资源描述
赏析版2013年6月经济学人文章（英汉双语对照）汇集
Contents
[2013.06.01] Urbanisation: Some are more equal than others 1
[2013.06.01] Drawing the battle lines 保守派vs.改革派：划分战线 5
[2013.06.01] The strange rebirth of liberal England自由主义怪异重生 6
[2013.06.01] Martian space flight: Red dreams 火星之旅 10
[2013.06.01] Killer drones: Out of the shadows 无人机杀手 18
[2013.06.06] Why so little Chinese in English? 英语的汉语借词太少 21
[2013.06.08] Lexington: The China syndrome 中国综合症 23
[2013.06.08] Too much of a good thing 领导人优势过多 27
[2013.06.08] America’s non-banks: The anointed美国金融机构封神榜 32
[2013.06.08] Palaeontology: A heroic find 古生物学史诗般的发现 33
[2013.06.08]Democrat or sultan? 土耳其的抉择：民主还是王权？ 34
[2013.06.08] Luxury in the Arab world 阿拉伯奢侈品市场 39
[2013.06.08]Turkey's troubles:Democrat or sultan?土耳其受难记 40
[2013.06.08] Turkey erupts: The new young Turks 土耳其新一代的年轻人 44
[2013.06.15]Secrets, lies and America's spies 监控网络错在哪？ 47
[2013.06.15] Surveillance: Look who’s listening 揭开监控黑幕 51
[2013.06.15] AIDS in India: The cost of living 生命的价值 60
[2013.06.15] Europe’s reluctant hegemon 心不甘情不愿的欧洲盟主 61
[2013.06.15] Energy: Tilting atwindmills 德国能源：无的放矢 69
[2013.06.15] Online privacy: How to disappear 如何抹去线上痕迹 76
[2013.06.22] Persian power: Can Iran be stopped? 难道伊朗已经无人能挡 78
[2013.06.22] China's Bank: the Shibor Shock 中国央行坐视钱荒加剧 83
[2013.06.22] The start of history 中日战争，历史的开篇 85
[2013.06.22] Cement industry: Ready-mixed fortunes 水泥业复苏在望？ 89
[2013.06.20] The Big Mac Index goes to North Korea 巨无霸指数走进朝鲜 91
[2013.06.22] Henry Cecil 悼～传奇驯马师亨利·塞西尔 96
[2013.06.22] Money and happiness: Buy buy love 买来的“爱” 99
[2013.06.29] Mediobanca: A little less tangled 意大利中期银行 101
[2013.06.29] Defining financial bigotry: Disparate times 金融偏执的认定 103
纤云无语探苍穹——用方程式描述的数学故事 106
[2013.06.01] Urbanisation: Some are more equal than others
中国的城镇化
Urbanisation
城镇化
Some are more equal than others
有些人比其他人更“平等”
China’s need for a new urbanisation policy reaches a critical point
中国亟需新的城镇化政策
Jun 1st 2013 | SHENZHEN |From the print edition
FOR many migrants who do not live in factory dormitories, life in the big city looks like the neighbourhood of Shangsha East Village: a maze of alleys framed by illegally constructed apartment buildings in the boomtown of Shenzhen, near Hong Kong. There are at least 200 buildings, many of them ten storeys tall (see picture). They are separated by only a metre or so, hence the name “handshake buildings”—residents of neighbouring blocks can reach out from their windows and high-five.
上沙东村坐落在毗邻香港的深圳，发展迅猛。违章建造的住宅楼鳞次栉比，迷宫般的小巷夹杂其间——对许多不住在工厂宿舍的农民工来说，他们在大都市的生活便莫过如此。这些楼房至少有200幢，许多高达十层（如图）。它们只有一米左右的间隔，因此被称为“握手楼”——相邻楼房的住户可以探出窗口，击掌问候。
The buildings are China’s favelas: built illegally on collectively owned rural land. Rents are cheap. An eight-square-metre (86-square-foot) flat costs less than $100 a month. They symbolise both the success of the government’s urbanisation policy and also its chronic failures. China has managed a more orderly system of urbanisation than many developing nations. But it has done so on the cheap. Hundreds of millions of migrants flock to build China’s cities and manufacture the country’s exports. But the cities have done little to reward or welcome them, investing instead in public services and infrastructure for their native residents only. Rural migrants living in the handshake buildings are still second-class citizens, most of whom have no access to urban health care or to the city’s high schools. Their homes could be demolished at any time.
这些违章住宅矗立在集体所有的农地上，是中国棚户区的缩影。房租很便宜。八平米（86平方英尺）的一间房月租不到100美元。这些住宅既象征着政府城镇化政策的成功，也象征着它的慢性失败。与许多发展中国家相比，中国的城镇化进程更加有序，却成本低廉：亿万农民工蜂拥而至，建设着中国的城市，制造着中国的出口商品；而城市却极少回馈或欢迎他们，只顾着为本地居民改善公共服务和兴建基础设施。住在“握手楼”里的农民工依然是二等公民：他们中的绝大多数无法加入城镇的医疗体系，其子女也无法接受城市的高中教育；他们的住所也面临着随时被拆的危险。
China’s new leaders now say this must change. But it is unclear whether they have the resolve to force through reforms, most of which are costly or opposed by powerful interests, or both. Li Keqiang, the new prime minister, is to host a national conference this year on urbanisation. The agenda may reveal how reformist he really is.
现在，中国的新领导人宣称：这种情况必须改变。但尚不清楚他们是否有决心推进改革，毕竟大多数改革或代价高昂，或受到强大利益集团的反对，或同时面临这两大难题。新任总理李克强今年将主持召开关于城镇化的全国会议。从会议中，我们或能看出他是否真的是一位改革者。
He will have no shortage of suggestions. An unusually public debate has unfolded in think-tanks, on microblogs and in state media about how China should improve the way it handles urbanisation. Some propose that migrants in cities should, as quickly as possible, be given the same rights to services as urban dwellers. Others insist that would-be migrants should first be given the right to sell their rural plot of land to give them a deposit for their new urban life. Still others say the government must allow more private and foreign competition in state-controlled sectors of the economy such as health care, which would expand urban services for all, including migrants. Most agree the central government must bear much more of the cost of public services and give more power to local governments to levy taxes.
他会听到不少建言。一场异乎寻常公开的辩论已在智库内、微博上和官媒中全面铺开，辩论的话题是：中国应如何改善城镇化的方式。一些人提议：城市中的农民工应尽快获得与当地居民同等的、享受公共服务的权利。另一些人坚持认为：应首先允许准农民工出售他们的农地，这样，他们就能获得迁居城镇的储蓄保障。还有一些人建议：政府必须开放更多的私企和外企进入国有控制的经济部门（比如医疗），这样城镇服务就能覆盖包括农民工在内的更多人。多数人认同一个观点：中央政府必须在公共服务上承担更多成本，并赋予地方政府更大的征税权力。
Any combination of these options would be likely to raise the income of migrants, help them to integrate into city life and narrow the gap between the wealthy and the poor, which in China is among the widest in the world. Such reforms would also spur on a slowing economy by boosting domestic consumption.
这些措施都可能提高农民工的收入，帮助他们融入城市生活，以及缩小贫富差距（中国是贫富差距最大的国家之一）。此类改革也将提振内需，刺激趋缓的经济增长。
Officials know, too, that the longer reforms are delayed the greater the chances of social unrest. “It is already a little too late,” Chen Xiwen, a senior rural policy official, said last year of providing urban services to migrants. “If we don’t deal with it now, the conflict will grow so great that we won’t be able to proceed.”
官方也知道：改革拖得越久，社会就可能越不稳定。去年，中国三农政策的高级官员陈锡文针对农民工享受城镇公共服务发表了看法：“已经有点晚了。如果再不做，矛盾就更大，压得我们做都做不动。”
Yet Mr Li, the prime minister, would do well to dampen expectations. The problems of migrants and of income inequality are deeply entrenched in two pillars of discriminatory social policy that have stood since the 1950s and must be dealt with before real change can come: the household registration system, or hukou, and the collective ownership of rural land.
然而，面对大家的热切期待，李总理可能会泼点冷水。农民工和收入不平等的问题深深植根于两大歧视性的社会政策之中：户籍制度（也即户口）和农地的集体所有制。如果不能触及这些始于上世纪50年代的政策，真正的变革将无从开始。
Who will pay?
谁来买单？
The hukou perpetuates a rigid caste system. Children of holders of rural hukou inherit their parents’ second-class status, even if they are born in cities. Many urbanites want to keep this system in place, to protect their preferential access to jobs, education and health care.
户口延续着僵化的等级制度。如果父母是农村户口，那么孩子也就顺承为二等公民，即使他们出生在城市。许多城里人都想留住这个制度，以保护他们在就业、教育和医疗等方面的特权。
City governments, meanwhile, cannot afford to extend public services to migrants. Zheng Zhijie, president of state-owned China Development Bank, estimated in May that cities would require 50 trillion yuan ($8.2 trillion) in investment by 2020 to accommodate 100m new migrants and provide increased benefits to those already there. Shanghai’s schools give a sense of the scale of the problem: the city had 170,000 students enrolled in high school in 2010, all holders of Shanghai hukou; more than three times that many children—570,000 migrant children aged 15 to 19—were living in the city in 2010 without Shanghai hukou, most of them unable to attend those schools.
与此同时，如果把农民工纳入城市的公共服务体系，政府将无力承担。今年五月，中国国家开发银行行长郑之杰估算：如果城市吸纳一亿新农民工并提高原有农民工的福利水平，那么它们就需要在2020年前投资50万亿人民币（8.2万亿美元）。上海的学校也形象地展示了这个问题的严重程度：这座城市在2010年有17万高中在校生，他们都持有上海户口；与此同时，57万（17万的三倍多）15至19岁的外来青少年也住在这座城市，但他们没有上海户口，绝大多数因此无法进入上海的高中学习。
The collective control of rural land by local officials also impedes social mobility, by allowing local governments and developers to dispossess farmers of the land they lease—and to pay them far below market value for it. Yu Jianrong, a researcher on rural China, calculated in 2010 that the government had expropriated 6.7m hectares (16.5m acres) of rural land over a 20-year period, paying farmers 2 trillion yuan ($326 billion) less than market value.
地方政府对农地的集体控制权也阻碍了社会流动性。集体控制权允许地方政府和开放商征收租给农民的土地，但农民获得的补偿却远低于市值。2010年，中国的三农问题学者于建嵘估算，20多年来，政府共计征收670万公顷（1650万英亩）土地，给农民的补偿却比市值少了2万亿人民币（3260亿美元）。
At the same time, housing prices in cities are increasingly out of reach for migrants. The central government has encouraged the construction of low-cost housing in cities with limited success, since only local hukou holders are eligible.
与此同时，面对城市的房价，农民工愈发有心无力。虽然中央政府鼓励城市兴建成本低廉的住房，但效果有限，因为只有持有本地户口的居民才能购买。
The discriminatory policies continue to take their toll on migrants. China has 163m migrant workers who have left their home township (another 99m people are classified as migrants even though they have only given up farming without moving away). A higher proportion of those were co-renting apartments with others in 2012 than four years earlier (19.7%, up from 16.7%), according to data released this week by the National Bureau of Statistics. And fewer migrants are becoming homeowners—0.6% in 2012, down from 0.9% in 2008.
歧视性的政策依旧伤害着农民工。中国离乡背井的农民工有1.63亿（另有9900万被归为农民工，即使他们只是放弃农作而并未离开家乡）。国家统计局本周发布的数据显示：2012年与他人合租住房的农民工占19.7%，比四年前的16.7%有所上升；2012年拥有自购房的农民工占0.6%，也低于2008年的0.9%。
Some scholars say a solution lies in the handshake buildings of Shenzhen. Tao Ran of Renmin University in Beijing says the government should legalise such buildings around the country—allowing rural dwellers near cities to develop them and rent out flats to migrants—and then levy taxes and fees to pay for expanding services. It sounds like a reasonable proposal that would increase the supply of affordable housing and help more migrants become proper urban residents.
一些学者表示，深圳的那些“握手楼”就是解决问题的契机。人民大学的陶然认为，政府应该在全国范围内将这些违章住宅合法化，允许城郊的农村房主扩建住房、租给农民工；政府可以从中征收税费，以补贴扩大公共服务所需的花费。这项建议听起来合情合理，或能增加廉价住房的供给，帮助更多农民工成为体面的城镇居民。
But local governments will have none of it, Mr Tao says, as they will fight to retain control over land, their chief source of revenue. Other vested interests, he says, will fight, too. The road to equality for China’s migrants will continue to be a hard one.
但陶先生也表示，地方政府不会采纳他的建议，因为他们会死守对土地的控制，这可是他们的主要财源；而其他既得利益者也会拼命反对。中国农民工的平权之路仍将荆棘满布。
译者：四眼猹
[2013.06.01] Drawing the battle lines 保守派vs.改革派：划分战线
Ideological debate
意识形态之争
Drawing the battle lines
划分战线
A conservative backlash against a push for reform
保守派vs.改革派
Jun 1st 2013 | BEIJING |From the print edition
IN DECEMBER China’s new Communist Party chief, Xi Jinping, said something that encouraged advocates of political reform. No organisation or individual, he declared, had a “special right to overstep the constitution and law”. He was simply quoting the constitution, but some liberals were encouraged by his praise of the “mighty force” of a document the party often ignores. Officials are now warning optimists not to get carried away.
新任中共总书记习近平曾在去年12月发表讲话，政治改革派为此备受鼓舞。习宣布，任何组织或个人都不得有“超越宪法和法律的特权”。他仅仅是提到了宪法一词，但有些自由派人士因为他赞扬了宪法的“伟大力量”，于是备受鼓舞。因为中共往往无视宪法。现在，官员们在提醒乐天派不要得意忘形。
The constitution contains much that liberals admire. It makes no mention of the Communist Party, except in its preamble. It promises freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of religious belief.
中国宪法中包含许多自由派人士所称扬的内容，除了序文以外，它都没有提及中共。中国宪法保证言论、出版、集会及宗教信仰自由。
Liberal calls for “constitutionalism” mean that the document should be above any other law or party edict. In January journalists at a liberal-minded newspaper, Southern Weekend, staged an unusual strike over the censorship of an article in praise of constitutionalism. But some in the party are clearly concerned about attempts to promote a reform agenda using the constitution as a shield. Now constitutionalism has come under fire.
自由派要求“宪政”，即宪法应在其他任何法律或中共的命令之上。今年一月，自由派杂志《南方周末》的记者们不满中共对一篇称扬宪政的文章进行审查，发起了罢工，此举实属罕见。但是，中共党内有人明确表示，对有人试图以宪法为盾推进改革议程感到担忧。如今，宪政的概念遭到了批判。
The assault began on May 21st with an article in a leading party journal by Yang Xiaoqing of Renmin University. The main components of constitutionalism, it said, belonged to “capitalism and bourgeois dictatorship, not to socialist people’s democracy”. It said constitutionalism was “deceptive”: in fact only politicians supported by “big interest groups” could get elected.
5月21日，人民大学的杨晓青在某主要党内刊物上发表了一篇文章，对宪政的批判由此开始。文章谈到，宪政的主要内容属于“资本主义和资产阶级专政，而不是社会主义人民民主”。文章还提到，宪政是个“幌子”：事实上只有被“大型利益集团”拥护的政客才能当选。
On the following day Global Times, a Beijing newspaper, said that debate about constitutionalism was not just a theoretical one. It was being used, it said, to negate China’s political system and try to turn it into a Western one. Calling for constitutionalism was in fact unconstitutional.
接下来一天，北京的一家报纸《环球时报》称，关于宪政的争论并不只是一个理论问题。该报还称，这场争论被用以否定中国的政治体制并试图将其西化。呼吁宪政实际上就是违反宪法。
It is difficult to tell whether Mr Xi himself endorsed the attacks. He has not mentioned constitutionalism but seemed to keep the debate alive by referring again in February to the constitution.
很难说习近平本人是否认可这种批判。他没有提及宪政，但在2月又一次提及宪法，此举似乎是为了让这场争论继续下去。
However, it is highly unlikely that Mr Xi is on the side of the liberals. In January remarks widely believed to have been made by him in an internal speech circulated on the internet. He criticised unnamed people for suggesting that reform meant adopting “Western universal values”.
无论如何，习近平基本上不可能站在自由派这边。1月，一些言论在网上流传，大家普遍认为那是习在某次内部讲话中发表的。他对某些认为改革就是接受“西方普世价值”的人提出批评，但没有指明是谁。
But if the party hopes a few editorials will keep liberals quiet, it is likely to be mistaken. The tirades against constitutionalism have helped to fuel internet discussion. The word became a top trending topic on Sina Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter. “Protecting the equal rights [conferred by] one person, one vote: that’s constitutionalism”, wrote Ren Zhiqiang, a real-estate magnate, to his 15m followers on May 27th. Mr Xi may be ruing the day he brought up the subject.
不过，如果中共希望几篇社论就能让自由派人士保持沉默，那就可能打错主意了。批判宪政的长篇社论令网上的讨论愈演愈烈。“宪政”一词成为了新浪微博（中国的推特）上最热门的话题。“保护一人一票的平等权利，这就是宪政”，地产大亨任志强5月27日在微博上写道，他的微博有1500万粉丝。在提及“宪法”一词那天，习近平可能就后悔了。
译者：contrary
[2013.6.1] The strange rebirth of liberal England自由主义怪异重生
British politics and the young
英国政治和年轻人
The strange rebirth of liberal England
自由英格兰的怪异重生
Young Britons have turned liberal, both socially and economically. Politicians need to get on their side
英国的年轻人在社会和经济方面已经转向了自由主义，政治人物需要迎合
Jun 1st 2013 |From the print edition
FOR the past 170 years The Economist has consistently advocated free trade, punctured government bloat and argued for the protection of individual liberties. It has also been consistently disappointed. Irksomely, political parties tend to plump either for economic liberalism or for social liberalism. Sometimes a small party boldly tries to combine the two—and is rewarde
展开阅读全文
浙ICP备2021020529号-1 | 浙B2-20240490 
