经过了近40年的高速发展,现在的中国正处在经济增长和社会发展的转折点。在这方面,薛力(音译)博士总结了5个当前中国面临的重大挑战和潜在隐患,下面来看第一个。
每人一小段,翻译我也行!
每日新素材,等你来认领! http://www.ltaaa.com/translation/
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
30 years since beginning its reforms, China has yet to create a political and social model for sustainable development.
改革开放已经30年了,但中国还没有创造一种可持续发展的政治和社会模式。
After enjoying rapid development for nearly 40 years, China is at a turning point in terms of both economic growth and social development. In this series, Dr. Xue Li examines the five most critical challenges and potential pitfalls China faces today. See the first piece here.
经过了近40年的高速发展,现在的中国正处在经济增长和社会发展的转折点。在这方面,薛力(音译)博士总结了5个当前中国面临的重大挑战和潜在隐患,下面来看第一个
More than 30 years have passed since China began its reform and opening up, but it has yet to create a political and social model for sustainable development.
改革开放已经30多年了,但中国还没有创造一种可持续发展的政治和社会模式。
On the economic side, by and large the market economy has taken the leading role, but there are some serious shortcomings. The government still intervenes too much in the economy. This problem of improper intervention in the economy has not been solved. To cite just two examples:
在经济方方面,总体而言,市场经济已经占据主导地位,但是也同时存在一些严重的缺点,政府对市场经济的干预仍然较多。在经济领域的不适当干预的问题还没有解决。举两个例子
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
First, the stock market bears clear signs of being a policy-driven market. The recent classic example is the government’s violent intervention to rescue the market Regrettably, not only was this action ineffective, it also provided evidence to those abroad who doubt that China has a market economy. Fortunately, the government has taken note of that and is making suitable adjustments. This new recalibration very possibly will suit the needs of a market economy.
第一, 股票市场有着明显的政策驱动市场符号。近期最经典的例子就是政府的暴力救市。遗憾的是,这个不光没有作用,也为那些国外怀疑中国市场经济的人提供了证据。幸运的是,中央政府注意到了这点,并且进行了适度的调整。这种新的再次调整很可能会适合市场经济的需求。
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Second, restrictions on and discrimination against private sector enterprises remains a problem. Private sector enterprises already provide employment for most of China’s labor force and account for most of China’s GDP. However, many fields restrict or forbid the entry of private enterprises. The proportion of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) is too large. SOEs are less efficient and yet still often get special treatment, such as being granted monopoly status or special subsidies. This leads to unfair market conditions and to the waste and reverse flows of economic resources.
第二,对私营企业的限制和歧视仍然是一个问题。私营企业对中国劳动力就业和GDP贡献良多。但是,在很多领域,仍然限制或禁止私营企业参与。国有企业的规模过大,国企效率不高,并且经常享受特殊待遇,例如获得垄断地位或者特殊补贴。这造成不公平市场环境并经济资源的浪费和回流
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Politically, leaders at every level of China’s government have too much overall influence on the area which they govern. A change in leaders brings on a cascade of new policies — big changes in planning for economic development, in urban construction and planning, and in the bureaucratic system. Meanwhile, the problem of inadequate oversight of the top leaders at each level has not been solved. Plus, there is no mechanism for effectively constraining the growth of local debt. According to European and U.S. standards, some Chinese local governments are in fact already bankrupt.
政治层面上,中国各级领导人在所辖区域的综合影响力太大。领导人的调任会带来一系列新政策, 经济发展规划的重大变化,城市建设和规划的变化,以及在体制上的变化等。与此同时,对各级最高领导人监管不足的问题还没有解决。另外,没有一个机构能够有效地控制地方债务的增长。按照欧洲和美国的标准,某些中国地方政府实际上已经破产。
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Oro Invictus • 9 days ago
I'm going to be honest, when I saw these articles coming out I was not expecting it to be from someone from the CASS, given they both
A) Acknowledge the PRC's growth strategies and sustainability are far from faultless, as is the case for any state and
B) Does not simply dismiss these faults as being something easily brushed aside.
I say this primarily because of the recent accusations of "ideological deviance" against the CASS and attempts to rein them in.
说实话,当我看到这篇文章的时候,我就没指望这是来自中国社科院的手笔,基于以下两个理由:
A 承认中国的增长策略和可持续性离着完美无缺差很远,任何国家都是这样
B 没有轻易地忽视这些缺点好像可以轻易的解决一样。
之所以这么说主要是因为对中国社科院关于“意识形态异常”的指责和控制。
Granted, they're not terribly in-depth and, for the most part, are simply echoing thoughts we have heard from other analysts as well as the CPC itself, but that it's being discussed in a forum outside of the PRC is certainly welcome news. Hopefully we will see more of such in the future, at least on the Diplomat.
当然,这类说法并不是太深入,并且,其中大部分是简单地对我们从其他分析者还有共产党自身所听到的思想的呼应,但是,这在中国之外的论坛里讨论的确是很受欢迎的新闻。希望我们在将来可以看到更多类似的新闻,至少在《外交官》杂志上。
-------------译者:二点亦旋-审核者:文所未闻------------
Exocet Oro Invictus • 9 days ago
It's a small step above the propag....ooops I mean the 'analysis' of Dingding Chen
楼上的可比陈定定的洗地……哎呀,我的意思是比他的“分析”强一点咯
ltlee1 Oro Invictus • 8 days ago
It is odd that TD's edition does not provide the source of Xue Li's (薛力) Chinese article. And whether the translation was authorized.
楼上上的,TD版并没有提供薛力的中文原文,这有点奇怪哦。而且这个文的翻译是否被授权了
life form ltlee1 • 8 days ago
The third one comes with a note that says Gao Dawei translated it.
"whether the translation was authorized"? it makes no mention. Who authorizes something like this translation?
楼上的,第三点那里标出了是Gao Dawei翻译的。
“这个文的翻译是否被授权了”?没说耶。谁来授权翻译?
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Be Reasonable • 9 days ago
I wonder if China's political & economic models might actually be stable. As someone living in the United States, my knee-jerk reaction is to applaud democracy and free markets. But China's recent resurgence is obviously not based on democracy nor free markets and, frankly, it's hard to argue with the results that they've achieved.
我想知道中国的政治和经济模式可能真的是稳定的。作为一个生活在美国的人,我的潜意识的反应就是为民主我自由市场鼓掌,但中国近期的复兴显然不是基于民主自由市场,并且,坦白说,很难对他们取得成就所三道四
Additionally, in the grand scheme of things, democracy is a fairly new form of government for most of the world. To my knowledge, China has never been a democracy during its entire millennia-old history. Other large countries (Roman Empire, Mongol Empire, Ottoman Empire, Spain at it's peak, Tsarist Russia, British Empire) weren't really democratic in our modern sense either. Even in the United States, women's suffrage didn't take place until the early 20th century.
此外,从大方面看,对世界上的大多数国家而言,民主是一种相对新的政府形式。据我了解,在几千年的历史长河中,中国从来就不是一个民主社会。其他大国(罗马帝国、蒙古帝国、土耳其帝国,巅峰时期的西班牙,沙俄帝国,大英帝国),在现代人意识里,当时都不是真正的民主社会。即使是美国,直到20世纪早期,女性才有投票权
Last, I think the term 'free markets' is a myth. Pure capitalism where anything goes certainly isn't taking place in the United States. We have an abundance of business regulation (minimum wage, Workers Comp, union rights, anti-trust laws, anti-bribery laws, etc.) as well as direct intervention by our Government in our markets (Fed interest rates, purchase of our own Treasuries, circuit breakers if our stock market plummets, etc). The degree of intervention by China in their economy may be greater but, again, I'm not sure that translates into their economy being more unstable than ours.
最后,“自由市场”这个词就是个神话。纯粹的资本主义应该有的东西并没有发生在美国。我们有大量的业务管理规定(最低工资、工人薪酬、工会权利、反垄断法、反贿赂法等)并且有政府部门对市场的直接干预(例如,联邦利率、购买国债、股市下跌时的下限条款)。中国政府对市场的干预力度可能更大,但是,再次重申,我不确定这转换到他们的经济中会不会比我们的更不稳定。
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
pug_ster Be Reasonable • 7 days ago
Excellent point. Xue Li is just an independent think tank for the CASS, but doesn't mean that he represents their or China's views. It is true that many China's party cadres got rich as the result of China's boom, it is no different than what the US politicians does with its revolving door with lobbyists. But hey, at least the party's Cadres help build China as an economic powerhouse whereas America's revolving door politicians/lobbyists are there for their personal gain.
好观点。薛力(音译)只是为中国社科院工作的独立智库的一员,但这并不意味着他代表中国社科院或者中国的观点。随着中国的高速发展,的确有很多中国党员干部富了起来,但这跟美国走马灯似的政客或是说客相比,没有什么不同。但是,他们至少帮助把中国建设成为了一个经济引擎,反而美国的政客和游说者只是为了满足私利。
hansolo_2012 Be Reasonable • 8 days ago
Don't get me wrong, but I believed Chinese Economy is just an expansion of Western World Economy. Also you should be aware that most of the Western World Countries are Democratic, just saying.
不要误会我,但是我相信,中国经济只是西方世界经济的延伸
你也应该注意到,大部分西方世界国家是民主国家,随便一说。
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Valkyrie Be Reasonable • 8 days ago
All those regulations you talk about are the result of public policy that can be debated, articulated, and formulated in a transparent forum. Democratic style of government simply means it provides the space for competing groups to deliver the policy in a competitive way. If you think China's political system is stable, then you must be smoking some kind of out of this world, hallucinating drug! China's economy is nowhere near the sophistication and complexity of western democratic states. China has a Frankenstein model. The distortions and contradictions will come in time to the surface.
所有你谈到的这些规章制度都是国家政策的结果,类似的国家政策在透明的论坛里可以争论,详细表述和公式化的。民主的政府仅仅意味着它为各集团通过竞争的方式实施政策提供了空间。如果你认为中国的政治体制是稳定的,你一定是吸了这个世界上没有的迷幻药!中国的经济并不比西方民主国家的精密和复杂。中国的是自寻死路的模式。畸形和矛盾终究会爆发到表面。
-------------译者:光脚上街-审核者:文所未闻------------
Godfree Roberts • 9 days ago
"Social stability expenses already exceed military spending and there is limited room for further increases".
维稳费用已经超过军费开支,并且上涨的空间非常有限
Comparing apples to oranges is not helpful. Comparing social stability spending in two economies might be more helpful. China's social stability spending figure encompasses every fire department in China, but is only one-fourth of the USA's social stability spending when adjusted for PPP.
这两样东西是没有可比性的,还不如比较两个经济体的之间维稳费用来的有用。中国维稳费用支出包含了所有的消防部门,但这也只是美国维稳费用支出的四分之一,以购买力平价来算的话。
-------------译者:charles.c.liu-审核者:文所未闻------------
Oro Invictus Godfree Roberts • 9 days ago
Comparing apples to oranges is not helpful.
Right, except most other states do the reverse when it comes to "social stability" spending and military expenditures. And the nation-states which have done as the PRC have, spending more on internal security than their military, have overwhelmingly ended poorly.
Okay, so bad attempt at obfuscation by Roberts there, but surely that must mark the low-point of the comment, right?
Comparing social stability spending in two economies might be more helpful.
Uh...
China's social stability spending figure encompasses every fire department in China, but is only one-fourth of the USA's social stability spending when adjusted for PPP.
...
*Sigh*
First, source. Without any nonsense, please give a source for that claim.
Second, and much more importantly, comparing the measures that may qualify as "social stability" in the US to those in the PRC is one of the most egregious examples of "apples-to-oranges" you could name. Should we also compare heating bills between people in Mexico and Siberia to get an accurate assessment of how eco-conscious they are relative to each other?
*Note: Edited to clarify a statement.
Oro Invictus 回复 Godfree Roberts:
“拿苹果和橘子比较毫无说服力。”
没错,不过当谈到“社会维稳”开支和军费的时候,大多数其他国家都是相反的。那些像中国一样做到内部安全比军队花费更多的民族国家,最终都无可避免地走向贫穷。
好了,看来这里Roberts的混淆是一个失败尝试。而明确的是,这一点标志着是这条评论的弱点,没错吧?
“比较两个经济体的维稳开支也许更有说服力。”
呃……
“中国维稳开支的数字包含了中国所有的消防部门,以购买力平价来算的话,它也只有美国维稳开支数字的四分之一。”
*叹*
首先,来源。不要扯淡,请给出这句话的来源。
其次,也是最重要的,中美之间在“社会稳定”的评判标准上存在差异,这正是你能说出的“苹果对橘子”的最极端例子之一。我们是不是也来比较一下墨西哥和西伯利亚的取暖费,以此精确评估他们具备多大程度的生态保护意识?
*注释:已编辑,澄清声明。
-------------译者:charles.c.liu-审核者:文所未闻------------
Internet Comments Don't Mean A Oro Invictus • 9 days ago
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"
- Mark Twain
Internet Comments Don't Mean A 回复 Oro Invictus:
“千万不要和蠢人争论,他们会把你拉低到他们的水平,然后用丰富的经验打败你。”——马克·吐温
Godfree Roberts Oro Invictus • 9 days ago
Do you mean that nations like China which spend very little on internal spying, suppression, security have worse fates, historically, than nations that spend a great deal of their budgets on internal spying, suppression, security?
That's what how first paragraph currently reads.
The measures that qualify for internal (or social security) are the same measures as those quoted in the article.
Here are the calculations: http://www.inpraiseofchina.com...
Godfree Roberts 回复 Oro Invictus:
你的意思是不是说,像中国这样在内部侦查、镇压、安保方面花费甚少的国家,从历史上看,比那些预算在此花费巨大的国家有更糟糕的命运?
这正是你第一段现在所说的内容。
评估内部(或社会安保)的方法与文章所引用的是同一种方法。
此处是计算方法:http://www.inpraiseofchina.com...
-------------译者:charles.c.liu-审核者:文所未闻------------
life form Godfree Roberts • 9 days ago
An assertion China spends little on internal spying suppression, and security?
Followed by some nonsense from a website "inpraiseofchina.com"
Ho ho, ho, thank you for the chuckle.
life form 回复 Godfree Roberts:
断言中国在内部间谍、镇压和安全上花费更少?
紧接着还有“inpraiseofchina.com”网站上的一些扯淡内容。
呵呵呵,谢谢你的笑话哦。
ashleyhk Godfree Roberts • 8 days ago
In 2010 a report by Tsinghua University put the budget for stability maintenance that year at $77 billion.
ashleyhk 回复 Godfree Roberts:
2010年清华大学的一个报告称,当年维稳费用的预算达到770亿美元。
life form ashleyhk • 8 days ago
yeah i saw that just today
life form 回复 ashleyhk:
没错,我今天刚好看到了。
Abhijit Gupta Godfree Roberts • 8 days ago
Replies to your assertions & posts ALWAYS get more "likes" .. so if it a chess game - you are losing pal. Need to spend time on figures that matter.
Abhijit Gupta 回复 Godfree Roberts:
对你进行回复的帖子总是可以获得更多的“赞”……所以如果这是一局棋的话,你一直在丢子儿。你需要把时间花在重要的数字上。
-------------译者:charles.c.liu-审核者:文所未闻------------
Alexandre Abranovich • 8 days ago
So, what's new? None of the points brought up by the author is thought provoking or providing deep insight into the problems that China is facing. Everything stated is common knowledge and a few critical elements are missing. What about the impact of the massive pollution problem on economic growth and social stability. When people started to get sick or seeing their children get sick from pollutions, they would be just as agitated as seeing their income stagnated or losing their jobs. Cleaning up pollutions, enforcing environmental regulations and moving away from traditionally cheap source of fuel, such as coal, are all costly and have a negative effect on economic growth. China's aging population is also a factor. Sooner or later the government will have to provide some sort of welfare net to provide the elderlies with medical and living assistance. With a huge aging population, this sort of commitment will also have a great effect on the economy and governmental spending.
Alexandre Abranovich:
所以,有什么新鲜吗?作者提出的观点, 没有一点是发人深省的,没有一点对中国正在面临的问题提出深刻见解。说的所有东西都是常识,而一丝批判性的成分都看不到。比如说,怎么看待巨大污染对经济增长和社会稳定的影响。当人们因为污染开始生病,或是看到孩子因此而生病的时候,他们就会像见到收入停滞或是失业一样感到焦急。清除污染、推动环保法规、远离传统廉价能源(比如煤),这些举措都花费巨大,而且会对经济增长产生负面作用。同时,中国正在老龄化的人口也是一个因素。政府迟早都要提供某种福利体系,以供老人的医疗和生活补助。拥有如此庞大的老龄人口,这种承担势必会对经济和政府开支产生巨大影响。
我们致力于传递世界各地老百姓最真实、最直接、最详尽的对中国的看法
【版权与免责声明】如发现内容存在版权问题,烦请提供相关信息发邮件,
我们将及时沟通与处理。本站内容除非来源注明五毛网,否则均为网友转载,涉及言论、版权与本站无关。
本文仅代表作者观点,不代表本站立场。
本文来自网络,如有侵权及时联系本网站。
最近,新冠肺炎疫情在日本有扩大的趋势,有专家呼吁日本应当举国行动起来,共...
最近,新冠肺炎疫情在日本有扩大的趋势,有专家呼吁日本应当举国行动起来,共...