金融英语学习资料17 中英文对照_英语中英文对照的app
金融英语学习资料17 中英文对照由刀豆文库小编整理，希望给你工作、学习、生活带来方便，猜你可能喜欢“英语中英文对照的app”。
Some laws are too dangerous to be allowed to remain on the books.Take, for example, the US debt ceiling.It is the legislative equivalent of a nuclear bomb aimed by the US at itself, with the rest of the world within its blast radius.What must never be used should not exist.Regardle of the outcome of the current negotiations, the law needs to be repealed.Orderly government cannot be pursued under so destructive a threat.It is quite different from a partial government shutdown.Albeit foolish and unjust, that is just about manageable.Failure to lift the debt ceiling is not.有些法律太过危险、不应保留，美国的债务上限就是一例。债务上限的立法相当于美国对自己投下了一颗核弹，而整个世界都在其爆炸范围内。绝不能使用的东西根本不应存在。不论目前谈判的结果如何，债务上限的法律都需要废止。面对破坏力如此之强的威胁，政府不可能实现有序的运转。这与政府部分关门有很大区别。政府部分关门虽然愚蠢和不应该，但基本上是可控的。而无法提升债务上限就不一样了。
The imbroglio over the ceiling does have a darkly amusing side.Many will recall Republican insistence that “uncertainty” was thwarting economic recovery.Yet it is difficult to imagine policies better designed to create maximum uncertainty than a poible default by the world’s most important debtor.Asked about the consequences of a failure to reach a deal on the ceiling, Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, responded: “You don’t want to know.” But we must seek to know;the results would be calamitous.关于债务上限的纠葛确实有其黑色幽默的一面。很多人会记得共和党坚称“不确定性”正在阻碍经济复苏。但我们很难想象出，还有什么政策比世界最重要债务国违约更能制造不确定性。当被问及无法就债务上限问题达成妥协将有何后果时，摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)首席执行官杰米•戴蒙(Jamie Dimon)说：“你肯定不想知道。”但我们必须设法弄清答案。结果将是灾难性的。
Why is the debt ceiling too dangerous to use? This question has two answers.为何债务上限这种步器过于危险、不应使用？可以从两个层面解答这个问题。The first is constitutional.In a recent article, Neil Buchanan of The George Washington University and Michael Dorf of Cornell argue that a binding debt ceiling would create a “trilemma” for the president: “Ignore the debt ceiling and unilaterally iue new bonds, thus usurping Congre’s borrowing power;unilaterally raise taxes, thus usurping Congre’s taxing power;or unilaterally cut spending, thus usurping Congre’s spending power.” Thus, a binding debt ceiling would force the president to violate his obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed”.The authors conclude that the president should choose the “least unconstitutional” course and ignore the debt ceiling.But, inevitably, whatever the president did would create a constitutional crisis.No responsible Congre would seek to put the president in that position.首先是宪法层面。在近期一篇文章中，乔治华盛顿大学(The George Washington University)的尼尔•布坎南(Neil Buchanan)和康奈尔大学(Cornell University)的迈克尔•多尔夫(Michael Dorf)辩称，具有约束力的债务上限为总统带来“三难”局面：“忽略债务上限，单方面发行新债券，将篡夺国会的举债权；单方面增税，将
篡夺国会的税权；单方面减支，将篡夺国会的支出权。”因此，有约束力的债务上限将迫使总统违背其“监护法律得到切实执行”的义务。两位作者的结论是，总统应选择“最不违宪”的道路，忽略债务上限。但无论总统怎么做，都将不可避免地造成宪政危机。一个负责任的国会，是不会寻求让总统陷于如此境地的。
The second reason why the debt ceiling is so dangerous is that the administration could not obey it in a non-destructive way.At some point between October 17 and the end of the month, the administration would lack the money to pay its bills.All choices would be dire.债务上限如此危险的第二个原因是，政府无法在不带来破坏性后果的前提下遵守债务上限。在10月17日到月底之间的某个时点，政府将无钱支付账单。所有的选择都很糟糕。
One much discued choice is “prioritisation”: the federal government would pay “high priority” claimants, such as the Chinese government, and default to “low priority” claimants, such as beneficiaries of Social Security or Medicare.Yes, the idea is that awful.一个被广泛讨论的选择是“优先支付”：联邦政府将向中国政府等“高优先级”债权人偿还债务，而对社保或联邦医疗保险计划(Medicare)受益人等“低优先级”债权人违约。没错，这个主意就是那么“馊”。
The US Treasury has two potent objections.First, prioritisation would not protect the “full faith and credit of the United States” – it would still be a default.Second, the US government’s computer systems do not allow it to choose among the close to 100m payments it makes a month.But Fedwire, the system that handles sovereign debt payments, is distinct from the systems making payments to government agencies and other vendors.So maybe the US Treasury could pay the former obligations first and then use any remaining money for the latter, a poibility it denies even exists, to preserve its bargaining credibility.美国财政部(US Treasury)提出两点有力的反对理由。首先，优先支付不能保护“美国的全部信心和信用”——它仍将是一种违约。其次，美国政府的计算机系统不允许财政部在每月的近1亿笔支付中做出选择。但处理主权债务付款的Fedwire系统与向政府机构和其他供应商付款的系统不同。因此，美国财政部也许能够先向前者偿债、然后用余下的资金向后者支付（但它认为这根本不具可行性），以维持自己讨价还价的信誉。
Even if poible, which is unclear, the politics of prioritisation would be disastrous.Yet the economics of a failure to service debt would be worse.US Treasuries are the world’s most important safe aets.If they were to default, even temporarily, there would be an immediate impact on risk premiums and a quite poibly permanent impact on their role as havens.Haircuts would be imposed on their use as collateral.The result, as my colleague Gillian Tett has noted, might be a huge disruption to market liquidity and credit acro the world.A Lehman default is one thing;a US default would be quite another.No wonder the gathering of central bankers and finance ministers in Washington last week for the IMF meeting was so agitated about the iue.优先支付即便可行（可行与否尚不明朗），其政治后果也将是灾难性的。但不偿还债务的经济后果更严重。美国国债是全球最重要的避险资产。如果美国国债违约，哪怕是暂时性的，也将对风险溢价产生即刻影响，并很可能对其避险资产角色产生长期影响。它作为抵押品的价值将打折扣。正如我的同事吉莲•邰蒂(Gillian Tett)所说的，结果可能是严重扰乱全世界的市场流动性和信贷。雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)违约是一回事，美国政府违约是另一回事。难怪上周各国央行行长和财长齐聚华盛顿参加IMF年会时，对此问题感到十分焦虑。
The le economically damaging alternative would seem to be for the US government to default on its non-debt obligations.Indeed, many in the Tea Party apparently believe the ceiling is a clever way to impose a balanced budget, though one that would curtail even the short-term borrowing normal for households.Today, this would require immediate elimination of a deficit of about 4.2 per cent of gro domestic product.An instantaneous cut of this magnitude would lower GDP by far more than the 6 per cent that conventional multipliers might suggest.The reason is that all built-in stabilisers would be cut off.As revenue fell along with GDP, spending would automatically shrink further.GDP could fall 10 per cent.This would inflict a domestic and global disaster.经济危害较小的选择似乎是，让美国政府对非债务义务违约。实际上，不少茶党(Tea Party)成员似乎认定债务上限是一种实现预算平衡的更巧妙方法，尽管就连家庭日常所要进行的短期借款也会因此受到抑制。从目前看，对非债务义务违约将立马削减相当于美国国内生产总值(GDP)约4.2%的赤字。但如果突然进行如此大规模的减赤，GDP的萎缩幅度将远超根据常规乘数推算出的6%。原因是，这样一来，所有的内在稳定器都将被切断。随着财政收入伴随GDP下滑，支出也会自动地进一步收缩。GDP可能萎缩10%，对美国国内和全球造成灾难性影响。
Thus, if the administration were to obey the debt ceiling, it would have a choice between a debt calamity and an output disaster.Yet Barack Obama is also right that he cannot concede to people wielding this threat because that would increase their incentive to use it and so, in the long run, the likelihood that the bomb would explode.This device needs to be disarmed.Alas, that is not going to happen.因此，如果政府准备遵守债务上限，它将不得不在债务灾难和经济产出灾难之间做出选择。但巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)也正确地认识到，他不能对那些用这一威胁逼迫他的人让步，因为那会增强他们使用债务上限步器的动力，从而加大长期内这颗核弹爆炸的概率。债务上限步器应被销毁。可惜的是，这是不会发生的。So the administration also needs to decide what it would do if the ceiling were not to be lifted in time – be it now, next month or at a later date.The least bad answer would be: keep borrowing.The president cannot state he would do so, before the fact.Indeed, he must deny it, since knowing this would lower his opponents’ incentive to raise the ceiling.Yet, if it came to the worst, he would have to borrow, invoking the need to preserve the credit of the government, without which it would be permanently damaged.所以，政府还需决定，如果债务上限无法及时解除——不论是现在、下月还是之后——自己应当采取什么行动。负面影响最低的方案是继续举债。总统不能在采取行动前透露这种打算。事实上，他必须否认自己将这么做，因为他的政敌如果得知他有此打算，他们解除债务上限的动力就会减弱。但如果最糟糕的情况发生，总统就必须以“需要维护政府信用”为由举债——如果不这么做，政府的信用将永久受损。
Borrowing under a constitutional cloud would be risky.The simplest way to minimise
these risks would be to borrow short-term.After all, the US Federal Reserve must ensure that the interest rate remains zero, in order to preserve its monetary policy.The House of Representatives might impeach the president for the “high crime” of ensuring the US government fulfils its promises, but this would fail in the Senate.Someone might challenge Mr Obama’s decisions in court.But how could a judge conclude that the president acted unconstitutionally if Congre has given contradictory instructions?
在宪法的阴影下举债将是危险的。把这些风险降到最小的最简单办法是借入短期资金。毕竟，美联储(Fed)必须确保利率维持在零，以维系其货币政策。众议院可能会因总统为保障美国政府履行其承诺而犯下的“重大罪行”弹劾他，但参议院绝不会通过弹劾案。也许有人会在法庭上质疑奥巴马的决定。但既然国会下达的指示自相矛盾，法官又如何能够认定总统的行为违宪呢？
It is insane that such a discuion is even poible.Abolish the ceiling now.It is an invitation to mischief.神志正常的人根本不会进行这样的讨论。赶快废除债务上限吧，它只会引发闹剧。
Angela Merkel, German chancellor, yesterday warned that the spying scandal was putting preure on talks to forge an EU-US trade pact, the clearest sign yet of th......
The first of China’s former bad banks to list on a stock market is set to raise up to $2.5bn as bankers close in on a price range of HK$3.00-HK$3.58 for more t......
The proportion of women reaching top-level management positions in the City has doubled in the past year, research has found.研究表明，在过去一年里，伦敦金融城处于......
The Global Positioning System helps power everything from in-car sat navs and smart bombs to bank security and flight control, but its founder has warned that i......
银行专业术语金融英语1.现金业务：Cash busine,2.转账业务：transfer busine,3.汇兑业务：currency exchange busine,4.委托收款：commiion receivables,5.发放贷款：loans,6.贷款收回......
