If the SEC’s proposals are not the answer, what changes can be made to make the system more stable? One route suggested by Mr Volcker is to make money fund deposits equivalent to bank deposits, with deposit insurance and all the regulations that would go with it. I doubt the benefits would exceed the costs of that strategy; there are easier ways to make the system less vulnerable.

如果美国证交会的提议都不能解决问题，那么还能采取哪些措施以增强金融体系的稳定性呢？保罗·沃尔克(Paul Volcker)的办法是将货币市场基金纳入存款保险覆盖范畴，并施行与之相关的所有监管法规，使其等同于银行存款。我怀疑这种做法的收益能否大于成本；增强金融体系的稳定性还有其他更简单易行的办法。

For example, the liquidity, duration, and quality standards for money funds could be further strengthened. The SEC made progress in 2010 in establishing minimum requirements, and these could be used as a framework for further discussion.

例如，可以进一步提升货币市场基金资产的流动性、久期以及质量标准。2010年，美国证交会在制定资产质量最低要求方面取得了进展，这可以为更深入的讨论提供一个框架。

Another idea is to establish “circuit breakers that take the form of standby liquidity fees on redemptions. For example, liquidity fees could be imposed if a fund’s liquidity fell below a prescribed weekly level.

【化解货币市场基金风险需要妥协】相关文章：

★ 东盟峰会将再推南海行为准则

★ 阿富汗军事基地遇袭10人受伤

★ 数字时代的零售业

★ “市场宠儿”越南风光不再

★ 走马观花看美国：体验世界过山车之最

★ 20世纪最无聊一天：1954年4月11日

★ 日韩大选的区别

★ 汇丰94亿美元出售平安保险股份

★ 北京新开地铁服务奥运

★ 韩国：朝鲜或准备发射卫星