策取向做出适当的调整。这与约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯对金融业的看法有不少相通之处。由此可见,像斯密和凯恩斯这样的大思想家,他们从最终的人性层面开出的面向自己时代的经济学药方是何其的相似!

The literature on Adam Smith shows that although Smith basically adhered to the"system of natural liberty"and advocated that general industries should be allowed to develop freely,for the banking system,the main body of the financial industry of his time,however,he advocated strict control,which made his theory logically inconsistent.This paper believes that this change in Adam Smith's thinking was indeed affected by the many banking crises in his life,especilly the bankruptcy crisis of Ayr Bank in 1772.It was these banking crises that prompted him to engage in profound contemplation regarding the workings of money and banking and their impact on the system of natural liberty,and advocate for the regulation of the industry.Therefore,Adam Smith was not the kind of market fundamentalist that modern liberals have portrayed him to be.Instead,he made appropriate adjustments to his theories and policy orientations based on his profound insights into human nature.This has much in common with John Maynard Keynes's views on the financial industry.It can be seen that great thinkers like Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes exhibit significant similarities in their economic prescriptions for their respective eras from a human nature perspective.