Here is a contender for most overused analogy of the year: buying naked credit default swap protection is like buying insurance against your neighbour's house burning down. Hedge funds bought it on Greek debt then fetched the fuel and matches, according to European politicians agitating for a ban. This is daft. CDS speculators do not have the power to push countries towards default. The better argument for regulatory interference in CDS markets is to protect buyers and sellers from themselves, not defend their targets.
下面这个类比可以参加“本年度最遭滥用类比”的评选：买入无实体信用违约互换合同(naked CDS)，就像是买入一份保险防范你邻居家房子被烧毁。用鼓吹禁止此类交易的欧洲政治家们的话说，对冲基金先是买入针对希腊债务的CDS，然后取出了汽油和火柴。这种说法很愚蠢。把相关国家推向违约，CDS投机者可没这个本事。若要支持对CDS市场实施监管干预，更为有力的论点应该是，要防止买卖双方受到自身过失的影响，而不是要保护他们所针对的目标。
您已阅读29%（736字），剩余71%（1821字）包含更多重要信息，订阅以继续探索完整内容，并享受更多专属服务。