货币化程度受一国特定的经济文化背景的深刻影响。因此，银行主导型金融体制未必就是与创新型企业发展互斥的体制，决不能想当然认为，中国金融体制的发展方向就是市场主导型体制。德国的实践就给我们提供了很好的例证。换句话说，我国高货币化比率可能还会长期存在。

Monetization degree by one country specific economic and cultural background of profound influence.so,Bank leading financial system is not necessarily and innovative enterprise development mutually exclusive system,Never take it for granted that,China's financial system is the development direction of the market leading system.Germany's practice will give us a good example.In other words,Our country high monetization ratio may be there for a long time.

　　我国货币化比率（M2与GDP之比）2012年末已高达188%，远超美国、英国和日本等国家。同时，广义货币发行（M2）则接近全球货币供应量的四分之一，从而成为全球货币存量第一大国。对此，有部分学者表现出格外忧虑之情，他们认为拥有如此大的货币存量，就如同头上顶着一个“堰塞湖”，会带来相应的风险，比如高通胀、资产价格泡沫或资金外流等等。

Our country monetization ratio(M2 and the ratio of GDP)By the end of 2012 has been as high as 188%,Far above the United States/Britain and Japan and other countries.At the same time,Broad money issue(M2)Is close to a quarter of the global money supply,So as to become a global money stock first great nation.this,Some scholars show particularly worries of love,They think that have so much money stock,As a on his head"lake",Will bring the corresponding risk,Such as high inflation/Asset price bubbles or capital flight and so on.

　　事情果真如此吗？ It was indeed the case?

　　不妨先看看造成我国货币化比率偏高的多种原因。一方面，股市并未在融资总量中发挥主导作用。多年来，沪深股市虽然扩容较快、绝对规模迅速增长，但在整个社会融资总量中的占比却变化不大。2002年，非金融企业境内股票融资占整个社会融资总量的比率为3.1%，至2011年末也不过3.4%。2012年全年，在沪深股市成了全球与基本面反差最大的股市的情形下，股市融资与社会融资总量之比更萎缩到年末的0.83%。既然中国经济还在快速发展，银行业又十分稳健，就没有道理不继续倚重间接融资。另外，我国居民储蓄倾向始终偏高，这有传统文化的深刻影响，此外，社会保障制度发展相对滞后，人口老龄化趋势加剧，收入差距有增无减等等，都使得公众倾向将更多收入用于储蓄。统计表明，1980年我国储蓄率34.5，2011年上涨到51%。需要补充说明的是，由于存在“储蓄（S）-投资（I）=净出口（NX）”恒等关系，无论将我国货币化比率较高归结于储蓄较多还是外汇储备迅速增加，其实都是等价的。所以，货币化程度受一国特定经济文化背景的显著影响。由于无法用数量精确描述特定国情影响而加以剔除，就很难借助M2与GDP之比国际比较得出更多的政策含义。

Might as well look at first to result in the monetization ratio on the high side of a variety of reasons.On the one hand,The stock market has not in total financing play a leading role.For many years,Shanghai and shenzhen stock market although flash faster/Absolute scale rapid growth,But in the whole society in the total amount of financing than but not change.In 2002,,Non-financial enterprises in China stock financing of the whole society's total financing ratio is 3.1%,To the end of 2011 only 3.4%.In the whole year of 2012,In the Shanghai and shenzhen stock market became a global and fundamental contrast the largest stock market in the cases,The stock market financing and the ratio of the total social financing more shrunk to 0.83% at the end of.Since China's economy is in rapid development,Banking and very robust,There is no reason not continue to rely on indirect financing.In addition,Our country residents savings tend to always on the high side,It has a profound impact on the traditional culture,In addition,Social security system development is relatively slow,An aging population increased trend,The income gap unabated, etc,All the public tendency will be more income for savings.Statistics show that,In 1980, savings rate 34.5,In 2011, up to 51%.Additional explanation is,In the presence of"savings(S)- investment(I)= net export(NX)"Identity relationship,No matter in the monetization ratio due to high savings more or foreign exchange reserves increase quickly,In fact are equivalent.so,Monetization degree by one country specific economic and cultural background of the significant influence.Unable to use quantity accurate describe specific national conditions and to eliminate the influence,It is hard to with the aid of M2 and the ratio of GDP international comparison more policy meaning.

　　再来分析一下市场的主导金融体制与银行主导的金融体制，前者未必优于后者。事实上，市场主导型金融体制正在受到金融危机史学家们的挑战。本质上看，银行可向公众发行流动性极高的存款凭证，不但使公众风险大幅下降，也使公众得以享受长期投资的高收益。相对而言，因为无法区分市场套利者和有流动性需求的投资者，金融市场不具有这种风险分散的功能。以美、英为代表的市场主导型金融体制国家在本轮国际金融危机中遭受重创，而以德国和中国为代表的银行主导型金融体制国家反而受损有限。还有，从上世纪70、80年代开始，金融危机即每隔几年发生一次，特别是进入90年代以后，已有近百个国家（地区）发生危机，可谓损失巨大。也就是说，如果我国继续在银行主导型金融体制下适当扩大直接融资比例，并打好金融安全的基础，即便在金融创新上稍有滞后，也会达到“磨刀不误砍柴工”的效果。另一方面，经济决定金融，将来中国需要什么样的金融体制，应当首先取决于公众对实体经济有什么样的期望。十八大进一步把创新提升到一个全新层次，这对金融业来说，就是要加大对小微企业以及创新创业型企业的政策支持力度。但理论与实践早已表明，虽然小规模风险投资可能先于银行资金进入创新型企业，但更大规模的直接融资——股票融资和债券融资却要大大迟于银行资金进入，说明银行主导型金融体制未必就是一种与创新型企业发展互斥的体制，因此，决不能想当然认为，中国金融体制的发展方向就是市场主导型体制。在这方面，德国的实践就给我们提供了很好的例证。换句话说，我国高货币化比率可能还会长期存在。

To analyse the market leading financial system and led by the bank's financial system,The former is better than that of the latter is.In fact,Market-based financial system is under the financial crisis the challenge of historians.Essence,,Banks may issue to the public liquidity high deposit certificate,Not only make public risk sharply,Also make the public to enjoy long term investment high yield.relatively,Because can't distinguish between market arbitrageurs and liquidity needs of investors,Financial markets do not have this kind of risk dispersion function.With the United States/English as a representative of market-based financial system countries in this international financial crisis hit hard,And in Germany and China as a representative of the bank leading financial system state instead of the damaged limited.and,From the last century 70/In the early 80 s,The financial crisis that happen once every few years,Especially in the 90 s,Nearly countries(area)crisis,Loss is great.that,If China continues to bank leading financial system appropriate to expand the proportion of direct financing,And play the basis of financial security,Even in the financial innovation has a slight lag,Will reach"Blade not cutting firewood."effect.On the other hand,Economic decided to financial,In the future China needs what kind of financial system,Should first of all depends on how the public judges the entity economy have what kind of expectation.The eighteenth big further innovation ascend to a new level,This is to the financial industry,Is to strengthen the small micro enterprise and innovation enterprises policy support.But the theory and practice that already,Although the small risk investment may before bank capital into innovative enterprise,But it is a direct financing, stock financing and bond financing will greatly later than bank capital into,That bank leading financial system is not necessarily a and innovative enterprise development mutually exclusive system,so,Never take it for granted that,China's financial system is the development direction of the market leading system.In this respect,Germany's practice will give us a good example.In other words,Our country high monetization ratio may be there for a long time.

　　当然还有个如何正确判断经济泡沫化程度的问题。既然货币化比率不是判定金融泡沫化程度的最佳指标，那就要寻找一种更为科学的判定方法。一种思路是“一般均衡”，站在经济金融全局视角去观察问题。比如，可以借助金融相关比率（全部金融资产与GDP的比值，FIR）。由于已剔除了银行主导型金融体制影响，在进行国别比较时，就能对一国经济泡沫化程度有更加准确的衡量。再比如，可以借助杠杆率指标（金融资产总量与权益资本的比值）。这次国际金融危机之所以在美欧国家爆发、蔓延，一个公认原因，就是金融业的高杠杆经营。作为对危机的反思，巴塞尔委员会提出杠杆率监管指标，并设定3%的下限。而我国也在2011年颁布了《商业银行杠杆率管理办法》，进一步要求商业银行并表和未并表的杠杆率均不得低于4%。所以，我们大可借助这一指标，来衡量我国金融是否已过度膨胀、超越了实体经济内在发展要求。另一种思路是“局部均衡”，抓主要矛盾。比如，上证综指曾从2006年初的1162点升至2007年的6124点，两年合计涨幅427%，这在世界股票史上是十分罕见的；再比如，20年之前，我国地方政府融资平台呈有序发展态势，但在4万亿刺激计划拉动下，平台公司井喷式增长。这两个例子都说明，如果不严格控制金融的泡沫化发展，演变为系统性或区域性风险就是大概率事件。

Of course there is a how to correctly judge the degree of economic frothy problem.Since the monetization ratio is not determine the degree of financial frothy best index,That is about to look for a more scientific decision method.A kind of thinking is"General equilibrium",Standing in the global economic and financial perspective to observe a problem.Such as,Can use financial correlation ratio(All financial assets and the ratio of GDP,FIR).Because already left bank leading financial system influence,In the country more,Can in one country economy of frothy more accurate measure.Again for instance,Can use leverage ratio index(Total financial assets and equity capital ratio).The international financial crisis broke out in the us and European countries/spread,A recognized reason,The financial industry is highly leveraged operation.As a reflection of the crisis,The Basel committee suggested leverage ratio regulation index,And set the lower limit of 3%.And our country in 2011 promulgated[The measures for the administration of the commercial bank leverage ratio],To go further by calling for a commercial bank and table and not the leverage ratio and table shall be less than 4%.so,We may have the aid of the indicators,To measure whether our country finance has excessive expansion/Beyond the entity economy inner development requirements.Another idea is"Local equilibrium",Tackling the principal contradiction.Such as,The Shanghai composite index was from 2006 at the beginning of the year 1162 points to 2007 points,Two years total or 427%,This in the world history of stock is very rare;Again for instance,Twenty years ago,Our local government financing platform is orderly development situation,But in 4 trillion stimulus plan under the pull,Platform company blowout type growth.The two each case,If not strictly control the frothy financial development,The evolution of systemic or regional risk is a big probability event.

　　（作者系独立经济学者）

(The author is independent economic scholars)