您所在位置： &
&nbsp&&nbsp&nbsp&&nbsp
Analysis+of+Translation+of+Tao+Te+Ching+from+the+Perspective+of+Translation+Ecology.pdf 58页
本文档一共被下载：
次 ,您可全文免费在线阅读后下载本文档。
下载提示
1.本站不保证该用户上传的文档完整性，不预览、不比对内容而直接下载产生的反悔问题本站不予受理。
2.该文档所得收入(下载+内容+预览三)归上传者、原创者。
3.登录后可充值，立即自动返金币，充值渠道很便利
Analysis of Translation of Tao Te Ching from the Perspective of Translation Ecology,tao te ching,analysis tao pdf,terence tao analysis,real analysis tao,ching chong,chinglish,fetching,ching,stretching
你可能关注的文档：
··········
··········
分类号：740．5011
天津理工大学研究生学位论文
翻译生态学视角下《道德经》之翻译
(申请硕士学位)
学科专业： 英语语言文学
研究方向： 翻译理论与实践
作者姓名： 张竞文
指导教师： 许建忠
2012年12月
SubmittedtoTianjin
University
Technology
TranslationofTaoTe
Perspective
ZhangJingwen
Supervisor
December2012
独创性声明
本人声明所呈交的学位论文是本人在导师指导下进行的研究工作和取
得的研究成果，除了文中特别加以标注和致谢之处外，论文中不包含其他
人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果，也不包含为获得 天津理工大学
其他教育机构的学位或证书而使用过的材料。与我一同工作的同志对本研
究所做的任何贡献均已在论文中作了明确的说明并表示了谢意。
学位论文作者签名：弛‰欠
签字日期：2D／；年 ／月上≥日
学位论文版权使用授权书
本学位论文作者完全了解 墨盗墨墨盘堂 有关保留、使用学位论文
的规定。特授权墨盗墨墨盘堂 可以将学位论文的全部或部分内容编入
有关数据库进行检索，并采用影印、缩印或扫描等复制手段保存、汇编，
以供查阅和借阅。同意学校向国家有关部门或机构送交论文的复本和电子
(保密的学位论文在解密后适用本授权说明)
学位论文作者签名：豸修毛乏
导师签名：
签字日期：o口，弓年，月≥≥日
签字日期：
Acknowledgements
1 wouldliketoshowsincere
toallthose
who mefavorsinthe
of thesis．
正在加载中，请稍后...Close Menu2011年英译汉真题
2011 年英译汉真题 　　With its theme that “Mind is the master weaver”, creating our inner character and outer circumstances ， the book As a Man Thinketh by…
Transcripts2011 年英译汉真题 　　With its theme that “Mind is the master weaver”, creating our inner character and outer circumstances ， the book As a Man Thinketh by James Allen is an in-depth exploration of the central idea of self-help writing. 　　46）Allen’s contribution was to take an assumption we all share—that because we are not robots we therefore control our thoughts—and reveal its erroneous nature. Because most of us believe that mind is separate from matter, we think that thoughts can be hidde this allows us to think one way and act another. However, Allen believed that the unconscious mind generates as much action as the conscious mind, and 47 ） while we may be able to sustain the illusion of control through the conscious mind alone, in reality we are continually faced with a question：“Why cannot I make myself do this or achieve that?” 　　Since desire and will are damaged by the presence of thoughts that do not accord with desire, Allen concluded :“We do not attract what we want, but what we are.” Achievement happens because you as a person embody the external achievement ； you don’t “get” success but become it. There is no gap between mind and matter. Part of the fame of Allen’s book is its contention that “Circumstances do not make a person, they reveal him.” 48）This seems a justification for neglect of those in need, and a rationalization of exploitation, of the superiority of those at the top and the inferiority of those at the bottom. This, however, would be a knee-jerk reaction to a subtle argument. Each set of circumstances, however bad, offers a unique opportunity for growth. If circumstances always determined the life and prospects of people, then humanity would never have progressed. In fact, 49）circumstances seem to be designed to bring out the best in us and if we feel that we have been “wronged” then we are unlikely to begin a conscious effort to escape from our situation. Nevertheless, as any biographer knows, a person’s early life and its conditions are often the greatest gift to an individual. 　　The sobering aspect of Allen’s book is that we have no one else to blame for our present condition except ourselves. 50 ） The upside is the possibilities contained in
knowing that ev where before we were experts in the array of limitations, now we become authorities of what is possible.
2011 年英译汉真题详解 46．Allen’s contribution was to take an assumption we all share—that because we are not robots we therefore control our thoughts—and reveal its erroneous nature. 结构分析 这是一个复合句。主句Allen’s contribution was to take an assumption是主系表结构，we all share是修饰名词assumption的定语从句，that because we are not robots we therefore control our thoughts是名词assumption的同位语从句，其中because引导原因状语从句，and reveal its erroneous nature与to take an assumption并列作主句表语。 句子切分 Allen’s contribution was to take an assumption / we all share— / that （ because we are not robots） we therefore control our thoughts— / and reveal its erroneous nature. 词义推敲： 1 assumption 动 词 assume 派 生 的 名 词 ， 意 为 “ 假 定 ， 假 设 ” ， 常 见 用 法 为 make an assumption（作假设，进行假设），take an assumption 可理解为“分析一个假设”。动词 assume 曾在 1997 年和 2004 年第一道翻译题中出现，属于常考词和核心词。 2 3 robot 机器人，曾在 2001 年第一道翻译题中出现。 erroneous 派生词形容词，意为“错误的”，其名词是大家熟悉的 error（错误），动词是 err（犯错误）。下面为这组词的用法举例： He erred in failing to prepare the public for it. 他错在没有事先使公众对那件事有思想准备。（动词） T to forgive, divine.
犯错人皆难免，宽恕实属超凡。（动词） All men are liable to error. 人人都可能犯错误。（名词） He was sent by error to the wrong office. 他被分配错了工作部门。（名词） receive an erroneous impression 得到错误的印象 （形容词） 整句试译 Allen 的贡献在于分析了一个大家都分享的假设——我们不是机器人，所以会控 制我们的思想——并揭示出其错误本质。
检查核对 代词 √ 问题分析 名词 √ 动词 ？ 修饰语 √ 从句 √ 惯用法 √ 逻辑性 ？ 完整性 √ 通顺 ？
动词 share 翻译成 “ 分享 ” 使译文读起来有些别扭。其在句中的宾语是名词 assumption （注意指代 assumption 的关系代词 that 在句中被省略了），根据知词看伴原则，应该理解 为“都有”。下面是更多关于 share 的用法举例： share the housework 分担家务劳动 share sb.’s troubles as well as sb.’s joys 与某人同甘共苦 share sb.’s feelings 与某人有同样的感情 share dinner with sb. 与某人合吃一份饭菜 share a laugh 一起大笑起来 share one’s conclusion with sb. 把自己的结论告诉某人 整句改译 Allen 的贡献在于分析了一个大家都有的假设——我们不是机器人，所以会控制 我们的思想——并揭示出其错误本质。
47．while we may be able to sustain the illusion of control through the conscious mind alone, in reality we are continually faced with a question ： “ Why cannot I make myself do this or achieve that?” 结构分析 这也是一个复合句。while we may be able to sustain the illusion of control through the conscious mind alone 是让步状语从句，in reality 是介词短语作状语，we are continually faced with a question 是主谓宾结构的主句，“ Why cannot I make myself do this or achieve that?”是直接引 语。 句子切分 while we may be able / to sustain the illusion of control / through the conscious mind alone, / in reality / we are continually faced with a question ： / “Why cannot I make myself do this or achieve that?”
词义推敲 1 while 在句中引导让步状语从句，自从 1999 年成为翻译考点以来一直在重复出现，几
乎每年必考，相信有准备的考生不会在这个考点上出问题。（参见 1999 年英译汉第 71 题关于 while 的解释以及后面真题中 while 的使用情况） 2 sustain 大纲词汇，意为“保持，使持续不息”，其形容词为 sustainable。其用法如下： The foundations were not strong enough to sustain the weight of the house. 地基不够牢固，承受不住房子的重量。 An unshakeable faith sustained me. 一种不可动摇的信念支持着我。 We should sustain the quality of our products. 我们应该保持产品的质量。 The villagers along the seacoast are sustained by the fishing trade. 沿海村民靠渔业为生。 sustain a family 养家 sustain a defeat 遭受失败 sustainable growth 持续增长 3 illusion 大纲词汇，意为“错觉，幻觉；幻想，错误的观念”。例如： have (or cherish, entertain, hold) an illusion about sth. 对某事抱有幻想 It is time for them to cast their illusions. 现在该是他们丢掉幻想的时候了。 The mirror gives an illusion of depth. 镜子造成一种纵深幻觉。 The old man’s ruddy complexion gave an illusion of good health. 老人红润的脸色给人以健康的错觉。 ④ the conscious mind 直译是 “ 有意识的大脑/ 思想 ” ，由于其在文章里是与 the unconscious mind（潜意识）相对的概念，所以可以简单地翻译成“意识”。 ⑤ be faced with 动词短语，意为“面临”。 ⑥ do this or achieve that 干这或者干那。注意动词 do 和 achieve 在这里意思一样，属于“相同 的意思不同的表达”，按照中文习惯可以都译成动词“干/做”。 整句试译 虽然我们可能仅靠意识就能保持控制的幻觉，但实际上我们一直面临一个问题 “我为什么不能使自己干这或者干那？” 检查核对 代词 √ 名词 √ 动词 √ 修饰语 √ 从句 √ 惯用法 √ 逻辑性 √ 完整性 √ 通顺 √
48．This seems a justification for neglect of those in need, and a rationalization of exploitation, of the superiority of those at the top and the inferiority of those at the bottom. 结构分析 这是一个简单句。主干 this seems a justification … and a rationalization …是主系表结构，for
neglect of those 是介词短语作定语修饰名词 justification，名词 rationalization 后面的介词短 语 of exploitation, of the superiority …也是定语，其中三个代词 those 后面都分别有介词短语 in need、at the top 和 at the bottom 作后置定语。 句子切分 This seems a justification / for neglect of those (in need), / and a rationalization of exploitation, / of the superiority of those (at the top) / and the inferiority of those (at the bottom). 词义推敲 1 this 显然指代前面句子中的名词 contention（论点）。contention 是由动词 contend（主张、 认为）派生而来的，由于这个词大家平时见得不多，估计很多考生会根据其后面的同 位语从句来反推它的意思。 根据同位语从句与前面的先行词意思相等的原则（参见 1996 年英译汉第 72 题关于同位语从句的解释），加上 Circumstances do not make a person, they reveal him（环境不会造就人，但会展示人）明显是个论点，我们可以反推出 contention 的意思必定是“论点”，而翻译这个句子时如果能把代词 this 译成“这个论点” 显然比简单地译成“这”要更清楚。 2 justification 动词 justify（证明正确或有道理）派生出来的名词，意为“辩护；正当的理 由”。这组词的用法如下： The pursuit of good ends does not justify the employment of bad means. 追求的目是正当的并不能证明可以使用不好的手段。 Your state of anxiety does not justify your being so rude to me. 你心情焦急并不能成为你对我如此粗暴的理由。 What can be said in justification of his behavior? 能说些什么来为他的行为辩解呢？ You have no justification for criticizing him in that way. 你没有理由那样批评他。 3 neglect 在句中作名词使用，因为它是介词 for 的宾语。注意下列例句中 neglect 的区别： They neglected his warning. 他们把他的警告当耳边风。（动词） I neglected winding (或 to wind) the clock. 我忘了给闹钟上发条。（动词） He has shown a persistent neglect of duty. 他老是玩忽职守。（名词） The child was in a state of neglect. 这孩子处于无人照管的状态。（名词） 4 in need 介词短语，意为“需要中的；贫困中的，困难中的”。例如： He is in dire need. 他生活极其困难。 A friend in need is a friend indeed. 患难朋友才是真朋友。（即：患难见真情。） ⑤ rationalization 形 容 词 rational （ 理 性 的 ； 合 理 的 ） 派 生 出 来 的 名 词 ， 其 动 词 为
rationalize，这组词的用法如下： Man is a rational being. 人是理性动物。（形容词） He used rational arguments to support his ideas. 他用合乎逻辑的论据来证明自己的想法。 （形容词） rationalize one’s attitude to life 使自己的处世态度合乎理性 （动词） a rationalization of customs procedures 海关手续的合理化 （名词） ⑥ exploitation 动词 exploit（开发；利用；剥削）派生的名词，在句中表示“剥削”的意思。 注意下列例句中 exploit 和 exploitation 在词义上的变化： exploit the oil under the sea 开发海底石油 exploit the materials and the techniques of our time 利用当代的材料和技术 exploit the poor 剥削穷人 You must not exploit your authority for personal gratification. 你切不可利用你的职权来满足个人的私欲。 the exploitation of newly discovered oil fields 开发新发现的油田 There are laws against the exploitation of child labor. 有法律禁止剥削（或利用）童工。 4 superiority 形容词 superior（优良的，较…优的；有优越感的）派生而来的名词，句中 可理解成“优越感”。请看下面的举例： They counted themselves as the most superior race in the world. 他们把自己看成是世界上最优等的民族。 Quite often, his sense of superiority makes him deride her opinions. 他的优越感常常会使他嘲笑她的看法。 5 inferiority 形 容 词 inferior （ 低 等 的 ， 低 于 … 的 ； 较 差 的 ） 派 生 而 来 的 名 词 ， 与 superiority 互为反义词，句中可理解成“自卑感”。 6 at the top / bottom 介词短语，字面意思是“（在）顶 / 底部”，句中可理解成“（在）上 层 / 下层社会”。 整句试译 这个论点似乎证明忽略（或：不去理睬）那些有困难的人是有道理的，同时也 为剥削、上层社会的优越感以及下层社会的自卑感提供了合理的解释。 检查核对 代词 √ 名词 √ 动词 √ 修饰语 √ 从句 √ 惯用法 √ 逻辑性 √ 完整性 √ 通顺 √
49． circumstances seem to be designed to bring out the best in us and if we feel that we have
been “wronged” then we are unlikely to begin a conscious effort to escape from our situation. 结构分析 这是一个复合句。circumstances seem to be designed 是主系表结构的主句，不定式短语 to bring out the best in us 是目的状语，其中介词短语 in us 作定语修饰 the best，并列连词 and 后面总体是个并列句，其中 if we feel 是条件状语从句，that we have been “wronged” 是表语 从句，then we are unlikely to begin a conscious effort 是并列主句，不定式短语 to escape from our situation 也是目的状语。 句子切分 circumstances seem to be designed / to bring out the best in us / and if we feel / that we have been “wronged” / then we are unlikely to begin a conscious effort / to escape from our situation. 词义推敲 1 circumstance 名词，表示“环境、 条件；事实、 事情；境况、 经济状况；机缘，命运”等意 思。注意它是个可数名词，而且经常用复数形式，例如： The weather is a circumstance to be taken into consideration. 天气是要考虑的一个条件。 Circumstances permitting, we sail on Friday. 条件允许的话，我们星期五起航。 His arrival was a happy circumstance. 他的到来是件令人高兴的事情。 The circumstances suggest murder. 事实表明可能是谋杀。 He is now in reduced circumstances. 他现在经济上有些拮据。 Circumstances have it so. 命该如此。 Circumstances alter cases.
环境改变，具体情况也改变。 （或：人的行为因时因地而 异。） Under no circumstance should you see them again. 你无论如何不该再和他们见面了。 Under the circumstances, there is little hope for an early settlement. 在这种情况下，及早解决是没什么希望的。 2 bring out 动词短语，本意是“拿出，取出；带…出来”，根据上下文可引伸出很多意思， 例如： He generally wears a pale blue tie to bring out the color of his eyes. 他通常打一条淡蓝色领带，以衬托眼睛的颜色。 Difficult conditions will sometimes bring out a man’s best qualities. 困境有时能把一个人最优良的品质发挥出来。 Bob was always willing to talk about his work, his latest book, etc. Chris found it easy to
bring him out. 鲍勃老喜欢谈自己的工作、自己最近的作品等等，克里斯发现要鲍勃和盘 托出是很容易的。 The girl is nice, but needs a lot of bringing out. 这姑娘不错，但还需要在场面上经受锻炼。 句中 bring out 的宾语是 the best in us“ 我们身上最好的（东西） ” ，根据 “ 知词看伴 ” （you know a word by the company it keeps）原则，显然应该译成“发挥”。 3 the best 可以理解为后面省略了名词 qualities。注意英语常在定冠词 + 形容词 / 分词后面 省略名词，表示以一类人或某一抽象概念，常见例子如下： the dead （全体）死者 the unemployed （全体）失业者 the true and false 真与假 The old are apt to catch cold. 老人容易感冒。 The duty of a doctor is to heal the wounded and rescue the dying. 医生的职责是救死护伤。 He has no eye for the beautiful. 他没有审美的眼力。 The unexpected always happens. 天有不测风云。 4 wrong 该词在句中显然不作形容词而作动词使用，因此绝对不能译成“错误的”。 wrong 作动词表示“不公正地对待、冤枉、伤害；无礼地对待、虐待、欺骗”，例如： He is an innocent man wronged by being sent to prison. 他是个被冤枉送入监狱的无罪的人。 We will not tolerate his wronging her any more. 我们不会容忍他继续虐待她。 5 be unlikely to do sth. “不大可能会做…，未必会做…”，注意此处 unlikely 是形容词。 下面 我们看看 likely / unlikely 什么时候是形容词，什么时候是副词： It is (un)likely to rain. 天（不）可能下雨。（形容词） It seemed hardly likely that they would agree. 看上去他们不大可能同意。（形容词） He is an unlikely candidate for the election. 他是一名希望不大的候选人。（形容词） That story of yours doesn’t sound very likely. 你那种说法听起来不太使人相信。（形容 词） Victory is unlikely but not impossible. 看样子无法获胜，但也不是不可能。（形容词） The new government quite likely will be more receptive to change. 新政府很可能更倾向于接受改革。（副词） He may, not unlikely, join us. 他也许会加入我们，这不是不可能的。（副词） 整句试译 环境好像被设计成使我们发挥到最佳，如果我们感觉到 被“冤枉” ，我们不大可 能会开始有意识的努力从我们的环境里逃出来。
检查核对 代词 √ 问题分析 1 名词 √ 动词 ？ 修饰语 ？ 从句 √ 惯用法 ？ 逻辑性 ？ 完整性 √ 通顺 ？
be designed to 译成“被设计成”显然不妥，不仅读起来别扭，意思也不清楚。 实际上，早 在 1999 年英译汉第 73 题就考过这个习惯表达法，其意为“旨在，用来”。对于这样重复 出现的考点，我们要格外注意。
be wronged 译成“被冤枉”意思不明确，读者可能会问“被谁冤枉了”？为了使句子读起 来更加清楚易懂，应该理解成“被不公正地对待”，按照中文表达习惯可以大胆地译成 “老天不公”。
to begin a conscious effort 直译成“开始有意识的努力”显得生硬，不如按照汉语表达习 惯意译为“积极想办法”。
to escape from our situation 译成“从我们的环境里逃出来”不能算错，但根据上下文调整 成“摆脱逆境”意思会更加清楚到位。
整句改译 环境好像就是为了使我们发挥到最佳，如果我们感觉到“老天不公”，我们可能 不会积极想办法摆脱逆境。
50．The upside is the possibilities contained in knowing that ev where before we were experts in the array of limitations, now we become authorities of what is possible.
结构分析 这是一个复合句加并列句。The upside is the possibilities 是主系表结构的主句，过去分词 contained in knowing 做名词 possibilities 的后置定语，that everything is up to us 是 knowing 的 宾 语 从 句 ， where before we were experts 是 地 点 状 语 从 句 ， 介 词 短 语 in the array of limitations 作定语修饰名词 experts, now 是时间副词做状语，we become authorities 是主系表 结构作并列句里面的主句，介词短语 of what is possible 修饰名词 authorities 作定语，其中 what is possible 是介词 of 的宾语从句。 句子切分 The upside is the possibilities / contained in knowing / that ev / where before we were experts / in the array of limitations, / now we become authorities / of what is possible. 词义推敲：
upside 词典释义是“上面，上部”，其在句中应与前一句话里面的 the sobering aspect（令 人清醒的一面，可以理解成 the downside ）意思相对，因此可以译为“令人鼓舞 / 乐观 的一面”。
possibilities 由于汉语名词不分单复数，因此在翻译不带其他修饰语的复数名词时往往 需要在名词前加“各种、 种种；这些、 那些”等修饰词。 （参见 2000 年英译汉第 75 题名词 problems 的翻译）
③ contained in knowing 过去分词短语作名词 possibilities 的后置定语。 注意介词 in 与前面的 过去分词 contained 搭配使用，而不是与后面的现在分词 knowing 构成 in doing sth.结构， 所以不能译成 “ 在做 … 的过程中 ” 。（参见 1995 年英译汉第 71 题关于 in attacking the tests 、 2002 年 英 译 汉 第 63 题 关 于 in shaping and maintaining the behavior of the individual、 2005 年英译汉第 50 题关于 in dealing with a challenge 的解释） 3 be up to sb. 习惯表达法，意为“取决于某人，须由某人来决定；是某人义不容辞的，是 某人的职责”，例如： When you cut the grass is up to you. 你什么时候割草由你自己决定。 It’s up to you whether you decide to take the job. 你是否决定要这份工作取决于你自己。 It’s up to us to give them all the help we can. 我们理应尽一切力量帮助他们。 There wasn’t a real doctor there, so the doctoring was up to Billy. 那儿没有一个真正的医生，因此治病救人的工作就由比利担当了。 根据上下文，句中 be up to us 应理解成“取决于我们”。 4 array 名词，意为“显眼的一系列，整齐的一批；大量”，例如： an array of players 阵容整齐的一队球员 a complex array of political and economic questions 一系列复杂的政治、经济问题 an array of facts 大量的事实 5 limitation 意为“限制；局限”。注意它与名词 limit（限度，极限）的区别： She reached the limits of her patience. 她到了忍无可忍的地步。 All railroads have weight and height limitations because of tunnels, bridges and so forth. 由于隧道、桥梁等原因，所有铁道皆有载重及车厢高度限制。 I can’t shoulder such a
I know my own limits. 我无法肩负如此重任；我自知能力有限。 I can only act within my limitations. 我只能力所能及地采取行动。 ⑥ authority 表示“权威”的意思，一般后面接介词 on，少数情况下也接介词 of，例如：
He is an authority on preventive medicine. 他是预防医学方面的权威。 A good dictionary is an authority on the meaning of words. 一本好的词典是词义方面的权威。 He spoke with authority on the dangers of smoking. 他令人信服地讲述了吸烟的种种危害性。 Her expression was grave with the authority of bad news. 因为听到了坏消息，她表情严肃。 整句试译 令人鼓舞（或：乐观）的是包含在知道的各种可能性，一切都取决于我们，以 前我们在一系列局限方面是专家，现在我们在各种可能方面是权威。 检查核对 代词 名词 动词 修饰语 从句 惯用法 逻辑性 完整性 通顺 √ ？ ？ ？ √ ？ ？ √ ？ 1 possibilities contained in knowing 译成 “包含在知道的各种可能性 ” 显然有问题，因为读 者通过译文不可能明白其中含义，而英文原文的意思肯定不会有问题（成为考卷内容 的文字材料不可能有问题或错误）——把原文的意思用清楚的中文表达出来往往就是 我们的考点和采分点，所以我们要开动脑筋，力争把隐含的意思理解出来。这里我给大 家介绍一种方法，那就是对这个句子进行 paraphrase（变换措辞，也就是我们常说的改 写），我们看下面的改写是不是与原文的意思一样： The upside is the possibilities. The possibilities are contained in the knowledge. The knowledge is that everything is up to us. …… knowing 能与名词 knowledge 划等号吗？如果能划等号后面接同位语从句能不改变原文 的意思吗？如果答案是肯定的，我们就可以大胆地把这句话重新译为：令人鼓舞的是 各种可能性，这些可能性包含在一种认识里，这种认识就是一切都取决于我们……虽 然这样译文还是不太地道，但意思却明显清楚多了，最后我们可将其调整为“令人鼓舞 的是这种认识包含着各种可能性，因为我们知道一切都取决于我们”。 2 experts in the array of limitations 和 authorities of what is possible 译成“在一系列局限方面 是专家”和“在各种可能方面是权威”意思也不清楚，不如改成“对种种局限一清二楚”和 experts 和 authorities 属于“相同的意思不同 “对各种可能了如指掌”。从英语表达上来讲， 的表达”，二者其实都是喻指“对…很清楚（或熟悉）”。 整句改译 令人鼓舞（或：乐观）的是这种认识包含着各种可能性，因为我们知道一切都
取决于我们；以前我们对种种局限一清二楚，现在我们对各种可能了如指掌。
2011 年全真试题参考译文
James Allen 的著作《如人所想》以“头脑是编织大师”为主题，建立了内在性格和外在环境 理论，对自助写作这一中心思想进行了深度探索。 （46）Allen 的贡献在于分析了一个大家都有的假设——我们不是机器人，所以会控制我 们的思想——并揭示出其错误本质。 大多数人相信大脑与物质是分开的，所以我们认为思想 可以隐藏并失去威力，这就允许我们想一套做一套。然而，Allen 相信潜意识促成的行动与 意识促成的行动一样多，（47）虽然我们可能仅靠意识就能保持控制的幻觉，但实际上我 们一直面临一个问题：“我为什么不能使自己干这或者干那？” 既然想法和意志因为有与想法不一致的思想存在而被破坏，Allen 总结说：“我们得到的 不是我们想什么，而是我们是什么。”成就之所以发生是因为作为一个人你具备了外部成就 应该包含的一切，你不是“取得”成就，而是成为成就，头脑与物质之间是没有距离的。 Allen 的书之所以出名的部分原因在于其论点“环境不会造就人，但会展示人。”（48）这 个论点似乎证明忽略（或：不去理睬）那些有需要的人是有道理的，同时为剥削、 上层社会 的优越感以及下层社会的自卑感提供了合理的解释。 然而，这个论点可能是对一个精妙观点的机械反应。 每一组环境，无论有多糟糕，都会 为成长提供独特的机会。 如果环境总是决定生活和人的发展方向，那么人性就决不会取得过 进步。 事实上，（49）环境好像就是为了使我们发挥到最佳，如果我们感觉到“老天不公”， 我们可能不会积极想办法摆脱逆境。 不过，正如每个传记作者所知，个人的早期生活及其环 境经常是一个人最好的礼物。 Allen 的著作令人清醒的一面在于，对于我们目前的境况，除了我们自己，我们无他人可 埋怨。 （50）令人鼓舞（或：乐观）的是这种认识包含着各种可能性，因为我们知道一切都 取决于我们；以前我们对种种局限一清二楚，现在我们对各种可能了如指掌。
Comparing Recessions and Recoveries: Job Changes
By CATHERINE RAMPELL
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Chart by Amanda Cox.
Horizontal axis shows months. Vertical axis shows the ratio of that month’s nonfarm payrolls to the nonfarm payrolls at the start of recession. Note: Because employment is a lagging indicator, the dates for these employment trends are not exactly synchronized with National Bureau of Economic Research’s official business cycle dates.
The United States added just 18,000 nonfarm payroll jobs over all in June, the Labor Department reported Friday, after having added 25,000 jobs the previous month. Neither figure is statistically significant from zero, given that the growth is compared to a base of 131 million jobs.
CATHERINE RAMPELL
Dollars to doughnuts.
June’s employment growth numbers were only about a tenth of what economists had been forecasting. Some of the biggest (although still modest) gains were in professional and technical services, leisure and hospitality, and health care. Government at all levels — federal, state and local — shed workers. Most of the local jobs lost were teaching jobs. Even most of the winners, though, have a long way to go before returning to their prerecession levels.The chart above shows economywide job changes in this last recession and recovery compared with other recent ones, with the black line representing the current downturn. Since the downturn began in December 2007, the economy has shed, on net, about 5 percent of its nonfarm payroll jobs. And that does not even account for the fact that the working-age population has continued to grow, meaning that if the economy were healthy we should have more jobs today than we had before the recession. The unemployment rate — measured by a different government survey, and based on how many people are without jobs but are actively looking for work — ticked up to 9.2 percent in June,
compared to 9.1 percent in May (also not a statistically significant change). There are now 14.1 million workers who are looking for wor the figure nearly doubles if you include workers who are part-time but want to be employed full-time, and workers who want to work but have stopped looking.
《经济学人》：城里人为何比农村人优越？
大邑县距离四川省省会成都市有几个小时的车程，那里有一座农家 宅院，里面的庭院错落有致，经常能看到中国游客来此参观。20世 纪50年代，毛夺取政权后，这座宅院立即被改建成博物馆，以向人 们展示敌人的丑陋嘴脸。 这座宅院原来的主人叫刘文才，地主出身， 因虐待佃户而臭名昭著。 刘是地主阶级的代表，毛对他们深恶痛绝， 他执政后，决定把地主霸占的土地归还给农民。 在毛执政的鼎盛时期，该博物馆是人们朝拜的圣地。 红卫兵蜂拥而至， 在此举行仪式批判刘和刘的亲属。 最有名的一次批判游行是在水牢， 牢里的水有几英寸深，刘被指控曾把反抗的农民关在这里。 还有一次 是，他们建造了一些农民和压迫他们的地主的雕像，有真人那么大。 当时的北京故宫馆长，因政治倾向与他们相左，恰巧此人又长得很 像刘，被强迫站在雕像旁，充当“活着的刘文才”，参观者对着他咆 哮，朝他吐口水（虽然这种做法没有得到明示），澳洲国立大学的 白杰明称。 这些雕像现在还立在那，但近些年来，大邑县刮起一股修正主义浪 潮。 地方政府官员在20世纪80年代初，就决定改革。 直到1999年， 一位敢于直言的记者出版了一本关于刘的书，书中重新评价了刘的 一生，让很多人重新认识了刘，觉得他其实并没有那么坏。 他的水牢
其实是政府杜撰出来的，博物馆里的最新资料显示。 他为兴建当地学 校，以及建设从成都到大邑的公路，花了不少钱。 去年，他的一位孙 子在大邑为刘的亲属组织了一次聚会，这些人曾害怕暴露与刘有任 何的牵连。最后共有1000多人出席。 共产党执政后，农村土地所有权制度发生了翻天覆地的变化，当时 的政府官员先是对地主大肆屠杀（刘不包括在内，他是正常死亡）， 成千上万的人被杀，然后又对复仇的农民下手。 农民得到了毛答应交 还给他们的土地，但好景不长。在20世纪50年代末期，共产党重新 收回土地，强迫农民组成集体所有制的“人民公社”。 这项政策带来了 灾难性的后果，全国发生饥荒，数千万人活活被饿死，直到今天， 它对中国农村的影响仍旧巨大。 还有一项政策给农民带来了很大影响， 那就是农民身份的终身制，禁止他们向城市迁徙，在城市工作。 A special report on China: Urbanisation
Where do you live?
Town- and country-dwellers have radically different prospects
Jun 23rd 2011 | from the print edition
Rus in urbe
IN DAYI COUNTY, a couple of hours’ drive down a motorway from the city of Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan Province, Chinese tourists stroll through the meandering courtyards of a rural mansion. In the 1950s, soon after Mao seized power, the mansion was turned into a museum, intended as a showcase of evil. It once belonged to Liu Wencai, a landowner supposedly notorious for ill-treating his tenant farmers. Liu embodied a class despised by Mao, who came to power on the back of a promise to give land back to the peasants.
In its Maoist heyday the museum was a place of pilgrimage. Red Guards swarmed there for ritual denunciations of Liu and his ilk. A high point of their visit was a trip to the “water dungeon”, a room with several inches of water covering the floor where Liu had allegedly kept disobedient farmers. Another was a series of life-size sculptures of peasants and their vicious oppressors. A politically disfavoured curator from Beijing’s Forbidden City who happened to look like Liu was forced to stand next to the sculptures as a “living Liu Wencai” so that visitors could shout and (though not strictly permitted) spit at him, according to Geremie Barmé of Australian National University. The sculptures are still there, but in recent years a wave of revisionism has been sweeping across Dayi. Local officials were already having second thoughts by the early 1980s. But it was a book reassessing Liu’s life published by an outspoken journalist in 1999 that finally convinced many that the man was really not that bad. His water dungeon was a government fabrication, the museum now points out. He spent a lot of money on local schools and paid for a road to be built from Chengdu to Dayi. Last year a grandson organised a get-
together in Dayi for the extended Liu clan, whose members would once have been terrified of revealing their ties. More than 1,000 turned up. In this special report
← ← ← ← ← ← ← ← ←
Rising power, anxious state The princelings are coming Beware the middle-income trap >>Where do you live? Deng & Co The long arm of the state Getting on Universalists v exceptionalists Offer to readers
Sources & acknowledgements Reprints
Related topics
Beijing China Chongqing
The slaughter of many thousands of landlords (not including Liu, who died of natural causes) by officials and vengeful peasants shortly after the communist takeover resulted in profound changes in the system of rural land ownership. Peasants got the land Mao promised them, but only briefly. In
the late 1950s the party took it back again and forced farmers into collectively owned “people’s communes”. The legacy of that disastrous decision, which contributed to a famine that left tens of millions dead, still weighs heavily on rural China. So too does a decision to confer hereditary status on peasants, who would be all but barred from cities to stop them rushing in to find work. The curse of the hukou The hukou system, as this one-time apartheid is commonly known, applied to urban as well as rural dwellers, but peasants got a worse deal because they received hardly any welfare benefits, and job prospects in the countryside were dismal. The system has been much eroded since the Mao era because of the need for cheap labour to fuel China’s manufacturing boom. But its lingering impact, combined with the still collective ownership of rural land, will retard China’s urbanisation in the years ahead just when the country is most in need of its consumption-boosting benefits. Two researchers from China’s finance ministry, Chen Xiaoqiang and Liu Ling, wrote in March that it was time to start returning land to the peasants, both to spur consumption and to help defuse
growing rural unrest. Most officials dare not say this so bluntly, but they admit that change is needed.
In 2007 Chengdu, and Chongqing to its south-east, were given licence to experiment. The principle of collective ownership could not be changed, but farmers’ rights could be clarified and rural land markets of sorts could be established. In Chengdu, which is responsible for a large rural area including Dayi county, officials spoke of initiating a “new land reform” (hinting at similarities to the great land reform that divvied up the estate of landlord Liu). They began a drive to ensure that farmers at last got long-promised certificates showing the
exact boundaries of their fields and housing as well as confirming their rights to use them (farmland is subject to a 30-year renewable contract).
Urbanisation in China
Without such documents a market could not take off. Regulations dating back at least to 1997 have obliged officials to issue them. But Landesa, an American NGO, says a survey it conducted in mid-2010 in 17 provinces, along with Renmin University and Michigan State University, found that only 44% of respondents had a complete set of certificates. One in three had no documents at all. In April the central government
urged the whole country to finish issuing the certificates by the end of 2012. Dayi county, chosen by Chengdu as a trailblazer for land reform, says it got the job done by the middle of last year. But one peasant fumes that officials never bothered to give her any documents and seized her house and farmland a few months ago for a development project. “Liu was a great landlord,” she says. “I wish officials today were like him.” Both Chengdu and Chongqing have gone a step further. They have set up markets for rural land derivatives, allowing farmers who create new land for agricultural use (by giving up some of their housing plots, for example) to sell the right to use an equivalent amount of rural land for urban development. Thus a developer who wants to build on a greenfield site that has already been approved for urban construction bids first for a “land ticket”, or dipiao, which certifies that such an area of farmland has been created elsewhere. The regulations say farmers get 85% of the proceeds: good news, in theory, for those in remote, dirt-poor areas who would otherwise have no chance of cashing in on the value created by urban expansion. This is hardly revolutionary. Especially for Chongqing’s Maoloving party chief, Bo Xilai, doing good by the peasantry would
seem a canny move. But because the notion of the collective persists, the system is wide open to abuses. Local officials have considerable incentives to force farmers to give up housing land and move to more compact dwellings in order to create land for dipiao trading (some of the proceeds of which also go to village authorities). The dipiao markets in Chongqing and Chengdu have done little more than add a layer of complexity to a widespread trend in many parts of China that has often added to peasants’ grievances.
Reform might quickly be exploited by the very forces it is meant to constrain: rapacious local governments and developers
In the name of building a “new socialist countryside” (a slogan launched in 2005), local governments have been corralling farmers into new apartment blocks in order to free up land which they can use for profitable purposes. Officials have justified the practice as a way of reducing incentives for local governments forcibly to appropriate farmland and sell it to developers. Two million peasants a year have lost their land this way in the past five years, a senior government adviser in north-east China said in March. The new strategy often means
the farmers are crammed into apartments with no backyards to raise chickens or store tools, and they face a longer journey to their fields. Though officially sanctioned, the dipiao markets are viewed warily by the central leadership. Late last year Chengdu’s market was suddenly closed down. No clear explanation was given, but a Chinese scholar says higher-level officials worried that dipiao were being traded without land having first been converted to agricultural use. The risk, central officials feared, was that it would never happen at all. The market reopened in April, but the central government remains cautious. In Chongqing only 10% of the government’s annual sales of undeveloped rural land are subject to the dipiao system. Thoroughgoing land reform, of the sort that would enable farmers to cash in on the value of their farmland and establish permanent and prosperous lives in cities (and at the same time encourage larger-scale farming), thus remains stuck. One obstacle is ideological: for all their economic pragmatism, many in the party still regard collectivism as a sacred principle. Privatisation remains a dirty word. A more practical worry is that reform might quickly be exploited by the very forces it is
meant to constrain: rapacious local governments and developers. These, it is feared, would take advantage of any changes to persuade farmers unaware of land values to sell their holdings at less than market rates. The numbers of poor, landless peasants would soar, creating huge instability. Reformers in Beijing argue that most farmers are far cannier than officials suspect. But the global financial crisis has strengthened the case for caution in the minds of party leaders. As many as 20m workers returned to the countryside when the crisis broke in 2008 and China’s exports slumped. Having farmland to go back to, many officials believe, kept the unemployed migrants from taking to the streets. As officials often say in China, “stability trumps everything.” Prospects for reform of the hukou system are only slightly better. Both Chengdu and Chongqing have been experimenting with this. They have declared that holders of rural hukou in the countryside surrounding these cities can move into urban areas and enjoy the same welfare benefits as their urban counterparts without giving up their land entitlements. This was an important step. Though the hukou divide is widely resented, peasants have often been reluctant to give up their
rural status for fear of losing their land, as well as the added benefit in the countryside of being able to have two children rather than one. In effect, Chongqing and Chengdu have created a new class of urban residents who enjoy the best of both worlds. But grand plans for hukou reform have fallen by the wayside before as officials tot up the price. The cities of Guangzhou and Zhengzhou abandoned reform efforts several years ago because of worries about the cost. Chongqing’s plans are ambitious. Local officials estimate the cost of converting 3m people at around 200 billion yuan ($30 billion). But the municipality says it wants to double the number of urban hukou holders by turning 10m of its rural citizens (some of whom already live in urban areas) into cardcarrying urbanites over the next ten years. It has made a rapid start. Since it relaxed its policy in August last year it has given urban hukou to more than 1.7m people. There are conditions: they must have been working in urban areas for at least three years, or for five years if they want to transfer their hukou to the centre of Chongqing. The reform remains only partial. The benefits of being a Chongqing urbanite still cannot be transferred to any other
part of the country. And if implementing such measures nationwide means raising more taxes, urbanites will dig in their heels. Local governments “don’t really have the incentives and they don’t have the resources” to encourage greater integration of migrants into urban life, says the World Bank’s Mr Kuijs. Although Chinese officials define the population as being already nearly 50% urban, the number of urban hukou holders is only around 35%. Zhang Zheng of Peking University says many of those who have moved to urban areas in recent years are wrongly seen as permanent migrants. Having reached their 30s or 40s, when they can no longer do mind-numbing, fastpaced and finicky work on production lines, they will often go back to the countryside. Late last year the National Bureau of Statistics asked rural hukou holders in the north-eastern province of Jilin whether they wanted to switch to urban status. “The results were surprising,” one of the bureau’s researchers wrote. The majority said no, and most young people who had moved to urban areas said they wanted to go back to the countryside when they got older. For the past two decades or more, urbanisation in China has
come relatively easily. As the country proudly claims, slums and shantytowns are rare compared with other developing countries. But ensuring a continuing net inflow of migrants into the cities as the youngest cohort shrinks will mean giving workers from the countryside more incentives to stay permanently (such as affordable housing and schooling). More money is being spent on these, but not yet enough. Too much responsibility is devolved to local governments that usually try hard to shirk it.
Cities say they welcome migrants, but some find roundabout
ways of keeping them from settling. Beijing recently launched a set of extraordinary measures to tame property prices and ease traffic congestion that included all but banning migrants (one-third of the city’s population) from buying homes or cars. In the name of improving safety, it has started closing down basement dwellings where migrants (known as the rat tribe) often live. China says it wants urbanisation, and it certainly needs it. But even as some obstacles are removed, new ones spring up.
该死的户籍制度 户籍制度，就是人们所熟知的以前的隔离制度，适用于城市和农村 居民，但农民所受毒害更深，他们无法享受到任何的福利政策，农 村的工作前景也不景气。 在毛的时代，该制度被严重滥用，原因是为 加速中国制造业的繁荣而对廉价劳动力的需求。 但其后续影响依旧存 在，加上农村土地集体所有制还在继续，它们的合力会阻碍中国这 几年的城市化进程，而此时，中国最需要的是刺激消费带来的好处。 中国财政部的两位研究员陈小强和刘玲，在三月份时写道，应该将 土地还给农民了，这对刺激消费和平息不断发生的农村抗议都有好 处。很多官员并不敢这样直言不讳，但他们承认改革势在必行。
2007年，成都和重庆以及重庆东南部地区成为改革的试验田。集体 所有制的本质无法改变，但农民的权利可以明确，农村土地的各种 市场可以确立。 成都地区的土地改革范围很广，其中就包括大邑县， 政府官员谈到正在启动的一项“新土地改革”运动，预示着这项改革 与分割地主刘的土地的重大改革如出一辙。 他们已努力确保农民最终 会得到长期以来承诺的土地证明，明示所拥有土地和房屋的具体范 围，确保他们使用的权利。（农村土地证明的有效期是30年） 如果没有土地证明，土地买卖市场也不会繁荣。 这项政策至少可追溯 到1997年，是由政府官员被迫签发的。但是，美国一家非政府组织 Landesa表示，在2010年中期，该组织曾与人民大学和密歇根州 立大学联手做过一项调查，调查对象覆盖了中国的17个省份，他们 发现，仅有44%的被调查对象有全套的土地证明。三分之一的人根
本就没有任何证明。今年四月份，中央政府敦促全国各省农村在 2012年末颁发完所有的土地证明。大邑县成了成都周边农村土地改 革的先驱，该县称，去年中期就已完成改革。 但是，一位农民愤怒地 称，政府官员从没有给她颁发过任何证明，就在几个月前，由于当 地一个开发项目，她的房屋和土地都被没收了。“刘是一位非常伟大 的地主，”她说，“我希望今天的官员能像他一样就好了。” 成都和重庆的土地改革进行得更深一步。 这两座城市的农村土地衍生 物市场已成形，农民新开的农田（比如，可以放弃他们的某处住房 来获得土地），其使用权可以卖掉，用与土地价值等价的资金进行 城市建设。 因此，想要在新址上建造工厂的开发商，他们实际上已参 加了首轮城市建设竞标、并且已经拿到地票。地票是用来证明这块土 地已经另有用途。规定称，农民会获得85%的收益：对那些边远地 区的穷困农民来说，理论上讲，这的确是个好消息，因为他们无法 因城市扩张而获得其他收入。 你很难把这叫做土地革命。特别是对毛的拥护者-重庆市党委书记薄 熙来来说，对农民行善举似乎是很明智的选择。 但由于集体观念依然 存在，地票很容易被滥用。 地方政府官员手里有一笔数目可观的补贴 款，完全可以强迫农民放弃房屋用地，搬到更加密集的住宅区，以 便为地票交易的土地腾地。 （地票交易获得的部分收入归村里权力部 门所有）。 重庆和成都的地票市场没有太大突破，无非是在中国许多 地区的通行做法上让交易变得更加复杂，这往往会增加农民的不满。
地方政府打着建设“新社会主义农村”（2005年提出的口号）的旗子， 把农民集中赶入新建的公寓大楼，这样就能腾出土地，为各种各样 的牟利开绿灯。 地方官员认为这种做法合情合理，把它看作是减少地 方政府补贴支出的办法，强迫农民腾出土地，然后把土地卖给开发 商。在过去5年里，每年有2万名农民以这种方式失去自己的土地， 一位来自中国东北的高级政府顾问在3月份说。新战略的另一层含义 通常是，把农民赶到公寓里居住，那里没有后院，无法饲养家禽， 也没有空间存放工具，还要走很远的路才能到达农田。 地票交易虽然得到官方认可，但中央领导对此的看法却各不相同。 去 年年底，成都的地票市场突然遭到关闭，具体原因没有说明。 但一位 中国学者说，高层官员担心在土地没有首先转为农业用地的情况下， 出现了地票交易。 中央政府官员担心，这种做法的风险是根本就不存 在真正的地票交易。 地票市场在今年四月份重新开放，但中央政府对 此仍持谨慎态度。重庆政府每年未开发的农村土地中只有10%是通 过地票交易完成的。 真正的土地改革会让农民获得与土地价值等价的金额，并在城市过 上丰衣足食的生活（同时要鼓励大规模农耕），否则改革只能止步 不前。 改革的一个阻碍是意识形态方面的：根据经济实用主义理论， 许多党内人士仍旧认为集体主义是很神圣的准则。 私有化一词是令人 厌恶的字眼。 比较现实的一个担心是，土地改革可能很快会被一些强 大的势力如贪婪的地方政府和开发商所控制。 令人恐惧的是，这些人
会利用各种机会，劝说农民将自己的土地以低于市场价的价格出售， 而农民对土地本身的价值并不知情。一些穷人、失去土地的农民会反 抗，造成巨大的社会动荡。 北京的改革家坚持认为，很多农民比官员想象的要更加精明。 但是， 全球金融危机的爆发，让党领导人对这件事变得更加谨慎。2008年 危机爆发后，有200万外地打工者返乡，中国的出口贸易因此受到 重创。 许多官员认为，打工者失业后还能回农村种地，就不会到街上 游行了。正如中国官员经常宣称的，“社会稳定大于天。” 户籍制度改革前景不容乐观，其改善微乎其微。 成都和重庆两个城市 已经率先尝试了。 他们已经宣布，两座城市周边的农村户口持有人可 以迁往城市，并且在不放弃土地所有权的条件下，享受与城市居民 同样的社会福利政策。这一步至关重要。虽然很多人对户籍制度怨声 载道，但农民往往因担心失去土地而不愿意放弃农村户口，还有一 个原因是农村户口享有生二胎的权利。 实际上，重庆和成都已经产生 了城市居民新阶层，他们同时享有城市和农村的优惠政策。 但是，户 籍改革的宏伟计划由于官员担心运作费用而一度被搁浅。 几年前，广 州和郑州就因费用问题而放弃改革。 重庆的户籍改革计划雄心勃勃。地方官员估算，将3百万农村户口居 民转为城镇户口，费用在2000亿元人民币左右。但重庆市政府称， 未来十年里，他们的计划是要将拥有城市户口的人口数翻倍，让周
边1000万的农村居民（有些人已居住在市内）能拿到城市户口。去 年8月，重庆的户籍制度有所松动，有1700多万的农村居民拿到了 城市户口。农村户口转为重庆市户口的条件是：至少在城市工作3年 或5年。 户籍改革制度之路依旧艰辛。 重庆市居民享有的优惠政策还无法在中 国的其他城市复制。 如果在全国范围内实行这样的改革，就要增加税 收，城里人会坚决反对的。 地方政府没有补贴，也没有资源鼓励大量 农村人口迁入城市，世界银行的奎杰斯说。 虽然中国官方认为城市人口已占总人口的一半，但其中只有35%的 人持有城市户口。 北京大学的张正表示，近年来，很多农村人口移居 城市生活，就把这些人误认为是城市永久居民。 城市里打工的外地人， 在年龄到了30多岁或40多岁后，无法再继续从事重复的体力劳动， 以及生产线上繁忙而复杂的工作，通常都会返回农村。 去年年末，中 国国家统计局曾调查吉林省东北部地区的农民，询问他们是否愿意 转为城市户口。结果令人震惊。调查局的一位工作人员写道。 “ ” 大部分 的回答是不愿转为城市户口，很多移居到城市里生活的年轻人说， 他们会在年纪大些的时候坟农村生活° 因为在过去的20多年里，中国的城市化发展进行的相对顺利。正如 中国非常自豪地宣称，与其他发展中国家相比，中国的贫民窟非常 少见。 随着城市里年轻劳力的减少，就要确保不断有一定数量的农村
人口进城，也就是说，要给农村人口发放更多的补贴，这样他们才 能永久留守在农村（比如住房和上学方面的补贴）。 在这方面的投资 还需加大力度，但只这么做还远远不够。 当地政府任重而道远，而他 们却经常会尽量逃避这些责任。
城市说，欢迎外地人来城市居住。 但是，现行的一些政策却将外地人 拒于城市之外。 最近，北京公布了一系列的特殊政策，以应对房价上 涨和缓解交通堵塞，其中就包括禁止外地人（占了该城市人口的三 分之一）买房车的政策。 打着提高城市安全的幌子，北京已经开始关 闭地下室，这里是很多外地务工人员（也称蚁族）居住的地方。 中国 希望实现城市化，当然这很必要。 但即使有些障碍已经被扫清，新的
障碍还会涌现。
Small Business and the Jobless Recovery(1991)
Mises Daily: Monday, July 04, 2011 by Fred Buzzeo
Article Comments More By this Author A
If we listen to most economists, we are told that the recession is over and we are in a period of recovery. In fact, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), the official voice on this matter, tells us that the recovery began in June 2009. Fortunately, most Americans focused on making a living see right through this illusion. For example, a recent New York Times/CBS poll indicates that Americans are becoming increasingly disillusioned with the performance of the US economy. An
astonishing 70 percent of respondents said that the country is moving in the wrong direction. There is now an ongoing attack on the free-enterprise system that for over a century has made the United States the greatest economic power in history. Trillions of dollars have been spent "pump-priming" the US economy. Additionally, the Federal Reserve has flooded the US economy with easy money that will rob Americans of the purchasing power of their hard-earned dollars. Ironically, all of this intervention is aimed at "stabilizing" the market and at reducing unemployment. But what has all this intervention accomplished? Not much. The unemployment rate remains stubbornly high at over 9 percent. Additionally, the U6 index — a broad measure of unemployment that takes into account underemployment and discouraged workers — is almost 16 percent. As the employment numbers are released, it becomes increasingly clear that job growth is anemic. So what is causing this jobless "recovery"? To answer this question, we must look at the plight of small
business. Small business in the United States is a major engine of job growth. But as the recession deepened in 2009, 60 percent of all job losses were in the small-business sector. small business has not recovered. In fact, from 2009 to 2010, entrepreneurs started the fewest new businesses in more than a decade, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If the financial position of small business does not improve, neither will the employment picture. Therefore, it is necessary to understand what is keeping small business depressed. Why is there a lack of capital formation in this vital sector of the economy? To this day,
The Importance of Small Business
The Small Business Administration defines a small business as an establishment employing fewer than 500 persons. In reality, most small businesses employ far fewer than that. Many small businesses have few employees, and a good number of them simply operate out of the proprietor's home. Nevertheless, the statistics concerning the contributions of small business to overall economic health are staggering. Over the past
15 years, small businesses have produced 64 percent of net new jobs in the United States. They also pay the salaries of 44 percent of all those working in the private sector. Furthermore, small business creates more than half of the nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP). In 2007, small business produced a little over 30 percent of known export value. Small business is the backbone of the US economy. Many new ideas are generated by people working in small businesses. For example, Microsoft and Apple once started as small businesses. The same could be said of Sam Walton, who borrowed money from a relative to open a store in Rogers, Arkansas, and went on to revolutionize the retail business.
It is obvious from the above that small business performs an incubator function whereby ideas are developed and tested in a small setting and then, if successful, introduced to a broader
market. Small business provides much of the employment for the lowskilled workforce. Just look at landscapers, construction contractors, and restaurant servers, and you will find mostly unskilled labor. Small business affords workers on-the-job training for possible advancement into more skilled employment. The small-business owner also provides services that most of us need. We buy groceries, get a haircut, and go out for a meal at local establishments all run by small-business owners. Where would we be without the landscaper, the pool guy, and the local electrician?
Market Uncertainty
The policies pursued by Washington policymakers are causing a disequilibrium in the market. This disequilibrium is clouding the business community with uncertainty, which is the greatest detriment to small-business growth and expansion. Most small-business owners and venture capitalists are uncertain as to where the economy is heading. Spending is out of control,
budget deficits are in the trillions of dollars, and the result of an inflationary Federal Reserve policy is starting to show up in commodity prices. All of this recklessness does not induce the small-business owner to open up the purse strings and invest in economic activities that will result in job creation. There is also uncertainty concerning the regulatory environment. People do not invest to "spread the wealth" they invest to make a profit. Investors don't react well to talk of "fundamentally transforming the United States of America." Indeed, there has been more government intrusion into the market during the last few years than since the Great Society programs. We have economic tsars, national health insurance, and de facto government ownership of industry. The following statement made by Raymond J. Keating, chief economist for the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, sums it all up nicely: For the most part, entrepreneurs want federal policymakers to impose a light tax and regulatory touch, keep spending under control, maintain low inflation, and otherwise get out of the way
so entrepreneurship and investment can thrive. … Until federal policymaking moves in a clear pro-entrepreneur, pro-growth direction, most small-business owners face great uncertainty.
"Entrepreneurs are the real heroes of the American story."
William Dunkelberg, an economist at the National Federation of Independent Business, puts it more succinctly: "There's just a huge amount of uncertainty. And when you're uncertain, you don't make bets." And with this uncertainty, there is no expansion of production — a requirement for creating employment opportunities. Why take the risk?
Lack of Financing
According to Federal Reserve governor Elizabeth Duke, seven out of ten small-business owners use personal savings to start or expand their business. They do not have the benefit of being "too big to fail." Therefore, they are not injected with cash to improve their liquidity position by government planners fearful of systemic collapse.
In fact, these small-business owners are the greatest risk takers of all. If they are successful, they can make a substantial profit. However, if they fail, all of their accumulated wealth can be destroyed. Many of them have left secure jobs to pursue their ambitions. They are the remnants of the rugged individualists that once turned the United States from an agrarian society to the world's foremost economic power. The current recession (or should I be politically correct and say the past recession?) has destroyed an enormous amount of personal wealth in the United States. Therefore, there is less money available for small-business expansion. Because of the uncertainties listed above, most venture capitalists — the financial lifelines of small-business owners — are sitting on the sidelines. In this economy, most investments are simply not worth the risk. When such a vital source of financing runs out, the small-business owner must turn to the banking system. Banks are flush with cash thanks to the government infusion of your tax dollars. But are the banks lending? The answer to this question is a resounding no.
Bank lending to small business is at its lowest since 2008. It is down an astonishing $15 billion in the first quarter of this year alone! Banks are simply sitting on cash in spite of the taxpayer bailouts — an example of crony capitalism at its best.
The Burden of Regulation
As a small-business owner myself, I can tell you that the burden of regulation is overwhelming. It adds a significant cost to operating a business, and this cost is often impossible to quantify at the outset.
I was once fined a significant amount of money for not putting bales of hay along the width of a waterfront property during the demolition of a small house. The purpose, I was told, was to prevent any soil from being blown into the water. I was a bit confused, because the entire surface of the property was concrete! Fortunately, given the facts, I had the fine reduced to almost nothing, but I still incurred a sufficient amount of
unnecessary legal fees. Currently, retailers in California are under legal attack for failing to provide seating, as required by a state labor law, for employees whose job it is to stand for most of the day. According to the attorney for the retailers, any employee can bring suit in this matter even if he wasn't the party aggrieved. Is there any doubt as to why businesses are fleeing California? It is comical to repeat the experience of a small construction contractor who was visited by an OSHA inspector: He [the contractor] said the inspector had written several citations. The first thing she told him was his scaffold wasn't level. … [H]e pulled out his level and put it on the scaffold to show that the scaffold was level. … [T]he inspector then wrote down the brand name of the level, as if there might be something wrong with his equipment. … He said he offered to let the inspector walk on the scaffold, but she declined and said she was afraid of heights. Unfortunately, these obstructions happen every day to smallbusiness owners everywhere. And although they are comical, they are costly and cumbersome to deal with. The fines paid to cover
these nonsensical violations could very well add up to enough money to hire an additional employee. According to economists from Lafayette University, for businesses with fewer than 19 employees, the cost of complying with federal regulations alone is $10,585 per worker. Add to this the cost of complying with state and municipal requirements, and the burden of regulation is clear. Then add in the cost of tax compliance, and one begins to wonder if it makes more sense to flip burgers at the local diner!
Conclusion
The importance of small business to the US economy is overwhelming. Without increased capital formation in this sector, we will not see the significant job growth necessary to bring down the unemployment numbers. We could, of course, simply put all of the unemployed on government payrolls. Or I suppose we could follow the advice of Mr. Keynes and have the Treasury fill bottles with bank notes, bury them at suitable depths, and have private enterprise dig them up again.
This would certainly alleviate unemployment in the short run. But what economic dislocation would such a policy cause in the long run? To answer this question, look no further than to the disastrous performance of the US economy in the '60s and '70s.
$29.95 $22.00
Therefore, there is only one sure way to cure unemployment: restore the entrepreneurial drive by alleviating the plight of small business. This can be done by simply restoring confidence in the marketplace. Balanced budgets, reduced spending, and reduced regulation will go a long way in achieving this goal. This will alleviate a lot of uncertainty by providing a signal that sound economic policy is once again the goal of policymakers.
But of equal importance, a probusiness attitude must be restored. Entrepreneurs are the real heroes of the American story. They are the risk takers who provide us with the necessities of everyday life. Unfortunately, they are currently being taxed and regulated out of existence.
中小企业与缺乏就业机会的复苏
于 22:44:48翻译 | 已有344人浏览 | 有4人评论 中小企业与缺乏就业机会的复苏 Tags: 就业 | 中小企业 | 经济复苏
大多数经济学家告诉我们经济衰退已经过去了，我们现在处于经济 复苏的过程中。事实上，作为官方观点，美国国家经济研究所 （NBER）告诉我们经济复苏是从2009年6月开始的。
幸运的是，多数致力于赚钱过活的美国人看穿了这一假象。 比如，最
近纽约时报和哥伦比亚广播电台（CBS）的一项调查表明，美国人 对美国经济的表现不再抱持幻想。 令人吃惊的是十分之七的受访者表 示，国家正走向错误的方向。
持续一个世纪对自由企业制度的攻击正使得美国强大的经济力量变 为历史。数万亿的美元花在“刺激经济的政府投资”。而美国联储局正 通过轻易地抢夺纳税人的辛苦钱来摧毁美国的经济，讽刺的是，所 有的这些干预政策的目标是为了稳定市场和减少失业。
但这些干预政策实现了什么？不多。失业率持续维持在9%的高位， 而U6指标——考虑到不充分就业的和低工资员工——已经达到了 16%。就像最近公布的就业数据一样，很显然工作机会增长并不明 显。
那么，是什么导致了缺乏就业机会的复苏呢？
回答这个问题，我们必须关注中小企业（原文直译为小企业，考虑 中国语境，可能中小企业更容易理解——译者注）的困境。 在美国， 中小企业是就业增长的重要力量，但是从2009年开始的经济复苏， 60%的失业就来自中小企业部分。就现在而言，中小企业并没有复
事实上，根据劳动局的数据统计，从2009年到2010年，企业家创 办的新企业要远低于十年平均水平。 如果中小企业的财政状况再不得 到改善，那么就业机会也不会增加。 因此，我们有必要弄清楚中小企 业面临的压力，以及为什么在经济体重缺乏必要的资本构成。
中小企业的重要性
中小企业管理者认为中小企业是指没有超过500个员工的企业。 事实 上，大部分中小企业要远低于这个数字。 许多中小企业只有几个员工， 一些就直接在业主家的外面工作。
然而，数据表明，中小企业对市场健康运行的贡献是难以置信的。 在 过去的15年，中小企业制造了64%的就业机会。他们也付出了私人 企业44%的薪水。 而且，中小企业创造了超过一半的非农GDP价值。 在2007年，中小企业制造了差不多30%的出口。
中小企业是美国经济的支柱。 很多新方法都是由中小企业的工作人员 发明的，比如微软和苹果都是从中小企业发展起来的，当然，山姆·
沃尔顿（沃尔玛创始人）也是如此，他用从亲戚那借来的钱在阿肯 色州的罗杰斯镇上开了个小店，然后逐步发展，彻底改变了零售行 业。
以上事实说明，中小企业作为经济孵化器的作用是明显的，将一些 好的想法在小企业逐步完善发展，如果成功，则在更广阔的市场进 行推广。
中小企业提供了大部分低技术员工的就业，只要看看园艺工人、 建筑 承包商、饭店服务员，你就会发现好多没什么技术的劳动力。中小企 业提供给工人通过工作训练获得更多高技能就业的机会。
中小企业主还提供给了我们大部分想要的服务。 零食、 理发、 下馆子， 都是这些人提供的服务。 想想一下没有园丁、 水池清理工、 电工会是怎 样的吧。
市场不确定性
华盛顿所推出的政策正导致市场失衡。 这种失衡导致商业团体的不确 定性，其中最大的受害者就是正在发展的中小企业。
大部分中小企业主和投资人不确定经济的走向。 开销已经超出控制， 政府赤字有万亿美元，联储局政策带来的通货膨胀已经在商品价格 上显现。 所有的这些冲动行为并没有把中小企业纳入进去，使得他们 无法获得投资以增加就业。
还一个不确定因素是关于调整环境的。 人们不会投资于“打撒金钱”， 人们是因为利益而投资。 投资者不会因为“美国经济基础的改变”而有 所行动。
事实上，自从大社会计划以来，近年来政府越来越查收市场经济。 我 们有经济沙皇，国家健康保险，和实际存在的工业国有企业。
下面这段陈述来自雷蒙德·基廷，中小企业委员会（the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council）主席，很好地总结了 以上观点。
大部分情况下，企业主希望联邦政策的制定者推出减税政策，减少 市场干扰，控制政府预算，保持低通胀，或者减少干预，让企业主 和投资人可以自我发展……只有政策的制定者制定一个明确的支持
企业主、 支持增长的法相，大部分中小企业主才能面对巨大的不确定 性。
“企业家才是美国故事的真正英雄。”
威廉·邓克尔伯格，在全国独立企业联合会（the National Federation of Independent Business）的经济学家说得更简洁： “现在充满了不确定性，当你不确定时，你就不敢下赌注。”
在这种不确定性下，就不会有生产的扩张——这是增加就业机会的 必要条件。为什么要冒这个风险呢？
根据美联储官员伊莎贝拉·杜克介绍，十分之七的中小企业主是用自 己的储蓄开始扩张生意的。他们并不具备“强而不倒”（too big to fail）的优势。因此，由于政府规划者对金融系统倒塌的恐惧，他们 也没有资金的注入用来改善财政状况。
事实上，中小企业主是最能够承担风险的企业。 如果他们成功了，他 们可以提供大量客观的利润。 即使失败了，自身累计财富也可以用来 抵偿。他们中间大部分人抛弃稳固的工作，来追求自己的抱负。他们 是那些曾引领美国从农业社会走向世界经济强国的个人主义精神的 坚持者。
现在的经济衰退（或者我应该政治正确的说过去了的经济衰退）已 经摧毁了美国大量的个人财务。 所以，现在没有什么钱为中小企业扩 张提供帮助了。
再加上我们刚才说的不确定性，大部分投资人——中小企业主的救 命稻草——也不敢越雷池一步。 在这样的经济情况下，投资人不值得 去冒险。
当重要的资金来源中断时，中小企业主不得不转向银行系统。 由于政 府通过将纳税人的钱注入市场，银行有着充足的现金。 但银行会借给 他们吗？答案是“不会”。
中小企业银行贷款在2008年陷入低谷。令人吃惊的是，第一季度就 降到了150亿。 银行才不管这是纳税人的救济，坐拥现金，最好的例
子莫过于裙带资本。
制度的重压
作为本身就是中小企业主，我可以告诉你制度的重压有多么巨大。 它 明显地增加了开店的成本，但这些成本又无法在开始时确定。
我曾经因为没有在拆除小房子时没有在房子旁边放上足够的干草而 遭到巨额罚款。我被告知，这样做的目的是防止泥土吹到水里。我有 点疑惑，财产的整个表面是确定的。 幸运的，我已经将罚款减到了最 小，但是我还必须付出足够的诉讼费用。
当前，在加州的零售商根据州劳动法的规定，只要没有为那些整天 站着工作的员工提供提供座位就会受到法律的惩罚。 根据零售商的代 理律师所言，在这种情况下，任何一个雇员都能起诉，即使