No matter how hot they get, property markets tend to cool in the same ways. Attention starts to shift from year-on-year price changes to month-on-month comparisons. Transactions dry up. The shares of listed developers suffer, as they offer incentives to shift inventory. Analysts start to talk about “froth” being “skimmed.” All this is happening now in China, where prices in more than half of the 70 biggest cities were flat, or fell, between July and August.

　　不管一個(gè)地方的房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)曾有多熱，他們最終都傾向于以相同方式降溫。市場(chǎng)注意力開(kāi)始從年度價(jià)格變化，轉(zhuǎn)移至月度價(jià)格變化。交易量趨向枯竭。上市房地產(chǎn)開(kāi)發(fā)商通過(guò)促銷(xiāo)來(lái)出售庫(kù)存，牽連其股價(jià)遭受打擊。分析人士開(kāi)始談?wù)撌袌?chǎng)的“去泡沫”化。所有這一切目前正在中國(guó)發(fā)生，全國(guó)70個(gè)最大的城市中，有半數(shù)以上城市在今年7月至8月期間房產(chǎn)價(jià)格下降或持平。

　　There are few reasons to suspect a crash is imminent. Households are generally not buying properties they cannot afford with money they do not have – the proximate cause of the collapse in the US and elsewhere. There are still very powerful incentives for buyers to load up on property: low interest rates on both deposits and loans, and a very shortlist of alternative outlets for savings. Local governments, which depended on land sales for about a third of their revenues last year, also have a strong interest in keeping prices high. Only two cities responded to the government’s July call for added restrictions on housing purchases, for example.

　　沒(méi)有什么理由推測(cè)中國(guó)樓市即將崩盤(pán)。中國(guó)的家庭一般不會(huì)用自己還沒(méi)有的錢(qián)，去購(gòu)買(mǎi)自己無(wú)法承擔(dān)的物業(yè)——而這是美國(guó)和其他國(guó)家出現(xiàn)房地產(chǎn)危機(jī)的直接原因。市場(chǎng)仍為購(gòu)房者置業(yè)提供著強(qiáng)大動(dòng)力：貸款和存款的利率都比較低，儲(chǔ)蓄投資的其它渠道也相當(dāng)有限。地方政府也有強(qiáng)大利益保持房?jī)r(jià)高企，去年其財(cái)政收入的大約三分之一都依賴(lài)土地交易。例如，7月份只有兩個(gè)城市響應(yīng)了政府要求收緊購(gòu)房限制的呼吁。

　　Still, some sense of a cycle would be welcome. In the 17 years since the State Council abolished the allocation system of housing, allowing apartments to become privately-traded commodities, the market has never experienced anything close to a slump. That has led investors to believe that prices can only go one way. Demonstrating otherwise is fraught with risk, given that the property sector accounts for more than a quarter of final domestic demand in China, according to UBS estimates. Yet policymakers should take their cue from the 76 per cent of respondents to a central bank survey last week who complained that prices were too high – the highest level since real estate data were first included in the quarterly poll in 2009. If social stability is policymakers’ overarching aim – and it is – a slowdown is more than just desirable.

　　但話(huà)說(shuō)回來(lái)，有一點(diǎn)周期的感覺(jué)將是可喜的。自中國(guó)國(guó)務(wù)院取消住房分配制度、允許公寓房成為私人交易商品的17年以來(lái)，中國(guó)樓市從來(lái)沒(méi)有經(jīng)歷過(guò)任何大幅下滑。這讓投資者相信房?jī)r(jià)只會(huì)朝著一個(gè)方向走。展示其它情形是充滿(mǎn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的，據(jù)瑞銀(UBS)估計(jì)，中國(guó)房地產(chǎn)行業(yè)占國(guó)內(nèi)最終需求逾四分之一。盡管如此，政策制定者仍應(yīng)從央行上周一份調(diào)查結(jié)果得到一些啟發(fā)，76%的受訪(fǎng)者抱怨房?jī)r(jià)過(guò)高——這是該民意調(diào)查2009年首次將房地產(chǎn)數(shù)據(jù)納入問(wèn)卷以來(lái)，人數(shù)比例最高的一次。如果說(shuō)維持社會(huì)穩(wěn)定是政策制定者的首要目標(biāo)——事實(shí)也正是如此——那么樓市減速就不僅僅只是可取而已。