????最新的標(biāo)普/Case-Shiller房?jī)r(jià)指數(shù)（S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price index）顯示,，5月份美國(guó)20個(gè)主要城市的住房?jī)r(jià)格同比上漲了12.2%；這項(xiàng)廣受關(guān)注的指數(shù)常被用來(lái)衡量美國(guó)住房市場(chǎng)的健康狀況,。周二發(fā)布的這項(xiàng)數(shù)據(jù)高于大多數(shù)人的預(yù)期,，創(chuàng)下2006年3月以來(lái)的最大年度漲幅。

????自從本輪經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退結(jié)束以來(lái),，很多人認(rèn)為一旦美國(guó)住房市場(chǎng)復(fù)蘇,，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)將最終呈現(xiàn)出良好的增勢(shì)。但歷史表明，這個(gè)流傳廣泛的說(shuō)法其實(shí)并不可靠,。住房市場(chǎng)的走向與整體經(jīng)濟(jì)的健康狀況及其走向并沒有太多關(guān)聯(lián),。

????當(dāng)然，這并不是說(shuō)房?jī)r(jià)和銷售不重要,。畢竟,，美國(guó)人的個(gè)人財(cái)富絕大部分仍然存在于住房，而不是股票等其他資產(chǎn)中,。因此,，上述說(shuō)法的邏輯是：如果房?jī)r(jià)上漲，房屋所有者會(huì)覺得自己更有錢了,，從而增加支出,，進(jìn)而推動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)。

????巴克萊（Barclays）美國(guó)首席經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家迪恩?馬吉表示,，雖然這種說(shuō)法一般而言沒錯(cuò),，但住房市場(chǎng)并不總是與GDP存在清晰的關(guān)聯(lián)，如今住房市場(chǎng)占美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的比例已大大小于住房市場(chǎng)崩潰前的水平,，這一點(diǎn)當(dāng)然也不會(huì)有幫助,。相比2005年年中，住房投資占GDP比例創(chuàng)下6.3%的峰值,，如今這個(gè)比例已經(jīng)下降到了2.7%,。

????僅僅因?yàn)樽》渴袌?chǎng)增勢(shì)良好并不意味著美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)也會(huì)出現(xiàn)良好的增勢(shì)。歷史上多次出現(xiàn)過(guò)住房市場(chǎng)反彈或大幅增長(zhǎng)時(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)卻沒有那么快的情況,，反之亦然,。去年，美國(guó)住房市場(chǎng)以出乎意料地強(qiáng)勢(shì)增長(zhǎng),，而美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)卻繼續(xù)步履蹣跚,；住房投資增長(zhǎng)12.1%，GDP僅增長(zhǎng)了2.2%,。而且,，在1987年至1999年間，住房投資年化增長(zhǎng)率為5.3%,，高于GDP的增幅4.5%,。

????反之，也有過(guò)這樣一些時(shí)期,，盡管經(jīng)濟(jì)在增長(zhǎng),，住房市場(chǎng)卻在萎縮：1965年至1967年間，住房投資年化增長(zhǎng)率為-5%,，而GDP增長(zhǎng)率卻達(dá)到了5.1%,。

????馬吉說(shuō)：“我的意思并不是說(shuō)住房不重要,，而是有些時(shí)候其他因素可能更重要?！?/p>

????巴克萊預(yù)計(jì),，2014年，美國(guó)住房投資預(yù)計(jì)將增長(zhǎng)10.3%,，而美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)可能只增長(zhǎng)2.2%,，數(shù)萬(wàn)聯(lián)邦雇員正在面臨強(qiáng)制休假，政府項(xiàng)目縮減,。盡管這比完全沒增長(zhǎng)要好,，但這種失衡不容忽視。

????今年早些時(shí)候?qū)嵤┑募佣惪s支措施將繼續(xù)拉低經(jīng)濟(jì)增速,，據(jù)美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)預(yù)算辦公室（U.S. Congressional Budget Office）估算,，今年GDP將由此縮減0.6%。從8月份起,，美國(guó)開始取消縮支計(jì)劃,，而且將一直延續(xù)到整個(gè)2014年。美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)預(yù)算辦公室就此進(jìn)行的一項(xiàng)單獨(dú)研究顯示,，取消縮支計(jì)劃將在2014年底前增加30萬(wàn)至160萬(wàn)新工作崗位,；GDP可能因此增加0.2%至1.2%。

????因此,，雖然美國(guó)住房市場(chǎng)吸引了大量的關(guān)注,，但它其實(shí)并不能真正反映當(dāng)今的美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????Home prices across America's 20 major cities in May climbed 12.2% higher from a year earlier, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price index, a widely watched gauge of the health of the U.S. housing market. This number, reported Tuesday, was higher than most expected and the biggest annual gain since March 2006.

????Since the Great Recession ended, many assumed that once the housing market recovered, the economy would finally grow at a healthy pace. But as history has shown, this is a myth. The direction of the housing market doesn't say a whole lot about the health of the overall economy and where it's headed.

????It's not that home prices and sales aren't important. After all, the vast majority of Americans' wealth is still tied to the homes they own, as opposed to other assets, such as the stock market. And so the thinking goes: If home prices rise, homeowners would feel richer and therefore spend more, which would in turn, drive economic growth.

????While that may generally be true, the housing market isn't always so neatly linked to GDP, says Dean Maki, U.S. chief economist at Barclays. It also doesn't help that the housing market makes up a much smaller share of the U.S. economy today than it did before the market collapsed: Whereas residential investment peaked at 6.3% of GDP in the middle of 2005, it has spiraled down to 2.7% today.

????Just because the housing market grows at a healthy clip, it doesn't mean the economy will. At various points throughout history, housing either rebounded or boomed while the economy didn't grow as quickly and vice versa. Last year, the housing market recovered in an unexpectedly big way while the economy slogged along; residential investment grew 12.1%, but GDP grew only 2.2%. Also, between 1987 through 1999, residential investment grew faster at an annualized rate of 5.3% than GDP at 4.5%.

????By contrast, there were periods when the housing market actually shrunk, even as the economy grew: Between 1965 and1967, residential investment contracted at an annualized rate of 5% while GDP grew 5.1%.

????"The point is not that housing doesn't matter, but there are times when other factors matter a lot more," Maki says.

????For 2014, residential investment is expected to grow 10.3%, while the economy will likely grow only 2.2% as tens of thousands of federal employees face furloughs and cuts to government programs, Barclays forecasts. This is better than no growth, but the imbalance is hard to dismiss.

????Higher taxes and spending cuts that kicked in earlier this year will drag down growth, reducing GDP by 0.6 % this year, according to estimates by the U.S. Congressional Budget Office. However, canceling the spending cuts could add between 300,000 to 1.6 million new jobs by the end of 2014; GDP could also be 0.2% and 1.2% higher, according to a separate report by the CBO that looked into the implications of eliminating the spending cuts starting in August and all of 2014.