A New Deal for Globalization
By Kenneth F. Scheve and Matthew J. Slaughter
From Foreign Affairs , July/August 2007
Summary: Globalization has brought huge overall benefits, but earnings for most U.S. workers -- even those with college degrees -- have been falling recently; inequality is greater now than at any other time in the last 70 years. Whatever the cause, the result has been a surge in protectionism. To save globalization, policymakers must spread its gains more widely. The best way to do that is by redistributing income.（全球化带来了巨大的整体利益，但是大部分美国工人的利益——即使是哪些拥有大学学历的人——最近一直在下降，不平等比过去七十年时间里的任何一时期都更严重。不管原因是什么，结果是造成了保护主义的高涨。为了挽救全球化，政策制定者必须更广泛的分配其所得。最好的方式便是重新分配收入）
Kenneth F. Scheve is Professor of Political Science at Yale University. Matthew J. Slaughter is Professor of Economics at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth and Adjunct Senior Fellow for Business and Globalization at the Council on Foreign Relations. He served on the White House Council of Economic Advisers from 2005 to 2007.
WAGES FALLING, PROTECTIONISM RISING
Over the last several years, a striking new feature of the U.S. economy has emerged: real income growth has been extremely skewed, with relatively few high earners （赚钱者）doing well while incomes for most workers have stagnated（停滞不前）or, in many cases, fallen. Just what mix of forces is behind this trend is not yet clear, but regardless, the numbers are stark. Less than four percent of workers were in educational groups that enjoyed increases in mean real money earnings from 2000 to 2005; mean real money earnings rose for workers with doctorates and professional graduate degrees and fell for all others. In contrast to in earlier decades, today it is not just those at the bottom of the skill ladder who are hurting. Even college graduates and workers with nonprofessional master's degrees saw their mean real money earnings decline. By some measures, inequality in the United States is greater today than at any time since the 1920s. (在过去几年里，美国经济的一个新的显著特征出现了，即实际收入的增长呈倾斜趋势，只有较少的赚钱这做的较好，而大多数工人的收入都是停滞不前的，或者在许多情况下是下降的。这一趋势背后的混合力量仍然没能弄清，但无论如何，这一数值是残酷的。地域4%的在教育团体的工人从2000-2005享有真正意义上的收入的增加。平均现实金钱收入对于拥有博士和专业研究生学位的工人来说是增加的，其余都是下降的。同早期几十年相比，今日这一情况还不是技能阶梯所伤害的最严重的年份。即便大学毕业生和拥有非专业硕士学历的工人看到他们的平均现实收入在下降。通过一些测量方法得出，不平等已经达到了自20世纪20年代以来的最高水平。)
Advocates of engagement with the world economy are now warning of a protectionist drift in public policy. This drift is commonly blamed on narrow industry concerns or a failure to explain globalization's benefits or the war on terrorism. These explanations miss a more basic point: U.S. policy is becoming more protectionist because the American public is becoming more protectionist, and this shift in attitudes is a result of stagnant or falling incomes. Public support for engagement with the world economy is strongly linked to labor-market performance, and for most workers
labor-market performance has been poor. （主张参与世界经济的倡导者如今发出了公共政策向保护主义倾斜的警告。这一倾斜通常归因于狭隘的业内人士关注，对全球化利益的失败解释，或者是恐怖主义的战争。这些解释遗失了一个更加基本的一点：美国政策的日趋保护主义化是因为美国公众正变得更加保护主义，这一态度的转变是由收入不增长或下降造成的。公众对参与世界经济的支持很大程度上是同劳动力市场的绩效密切相关的，而对绝大多数工人来说，劳动力市场的绩效表现欠佳。）
Given that globalization delivers tremendous（巨大的）benefits to the U.S. economy as a whole, the rise in protectionism brings many economic dangers. To avert（避免，防止）them, U.S. policymakers must recognize and then address the fundamental cause of opposition to freer trade and investment. They must also recognize that the two most commonly proposed responses -- more investment in education and more trade adjustment（调整）assistance（帮助，援助）for dislocated （混乱）workers -- are nowhere near adequate（充足的）. Significant payoffs from educational investment will take decades to be realized, and trade adjustment assistance is too small and too narrowly targeted on specific industries to have much effect.（如果总体来看，全球化给美国经济带来了巨大的利益，则保护主义的举起带来了许多经济危险。为了避免这些发生，美国政策制定者必须认识并提出反对自由贸易和投资的基本原因。他们也必须认识到两个最基本的可能的答复—对教育的更多投资以及更多的为混乱的工人提供贸易调整援助—是远远不够的。教育投资的有意义的回报将需要数十年才能被意识到，并且贸易调整帮助对于特定的目标行业来说太小太狭隘，而不能产生很多影响。）
The best way to avert the rise in protectionism is by instituting a New Deal for globalization -- one that links engagement with the world economy to a substantial redistribution of income. In the United States, that would mean adopting a fundamentally more progressive federal tax system. The notion of more aggressively redistributing income may sound radical, but ensuring that most American workers are benefiting is the best way of saving globalization from a protectionist backlash.(避免保护主义抬头最好的办法是通过建立一个全球化的新政—这个新政将可观的收入再分配同参与世界经济联系起来。在美国，这将意味着采取了从根本上更进步的联邦税收制度。更积极地重新分配收入的概念听起来可能激进，但要确保大多数美国工人受益是将全球化从保护主义情绪中挽救出来的最佳方式。)
RISING PROTECTIONISM不断上升的保护主义
U.S. economic policy is becoming more protectionist. First, consider trade. The prospects for congressional（议会的）renewal（延期）of President George W. Bush's trade promotion authority（贸易促进权）, which is set to expire（期满）this summer, are grim（严酷的）. The 109th Congress introduced 27 pieces of anti-China trade legislation（法规）; the 110th introduced over a dozen in just its first three months. In late March, the Bush administration levied （征收）new tariffs on Chinese exports of high-gloss paper（高光泽纸）-- reversing（推翻）a 20-year precedent（惯例）of not accusing（指责）nonmarket economies of illegal export subsidies（非法出口补贴）. （美国的经济政策越来越具有保护主义倾向。首先来看贸易。关于议会对于布什总统贸易促进权的延期事件的前景是不容乐观的，这一贸易促进权在今年夏天将会期满。第109次国会议会提出了27份反华贸易立法，第110次会议提出的只是之前提出过的立法。在三月下旬，布什政府对中国出口的高光泽纸征收新的关税，这推翻了20年以来不对非市场经济的非法贸易补贴进行指责的惯例。）
Barriers to inward foreign direct investment (FDI) are also rising. In 2005, the Chinese energy company CNOOC（中海油China national offshore oil corporation）tried to purchase U.S.-headquartered Unocal(加州联合石油公司Union Oil Company of California). The subsequent（随后的）political storm was so intense（强烈的）that CNOOC withdrew its bid（企图）. A similar controversy（争论）erupted（爆发于）in 2006 over the purchase of operations at six U.S. ports by Dubai-based Dubai Ports World, eventually causing the company to sell the assets. The Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which is legally required to review（审查）and approve（批准）certain foreign acquisitions（跨国并购）of U.S. businesses, has raised the duration（持续时间）and complexity of many reviews. Both chambers of the 109th Congress passed bills to tighten CFIUS scrutiny even further; similar legislation has already passed in the current House.（外来直接投资的进入壁垒也正在增加。2005年，中国能源公司中海油试图收购总部设在美国的加州联合石油公司。随后的政治风暴太过强大导致其撤销了这一方案。另一类似争议爆发于2006年的总部设于迪拜的迪拜港口世界购买美国六个港口的购买事件上，最终导致该公司卖掉了这一资产。美国对外投资委员会依法审查和批准美国公司的某些外资并购，但委员会加大了审查的持续时间和复杂性。第109次议会的两会都通过法案去进一步加强美国对外投资委员会的安全，相似的法律已经在白宫通过。）
This protectionist drift extends to much of the world. The Doha Development Round of trade negotiations, the centerpiece of global trade liberalization, is years behind schedule and now on the brink of（处于……边缘）collapse. Key U.S. trading partners are becoming increasingly averse（反对的）to foreign investment, as expressed both in their rhetoric (recent public pronouncements by the governments of France and Germany) and in their actions (new restrictions in China on foreign retailers). （这一保护主义倾向延伸到了世界。多哈发展回合贸易谈判，全球贸易自由化的核心，已落后于时间表多年，而现在正面临崩溃的边缘。美国关键的贸易伙伴越来月
反对对外投资，无论是在言论上（最近美国和德国的政府宣言）还是在他们的行动上（中国对外国零售商的新的限制）。）
At first glance, this rise in protectionism may seem puzzling. The economic gains from globalization are immense. In the United States, according to estimates from the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics and others, trade and investment liberalization over the past decades has added between $500 billion and $1 trillion in annual income -- between $1,650 and $3,300 a year for every American. A Doha agreement on global free trade in goods and services would generate, according to similar studies, $500 billion a year in additional income in the United States. （乍一看，这种保护主义抬头，似乎令人费解。全球化带来的经济收益是巨大的。在美国，根据彼得G ·彼得森研究所对国际经济和其他方面的估计，过去几十年的贸易和投资自由化的年收入增加了5000亿美元和1万亿美元——而每个美国人增加值从1650到3300美元不等。关于商品和服务的全球自由贸易的多哈协议将产生，根据类似的研究，亿美元，美国将获得5000亿的额外收入。）
International trade and investment have spurred（促进）productivity growth, the foundation of rising average living standards. The rate of increase in output per worker hour in the U.S. nonfarm business sector has doubled in the past decade, from an annual average of 1.35 percent between 1973 and 1995 to an annual average of 2.7 percent since 1995. Much of the initial acceleration was related to information technology (IT) -- one of the United States' most globally engaged industries, at the forefront of establishing and expanding production networks linked by trade and investment around the globe. （国际贸易和投资促进了生产率增长，以及提高平均生活水平上升的基础。美国非农商业领域里，每名工人每小时的产出率增加在过去几十年里增加了两倍，从1973年至1995年的平均1.35%到自1995年以来的每年平均2.7%。初始加速度的多少是与信息技术（美国全球范围从事率最高的产业）有关的，信息技术处于建立和扩大生产网络的最前沿，并在全球范围内由贸易和投资连接。）
Gains from globalization have been similarly large in the rest of the world. China and India have achieved stupendous rates of productivity growth, lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. Central to this success has been the introduction of market forces, in particular international market forces related to trade and FDI. In Chinese manufacturing, foreign multinational companies account for over half of all exports. And in the Indian IT sector, Indian and foreign multinational firms account for two-thirds of sales.（全球化的收益在世界其他各个地方都大大不同。中国和印度都取得了惊人的生产率增长速度，使得亿万人民摆脱贫困。这一成功的核心因素是市场力量的引入，尤其是同贸易和对外直接投资相关的国际市场力量。国外跨国公司在中国的制造业，占全部出口额的一半以上。在印度的IT业，印度和外国跨国公司占三分之二的销售额。）
Freer trade and investment can also enhance other foreign policy goals. The Doha Round was launched shortly after 9/11 because of the view that global poverty is intimately linked to international insecurity and instability. The Doha Round was also intended to remedy the widespread perception that previous rounds of trade negotiations had treated poor nations unfairly by failing to open the very sectors -- such as agriculture -- whose openness would most likely help the world's poor.
Accordingly, it is believed that a successful Doha agreement would enhance the United States' image and promote its interests around the world. （自由贸易和投资，还可以增强其他外交政策目标。多哈会议在9/11后不就举行是因为全球贫困是同国际不安全和不稳定密切相关的。多哈回合的目的还在于纠正普遍的看法，即，在前几轮贸易谈判中，贫穷国家受到了不公平的对待，因为一些重要部门未能放开，如农业部门，这些部门的开放将对很可能降低世界的贫困。因此，它认为，一个成功的多哈协议将加强美国的形象，促进世界各地的利益）
There are three common explanations for why protectionism is on the rise in the United States even though globalization is good for both the U.S. economy and U.S. security interests. None, however, is convincing. The first is that a narrow set of industries, such as agriculture and apparel （服饰）manufacturing, have been harmed by freer trade and, in response, have lobbied hard to turn lawmakers against liberalization. But the incentives for these industries to oppose globalization have not changed in recent years, and there are also many industries that have benefited from, and thus lobbied for, further liberalization. What is new today is that special-interest protectionists are facing a more receptive audience. （为什么保护主义在美国的兴起是有三个共同的解释，即使全球化有利于美国经济和美国的安全。然而，没有任何东西能令人信服。首先是狭隘的行业，如农业和服装制造业，已经损害了自由贸易，并且造成了其努力说服立法者反对自由主义。但这些行业的为反对全球化的激励机制在近几年并没有发生变化，也有许多行业得益于，从而游说进一步自由化。当今新的问题是，特殊利益保护主义者正面临着一个更容易接受的观众）
The second explanation is that policymakers and the business community have failed to adequately explain the benefits of freer trade and investment to the public. But in fact, public-opinion data show the opposite: large majorities of Americans acknowledge these broad benefits. If anything, the public seems to understand certain benefits better than ever -- for example, that its enjoyment of relatively affordable toys, DVD players, and other products depends on globalization. （第二种解释是，决策者和商界未能充分向公众解释自由贸易和投资的好处。但事实上，民意的数据显示的是相反的：大多数美国人承认这些广泛的效益。如果有什么的话，公众似乎比以往任何时候都更好地了解一定的好处，例如，其享受比较实惠的玩具，DVD播放机和其他依赖于全球化的产品）
Finally, there is the security explanation: that the need to balance economic interests with national security concerns has resulted in a more protectionist stance. This may help explain policy debates on certain issues, such as immigration. But generally, security concerns strengthen rather than weaken the case for further trade and investment liberalization, as long as such liberalization is viewed as fair to the developing world. （最后，有一个安全方面的解释：对国家经济利益和国家安全方面关注的平衡的需要早就了更加保护主义化的立场。这可能有助于解释在某些问题上的政策辩论，例如移民。但一般来说，只要自由化被视为对发展世界是公平的，那么，安全的关注就会加强，而不是削弱进一步的贸易和投资自由化。）
THE ROOTS OF PROTECTIONISM （保护主义的根源）
The fundamental explanation is much simpler: policy is becoming more protectionist because the public is becoming more protectionist, and the public is becoming more
protectionist because incomes are stagnating or falling. The integration of the world economy has boosted productivity and wealth creation in the United States and much of the rest of the world. But within many countries, and certainly within the United States, the benefits of this integration have been unevenly distributed -- and this fact is increasingly being recognized. Individuals are asking themselves, "Is globalization good for me?" and, in a growing number of cases, arriving at the conclusion that it is not. （最根本的解释是非常简单，政策的保护主义化是因为公众的越来越保护主义化，而这又是因为收入的停滞不前或下降。世界经济一体化带动了美国以及其他国家的生产力和财富创造力。但是，在许多国家，当然包括美国，这种整合的好处处于分布不均的状态，这已越来越被人们所认识到。个人问自己：“全球化有利于我么？”在很多情况下，越来越多的结论是否定的。）
This account of rising protectionism depends on two key facts. First, there is a strong link between individuals' labor-market interests and their policy opinions about globalization. Second, in the past several years labor-market outcomes have become worse for many more Americans -- and globalization is plausibly（似真地）part of the reason for this poor performance（表现不佳）.
Research on polling（民意测验）data shows that opinions about trade, FDI, and immigration are closely correlated to（相关）skill and educational levels. Less skilled Americans -- who make up the majority of the U.S. labor force -- have long led opposition（反对）to open borders. Workers with only high school educations are almost twice as likely to support protectionist policies as workers with college educations are.
This divide in opinion according to skill level（根据技能水平）reflects the impact that less skilled Americans expect market liberalization to have on their earnings. It also reflects their actual poor real and relative earnings performance （收入绩效）in recent decades. It is now well established that income inequality across skill levels has been rising since (depending on the measure) the mid- to late 1970s and that the benefits of productivity gains over this time accrued（增加）mainly to higher-skilled （高技能）workers. For example, from 1966 to 2001, the median pretax （税前所得）inflation-adjusted wage（通胀调整后的工资）and salary income（工资收入）grew just 11 percent -- versus （与……相比）58 percent for incomes in the 90th percentile百分位and 121 percent for those in the 99th percentile. Forces including skill-biased偏重技能technological change played a major role in these income trends; the related forces of globalization seem to have played a smaller role -- but a role nonetheless依然.
There are two important points about this link between policy opinions and labor-market skills and performance. One is that it does not simply reflect different understandings of the benefits of globalization. Polling data are very clear here: large majorities of Americans acknowledge承认the many benefits of open borders开放边界-- lower prices, greater product diversity, a competitive spur激励to firms -- which are also highlighted强调by academics, policymakers, and the business community商界. At the same time, they perceive注意到that along with these benefits, open borders
have put pressures on worker earnings.
Second, a worker's specific特定的industry does not appear to drive his view驱动他认为of globalization. This is because competition in the domestic labor market extends the pressures of globalization beyond trade- and foreign-investment-exposed暴露industries to the entire economy. If workers in a sector such as automobile manufacturing lose their jobs, they compete for new positions across sectors他们争夺跨部门的新职位-- and thereby put pressure on pay in the entire economy. What seems to matter most is what kind of worker you are in terms of在 ... 方面skill level, rather than what industry you work in.
The protectionist drift also depends on worsening labor-market outcomes产出over the past several years. By traditional measures, such as employment growth and unemployment rates, the U.S. labor market has been strong of late. Today, with unemployment at 4.5 percent, the United States is at or near full employment充分就业. But looking at the number of jobs misses the key change错过了关键的变化: for several years running, wage and salary growth for all but the very highest earners赚钱者has been poor, such that U.S. income gains have become extremely skewed不直的，歪斜的.
Of workers in seven educational categories -- high school dropout,退学学生, high school graduate, some college, college graduate, nonprofessional master's, Ph.D., and M.B.A./J.D./M.D. -- only those in the last two categories, with doctorates or professional graduate degrees, experienced any growth in mean real money earnings between 2000 and 2005. Workers in these two categories comprised包含only 3.4 percent of the labor force in 2005, meaning that more than 96 percent of U.S. workers are in educational groups for which average money earnings have fallen. In contrast to in earlier decades, since 2000 even college graduates and those with nonprofessional master's degrees -- 29 percent of workers in 2005 -- suffered declines in mean real money earnings.
The astonishing skewness of U.S. income growth is evident in the analysis of other measures as well. The growth in total income reported on tax returns has been extremely concentrated in recent years: the share of national income accounted for by the top one percent of earners reached 21.8 percent in 2005 -- a level not seen since 1928. In addition to high labor earnings, income growth at the top is being driven by corporate profits, which are at nearly 50-year highs as a share of national income and which accrue mainly to those with high labor earnings. The basic fact is clear: the benefits of strong productivity growth in the past several years have gone largely to a small set of highly skilled, highly compensated workers. (美国的收入增长惊人的偏斜在其他分析措施中分析的结果也是显而易见的。在纳税申报报告中的关于总收入的增长近几年一直非常集中：国民收入的份额中由前1%的赚钱者占的比率在2005年达21.8%--自1928年以来未见的水平。除了较高的劳动收入，顶部的收入增长是由公司利益驱动的，这是其作为国民收入中50年以来的一个历史高危，并且主要是由高收入者的收入增加带来的。基本事实是清楚的，在过去几年强劲的生产率增长的好处主要流向了小部分高技能，高报酬率那批工人。)
Economists do not yet understand exactly what has caused this skewed pattern of income growth and to what extent globalization itself is implicated, nor do they know
how long it will persist. Still, it is plausible that there is a connection. Poor income growth has coincided with the integration into the world economy of China, India, and central and eastern Europe. The IT revolution has meant that certain workers are now facing competition from the overseas outsourcing of jobs in areas such as business services and computer programming. Even if production does not move abroad, increased trade and multinational production can put pressure on incomes by making it easier for firms to substitute foreign workers for domestic ones. （经济学家还不明白究竟是什么原因造成这种收入增长的倾斜格局，以及到什么程度全球化本身会被牵连，也不知道它会持续多久。不过，有一个连接是合情合理。糟糕的收入增长情形的出现正值同中国，印度，中欧以及东欧的世界经济一体化进程。IT革命意味着某些工人正面临着海外外包领域的就业竞争，如商业服务和计算机编程。即使生产不向海外扩张，增加的贸易和跨国生产也可以通过向公司提供外国工人来代替本国工人这一方式来增加收入压力。）These twin facts -- the link between labor-market performance and opinions on globalization and the recent absence of real income growth for so many Americans -- explain the recent rise in protectionism. Several polls of U.S. public opinion show an alarming rise in protectionist sentiment(情绪) over the past several years. For example, an ongoing NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that from December 1999 to March 2007, the share of respondents stating that trade agreements have hurt the United States increased by 16 percentage points (to 46 percent) while the "helped" share fell by 11 points (to just 28 percent). A 2000 Gallup poll found that 56 percent of respondents saw trade as an opportunity and 36 percent saw it as a threat; by 2005, the percentages had shifted to 44 percent and 49 percent, respectively. The March 2007 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found negative assessments of open borders even among the highly skilled: only 35 percent of respondents with a college or higher degree said they directly benefited from the global economy.
(这两项事实--劳动力市场的表现和对全球化的意见之间的联系和这么多美国人的实际收入增长的最近的情况下--解释在最近兴起的贸易保护主义. 美国舆论的一些民调显示，在过去几年中的贸易保护主义情绪的惊人崛起。例如，正在进行的美国全国广播公司新闻/华尔街日报“民意调查发现，从1999年12月至2007年3月，说明贸易协定伤害了美国的受访者比例增加了16个百分点（增至46%），而“帮助”的份额下降了11分（只有28 ％）。2000年的盖洛普民意调查发现，56 ％的受访者将贸易视为契机，而只有36 ％的人认为它是一种威胁。2005年，分别变成了44 ％和49 ％的百分比。2007年3月NBC新闻/华尔街街杂志民意调查发现，开放边界的负面评估还存在于高技术人群：只有35 ％，具有大专以上学历的受访者表示，他们直接从全球经济中受益。)
Given the lack of recent real income growth for most Americans, newfound skepticism about globalization is not without cause. Nor is it without effect: the change in public opinion is the impetus for the protectionist drift in policy. Politicians have an incentive to propose and implement protectionist policies because more citizens want them, and protectionist special interests face an audience of policymakers more receptive to their lobbying efforts than at any time in the last two decades. （鉴于最近大多数美国人的实际收入增长缺乏问题，关于全球化出现的新的怀疑并非是无的放矢。它也不是没有效果：舆论的变化是保护主义政策倾向的动力。政治家们提出并实施保护主义政策的激励，因为越来越多的市民希望他们这么做，并且保护主义的特殊利益面对政策决定着这一观众，其比过去二十年的任何时间都更能接收游说的努力。）
INADEQUATE ADJUSTMENTS（不足调整）
Because the protectionist drift reflects the legitimate concerns of a now very large majority of Americans, the policy debate needs fresh thinking. There is reason to worry even if one does not care about social equity. When most workers do not see themselves as benefiting from the related forces of globalization and technology, the resulting protectionist drift may end up eliminating the gains from globalization for everybody. Current ignorance about the exact causes of the skewed income growth is not reason for inaction. Policymakers may not be able to attack the exact source (or sources) and likely would not want to even if they could identify them, because doing so could reduce or even eliminate the aggregate gains from globalization. （由于保护主义倾向反映了美国人现在很大部分的正当关切，政策思考需要新的思维。人们有理由担心，即使其不计较社会公平。当大多数工人没有看到自己受益于全球化和技术相关的力量，由此产生的保护主义倾向最终可能消除每个人都从全球化中收益。当前对何种原因引起收入增长降低无知并不能作为无所作为的理由。决策者可能无法抨击确切的来源，或者可能会不希望抨击即使他们能够识别它们，因为这样做可以减少甚至消除从全球化进程中的总收益。）
Supporters of globalization face a stark choice: shore up support for an open global system by ensuring that a majority of workers benefit from it or accept that further liberalization is no longer sustainable. Given the aggregate benefits of open borders, the preferable option is clear. （全球化的支持者面临着严峻的抉择：为开放的全球化体系提供一个岸上支持，通过保证大多数工人能够从全球化获利或者接受更深入的自由主义已经不是可持续的了。鉴于开放边界的总效益，更好的选择是明确的。）
Current policy discussions addressing the distributional consequences of globalization typically focus on the main U.S. government program for addressing the labor-market pressures of globalization -- Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) -- and on investing more in education. These ideas will help but are inadequate for the problem at hand. （目前的政策讨论全球化的分配后果通常集中于为应对全球化的劳动力市场压力而制定的主要美国政府计划--贸易调整援助组—以及更多的教育投资。这些想法能够起到作用但对于解决手头的问题却无能为力）
The problem with TAA is that it incorrectly presumes that the key issue is transitions across jobs for workers in trade-exposed industries. Established in the Trade Act of 1974 (with a related component connected to the North American Free Trade Agreement), the program aids groups of workers in certain industries who can credibly claim that increased imports have destroyed their jobs or have reduced their work hours and wages. TAA-certified workers can access supports including training, extended unemployment benefits while in full-time training, and job-search and relocation allowances. （贸易调整援助的问题是：它错误地假定问题的关键是贸易行业的工作转变。成立于1974年贸易法案（拥有与北美自由贸易协定相关联的部分），一些特定行业的工人救助组十分确定的宣称进口增加已经毁掉了他们的工作或减少他们的工作时间和工资。贸易调整援助认证的工人可以获得帮助，包括培训支持，在全职培训期间，寻找工作，以及津贴重新安置期间，延长失业救济金）
In short, TAA is inappropriately designed to address the protectionist drift. The
labor-market concern driving this drift is not confined to the problem of how to reemploy particular workers in particular sectors facing import competition. Because the pressures of globalization are spread economy-wide via domestic labor-market competition, there is concern about income and job security among workers employed in all sectors. （简而言之，贸易调整援助对与解决保护主义倾向是不合适的。劳动力市场的关注推动了这一倾斜，这一关注并不局限于如何重新雇佣面临着进口竞争的特殊部门的下岗工人的问题上。由于全球化的压力是通过国内劳动力市场竞争来蔓延的经济扩张，有关于所有部门受雇工人的收入和安全问题的关注是存在的。）
Today many are calling for reform and expansion of TAA. For example, President Bush has proposed streamlining（精简的）the processes of eligibility determination （资格认定）and assistance implementation to facilitate reemployment. This year, TAA is due to be reauthorized by Congress, and many legislators have proposed broadening the number of industries that are TAA-eligible. TAA improvements like these are surely welcome. But they alone cannot arrest the protectionist drift. （今天，许多人要求改革和扩大贸易援助。例如，布什总统已经提出精简的资格认定程序和实施援助促进再就业。今年，贸易援助由于被议会批准，许多立法者建议扩大符合贸易援助项目条件的行业数量。这类贸易援助项目的改善是受到欢迎的。但他们不能单独阻止的保护主义的倾向。）
The idea behind investing in education is that higher-skilled workers generally earn more and are more likely to directly benefit from economic openness. The problem with this approach, however, is that upgrading skills is a process that takes generations -- its effects will come far too late to address today's opposition to globalization. It took 60 years for the United States to boost the share of college graduates in the labor force from six percent (where it was at the end of World War II) to about 33 percent (where it is today). And that required major government programs, such as the GI Bill, and profound socioeconomic changes, such as increased female labor-force participation. （教育投资背后的目标高技术的工人能够赚取更多，并且能够更可能直接的从经济开放中获利。然而，这种方法的问题是：提升技能需要经历几代人的过程--其效果用来解决今天的反对全球化的问题将会为时已晚。美国花了60年的时间来将大学毕业生的劳动力比例从6%（大约为二战后）提高到了33%（今天）。这需要重大政府计划，例如，士兵福利法案，而深刻的社会经济变化，如增加女性劳动力参与比例。）
If the United States today undertook the goal of boosting its college-graduate share of the work force to 50 percent, the graduation of that median American worker would, if the rate of past efforts are any indication, not come until about 2047. And even this far-off date might be too optimistic. In the past generation, the rate of increase in the educational attainment of U.S. natives has slowed from its 1960s and 1970s pace, in part because college-completion rates have stalled. Rising income inequality may itself be playing a role here. Since 1988, 74 percent of American students at the 146 top U.S. colleges have come from the highest socioeconomic quartile（四分位数，最大值）, compared with just 3 percent from the lowest quartile. Moreover, even college graduates and holders of nonprofessional master's degrees have experienced falling mean real money earnings since 2000. If this trend continues, even completing college will not assuage the concerns behind rising protectionism. （如果美国今天着手完成
将其将劳动力大学毕业率提高到50%这一目标上，中产阶级的美国工人的毕业率降到2047年才能达到，如果过去的努力力可以作为指示的话。甚至这一遥远的日期有可能都过于乐观。在过去的一代，美国本地人的教育程度的增幅从20世纪60年代和70年代的步伐已经放缓，部分是因为大学完成率一直停滞不前。日益扩大的收入不平等问题可能在这里起到了一定的作用。自1988年以来，74%的处于美国146个顶尖院校的学生来自于社会经济的最高四分位数。此外，即使是大中专毕业生和持有非专业的硕士学位经历了自2000年以来的平均真实收入的下降。如果这种趋势继续下去的话，即使完成大学教育也不能缓和对高保护主义背后的关注。）
GLOBALIZATION AND REDISTRIBUTION
Given the limitations of these two reforms and the need to provide a political foundation for engagement with the world economy, the time has come for a New Deal for globalization -- one that links trade and investment liberalization to a significant income redistribution that serves to share globalization's gains more widely. Recall that $500 billion is a common estimate of the annual income gain the United States enjoys today from earlier decades of trade and investment liberalization and also of the additional annual income it would enjoy as a result global free trade in goods and services. These aggregate gains, past and prospective, are immense and therefore immensely important to secure. But the imbalance in recent income growth suggests that the number of Americans not directly sharing in these aggregate gains may now be very large. （鉴于这两项改革的局限性以及需要为参与世界经济提供一个政治基础，一个全球化的新政的时机已经到来，这一时机将贸易和投资自由化同有意义的收入再分配连接起来，这一再分配为更广泛地分享全球化的收益而服务。回想一下，500亿美元的年收入增益的共同估计，美国享有的今天是从早期的贸易和投资自由化以及每年的收入额外增加（它会享受全球化商品和服务的自由贸易）的几十年中得到的。这些总收益，过去和未来，是巨大的，因此极其重要，应该得以保证。但在最近的收入增长不平衡表明，美国不能直接享受这些总收益的人员数量现在可能已经非常大了。）
Truly expanding the political support for open borders requires a radical change in fiscal policy. This does not, however, mean making the personal income tax more progressive, as is often suggested. U.S. taxation of personal income is already quite progressive. Instead, policymakers should remember that workers do not pay only income taxes; they also pay the FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) payroll tax for social insurance. This tax offers the best way to redistribute income. （为开放边界而真正意义上扩大政治支持需要在财政政策上的彻底改变。然而，这并不意味着个人所得税累进，如通常建议。美国个人所得税的税收已经是相当进步的。相反，决策者应该记住，职工不仅缴纳所得税，他们也缴纳了“联邦保险缴纳法”规定的社会保险费用。这种税收提供了收入再分配的最佳方式。）
The payroll tax contains a Social Security portion and a Medicare portion, each of which is paid half by the worker and half by the employer. The overall payroll tax is a flat tax of 15.3 percent on the first $94,200 of gross income for every worker, with an ongoing 2.9 percent flat tax for the Medicare portion beyond that. Because it is a flat-rate tax on a (largely) capped base, it is a regressive tax -- that is, it tends to reinforce rather than offset pretax inequality. At $760 billion in 2005, the regressive payroll tax was nearly as big as the progressive income tax ($1.1 trillion). Because it
is large and regressive, the payroll tax is an obvious candidate for meaningful income redistribution linked to globalization. （工资税包含社会保障部分和医疗保险部分，其中一半由雇主一般由工人支付。整体工资税是15.3％的统一税，当每个工人的总收入首次超过94.200美元时缴纳，除此之外还需缴纳统一的2.9%的医疗保险部分。因为它是一个（主要）上限基础上的扁平税率，它是一种累退税--也就是说，它会加强而不是抵消税前不平等。2005年是7600亿美元，倒退的工资税同累进的所得税几乎一样大（1.1万亿美元）。因为其额度很大并且是递减的，工资税是一个同全球化相关的对收入再分配最有意义的候选方法。）
A New Deal for globalization would combine further trade and investment liberalization with eliminating the full payroll tax for all workers earning below the national median. In 2005, the median total money earnings of all workers was $32,140, and there were about 67 million workers at or below this level. Assuming a mean labor income for this group of about $25,000, these 67 million workers would receive a tax cut of about $3,800 each. Because the economic burden of this tax falls largely on workers, this tax cut would be a direct gain in after-tax real income for them. With a total price tag of about $256 billion, the proposal could be paid for by raising the cap of $94,200, raising payroll tax rates (for progressivity, rates could escalate as they do with the income tax), or some combination of the two. This is, of course, only an outline of the needed policy reform, and there would be many implementation details to address. For example, rather than a single on-off point for this tax cut, a phase-in of it (like with the earned-income tax credit) would avoid incentive-distorting jumps in effective tax rates. （一个全球化的新政将结合进一步的贸易和投资自由化，并且消除所有工人的收入低于全国中位数的工资税。2005年，所有工人总金额收入中位数是$ 32140，有大约670万工人处于或低于这个水平。假设这一组数据的平均劳动力收入为25，000美元，这670万工人每人将会得到约3,800美元的减税额度。由于这项税收的经济负担落在很大程度上落在工人的肩上，此次减税将直接使得他们的税后实际收入增加。随着总额约为2.56亿美元的价格标签的出现，这一提议可以通过提高最高上限到94，200美元的方法来支付，提高工资税率（为累进税，税率能够像所得税那样升级），或者是两个的组合。这是，当然，只是一个必要的政策改革纲要，会有许多实施细则。例如，比起这次税收单一点的降低，逐步的降低（如获取收入的税收抵免）将避免实际所得税税率中的激励扭曲的跳跃。）
This may sound like a radical proposal. But keep in mind the figure of $500 billion: the annual U.S. income gain from trade and investment liberalization to date and the additional U.S. gain a successful Doha Round could deliver. Redistribution on this scale may be required to overcome the labor-market concerns driving the protectionist drift. Determining the right scale and structure of redistribution requires a thoughtful national discussion among all stakeholders. Policymakers must also consider how exactly to link such redistribution to further liberalization. But this should not obscure the essential idea: to be politically viable, efforts for further trade and investment liberalization will need to be explicitly linked to fundamental fiscal reform aimed at distributing globalization's aggregate gains more broadly. （这听起来像是一个激进的建议，但是要记住5000亿美元这一数字：美国每年从贸易和投资自由化的收入增益。这种规模的再分配可能需要克服劳动力市场的担忧，推动保护主义倾向。确定合适的规模和再分配的结构需要所有利益相关者之间的全面的全国性讨论。决策者还必须考虑究竟如何将再分配
和进一步自由化确切的连接起来。但这不应该掩盖基本的思路：政治上是可行的，进一步的贸易和投资自由化的努力需要同基本的财政改革挂钩，这一改革致力于更广泛地分配全球化的总收益。）
SAVING GLOBALIZATION
Averting a protectionist backlash is in the economic and security interests of the United States. Globalization has generated -- and can continue to generate -- substantial benefits for the United States and the rest of the world. But realizing those broad benefits will require addressing the legitimate concerns of U.S. voters by instituting a New Deal for globalization. （避免了一场贸易保护主义反击存在于美国经济和安全利益。全球化已经为对美国以及世界其他国家提供(并可以继续提供)实质性的利益。但是，实现这些广泛的效益需要解决美国选民正当关切的，建立一个全球化的新政。）
In many ways, today's protectionist drift is similar to the challenges faced by the architect of the original New Deal. In August 1934, President Franklin Roosevelt declared: （在许多方面，今天的保护主义倾向类似于原来的新政的建筑师所面临的挑战。在1934年8月，富兰克林罗斯福总统宣布：）
Those who would measure confidence in this country in the future must look first to the average citizen. . . . （谁想度量一个国家的未来信心程度必须先看看普通公民的情况……）
This Government intends no injury to honest business. The processes we follow in seeking social justice do not, in adding to general prosperity, take from one and give to another. In this modern world, the spreading out of opportunity ought not to consist of robbing Peter to pay Paul. In other words, we are concerned with more than mere subtraction and addition. We are concerned with multiplication also -- multiplication of wealth through cooperative action, wealth in which all can share. （政府并没有打算伤到诚信经营。我们所跟随的寻找社会公正的进程并不是（政府打算没有伤到诚信经营）从另一个获得再给予另一个。在现代世界中，机会的蔓延不应该由抢劫彼特而去支付保罗这种形式组成。换句话说，我们所关心的不仅仅是加减法。我们也关心乘法--通过合作行动以及所有的财富都可共享的财富乘法。）
Today, such multiplication will depend on striking a delicate balance -- between allowing globally engaged companies to continue to generate large overall gains for the United States and using well-targeted fiscal mechanisms to spread the gains more widely. （如今，这样的乘法将取决于达成一种微妙的平衡--全球公司之间允许为美国继续产生大的整体收益以及使用有针对性的财政机制，以更广泛地传播成果。）
Would addressing concerns about income distribution make voters more likely to support open borders? The public-opinion data suggest that the answer is yes. Americans consistently say that they would be more inclined to back trade and investment liberalization if it were linked to more support for those hurt in the process. The policy experience of other countries confirms this point: there is greater support
for engagement with the world economy in countries that spend more on programs for dislocated workers. （解决收入分配问题会使选民更倾向于支持开放边界么？民意的数据表明，答案是肯定的的。美国人坚持说，他们会更倾向于回到贸易和投资自由化，如果它同过程中伤害支持相联系。其他国家政策的经验证实了这一点：有更大的支持，支持参与国家与世界经济，这些国家在方案上面话费更多来扰乱工人。）
U.S. policymakers face a clear choice. They can lead the nation down the dangerous path of creeping protectionism. Or they can build a stable foundation for U.S. engagement with the world economy by sharing the gains widely. A New Deal for globalization can ensure that globalization survives. （美国的决策者面临的一个明确的选择。他们可以领导者国民沿着埋伏着保护主义的道路向下前进。或者，他们可以通过更管饭的分配收益来为美国参与世界经济建立一个稳固的基础。）
Globalization 全球化 A fundamental shift is occurring in the world economy. We are moving rapidly away from a world in which national economies were relatively self-contained entities, isolated from each other by barriers to cross-border trade and investment; by distance, time zones, and language; and by national differences in government regulation, culture, and business systems. And we are moving toward a world in which barriers to cross-border trade and investment are tumbling; perceived distance is shrinking due to advances in transportation and telecommunications technology; material culture is starting to look similar the world over; and national economies are merging into an interdependent global economic system. The process by which this is occurring is commonly referred to as globalization. 世界经济正在发生着根本性的改变。我们正迅速地远离这么一个世界，在这个世界里国家经济实体都曾经是相对自给自足，彼此孤立的，就其原因或是设置跨境贸易和投资的壁垒所致，或是因距离、时差和语言的缘故所致；或是因政府监管、文化和商业体制上的的国家差异所致。与此同时，我们正在走向另外一个世界，在这个世界里，跨境贸易和投资的壁垒正在摇摇欲坠，原来感知到的距离因为交通和电信技术上的进步而正在缩小；物质文化在全世界开始看起来都很相似；各种经济实体正融入一个彼此依赖的全球经济体制中。而正在发生的这一个过程，人们通常把它称为全球化。 Correspondent: Globalization has been one of the most important factors to affect business over the last twenty years. How is it different from what existed before? Companies used to export to other parts of the world from a base in their home country. Many of the connections between exporting and importing countries had a historical basis. Today, to be competitive, companies are looking for bigger markets and want to export to every country. They want to move into the global market. To do this many companies have set up local bases in different countries. Two chief executives will talk about how their companies dealt with going global. Percy Barnevik, one of the world’s most admired business leaders when he was Cha irman of the international engineering group ABB and Dick Brown of telecommunications provider Cable & Wireless. Cable & Wireless already operates in many countries and is well-placed to take advantage of the increasingly global market for telecommunications. For Dick Brown globalization involves the economies of countries being connected to each other and companies doing business in many countries and therefore having multinational accounts. 记者: 过去20多年以来，全球化已经成为影响业务的最重要因素之一。那么，现在的全球化与以前有何不同呢? 过去的公司都是把在本国生产基地的商品出口到世界其他各地。进出口各国之间都有着千丝万缕的联系，其中许多联系都有其历史基础。当今，要想具有竞争力，各个公司都在寻求更大的市场，都想把产品出口到每一个国家，都想迈入全球化市场，为此，许多公司都在不同国家建立了本土化基地。今天我们请来两位总裁，让他们来谈谈他们的公司是如何应对全球化的。一位是珀西·巴恩维克，在担任国际工程集团ABB主席一职时，曾是世界上最令人羡慕的商界领袖之一；另一位是迪克·布朗，来自英国大东电报局（Cable&Wireless）的电信提供商。 大东电报局已经在许多国家营运起来了，而且定位很准，充分利用电信业上的日益增长的全球化市场。对迪克·布朗来说，全球化包括彼此联系的各个国家经济实体和在许多国家做生意的、从而拥有跨国账户的公司。 Dick Brown: The world is globalizing and the telecommunications industry is becoming more and more global, and so we feel we’re well-positioned in that market place. You see currency markets are more global tied, economies are globally connected, more so nowadays with
G l o b a l i z a t i o n的参考译文(2013.11)
Globalization A fundamental shift is occurring in the world economy. We are moving rapidly away from a world in which national economies were relatively self-contained entities, isolated from each other by barriers to cross-border trade and investment; by distance, time zones, and language; and by national differences in government regulation, culture, and business systems. And we are moving toward a world in which barriers to cross-border trade and investment are tumbling; perceived distance is shrinking due to advances in transportation and telecommunications technology; material culture is starting to look similar the world over; and national economies are merging into an interdependent global economic system. The process by which this is occurring is commonly referred to as globalization. Correspondent: Globalization has been one of the most important factors to affect business over the last twenty years. How is it different from what existed before? Companies used to export to other parts of the world from a base in their home country. Many of the connections between exporting and importing countries had a historical basis. Today, to be competitive, companies are looking for bigger markets and want to export to every country. They want to move into the global market. To do this many companies have set up local bases in different countries. Two chief executives will talk about how their companies dealt with going global.Percy Barnevik,one of the world’s most admired business leaders when he was Chairman of the international engineering group ABB and Dick Brown of telecommunications provider Cable & Wireless. Cable & Wireless already operates in many countries and is well-placed to take advantage of the increasingly global market for telecommunications. For Dick Brown globalization involves the economies of countries being connected to each other and companies doing business in many countries and therefore having multinational accounts. Dick Brown: The world is globalizing and the telecommunications industry is becoming more and more global, and so we feel we’re well-positioned in that market place. You see currency markets are more global tied, economies are globally connected, more so nowadays with expanded trade, more and more multinational accounts are doing business in many, many more countries. We’re a company at
全球化的利与弊Economic globalization 全世界都在谈论全球化，有的人认为它是本世纪的发明，有的人看到它的负面影响。 经济上的利与弊： 随着电子货币的到来，投资变得很方便，只要点击一下，大量货币就会从一个国家流通到另一个国家。这就开辟了个人投资的新渠道。 提高了劳工的流动性，因此开辟了前所未有的就业和培训前景。 激烈的竞争促使价格下降和服务的改进，例如送货上门和售后服务。 全球化导致产生统一市场，从而使那些不在这个市场中的国家受到更多的剥削。 仅仅３００家公司就占全球产值的三分之一，占国际贸易的一半。而食品生产则由１２家公司控制。 贫困的劳工群体越来越被排斥在外。不稳定性在增加，１９９７年在欧洲抛售黄金储备的传闻就使南非５万矿工失业。这就是多米诺骨牌效应。 All over the world about globalization, some people think that it is the invention, some people see its negative effects. Economic advantages and disadvantages: With the arrival of electronic money, it's very convenient for investment, click, a lot of money from one country to flow into another country. It opened up new avenues of personal investment. To improve the labor mobility, and thus opened an employment and training. Competitive price and service to the improvement, such as door-to-door and after-sales service. Globalization leads to a single market, so that the market in the country is more exploitation. Only 300 companies is one-third of global output, accounting for half of the international trade. While food production is controlled by 12 companies. Poverty and labor group is excluded. Instability in 1997 in Europe, selling gold reserves rumours that South Africa is 5 million miners unemployment. This is the domino effect. 统一供应的危险性在增长，忽视了市场上产品的多样性。 Supply risk in growth, has neglected the diversity of products on the market. 社会上的利与弊： 在政治上，欧盟和联合国等组织的权力在扩大，这可以在全球决策的舞台上抵消多国公司的作用。媒体的跨国力量有助于控制不公正现象，有助于各国的言论自由。 南北差距在扩大。贫困世界在全球收入中只占１·４％，１０年前占２·３％。 最严重的社会后果是犯罪全球化，对贫困国家劳动力的剥削有增无减。非法移民在增加。 文化上的利与弊： 文化的传播更快了，政治和知识产权的障碍减少了，谁也不能阻止一种文化产品在其国内的传播。“逆殖民化”在加强：例如美国迈阿密和洛杉矶的拉丁化。 亚洲和非洲繁荣城市人口的增长成为文化传播的新的推动力。 最近一份联合国人文发展报告显示，全球文化只朝着一个方向传播：从富国向穷国，而不是从穷国向富国。 在文化生产上，商业利润至上，质量和多样性被忽视。 Politically, the European Union and the United Nations organization such as power in the world, which can be expanded in the decision on the stage of the multinational corporation offset. Multinational force helps to control the media injustices, helps countries freedom of speech.
表1：全球化的定義 項 次 人名或機構定義 1 David Held et al.當代社會生活的所有層面（包括文化、犯罪、金融、宗教精神等），在整個世界的相互聯繫上，已經日益擴張、深入和加速。 2 Ulrich Beck 跨國行動者從權力、取向、認同和網絡等各種面向穿透 和侵蝕主權國家的過程。 3 R. Cohen and P. Kennedy 時空概念的變化、文化互動的增長、世界所有居民都面臨共同問題的增加、相互聯繫和相互依存的增強、跨國行為體的發展和跨國組織網絡的擴展，以及全方位的一體化。 4 A. G. McGrew 組成當代世界體系的國家與社會之間的聯繫和相互溝通 的多樣化，是世界某個部份發生的事情、決定和活動能 夠對全球遙遠地方的個人和團體產生重要影響。 5 Barbara Parker (2005: 49) 對傳統界限，例如國家、時間、空間等等日漸增加的穿透性。 6 喬治?索羅斯 (2002: i) 全球化等於資金的自由流動，而國家也愈來愈受到全球金融市場及跨國企業的主導。 7 Kenich Ohame 國與國間貿易界限或障礙的消弭。 8 Peter Dicken 為傳統國際生產、投資及貿易形式上的轉變。 9 Douglas Kellner (2002) 高度複雜、矛盾和模糊的制度與社會關係，以及牽涉商 品、勞務、想法、科技、文化形式和人的流動。 10 卡爾?海因 茲?巴奎 全球化係以貿易聯繫的密切程度為基準，國際貿易額佔 全球生產的比例越高，世界經濟全球化的程度就越高。 11 Richard C. Longworth 全球化可視為全球經濟體系的形成，使企業家能夠在世 界任何地方籌募資金，藉著這些資金，利用世界任何地 方之科技、通訊、管理和人才，在世界任何地方製造商 品，賣給世界任何地方的顧客。 12 Richard G. Harris (1993) 經濟學者通常將全球化視為生產、分配和商品行銷的國 際化。 13 Christopher Chase-Dunn et al. (2000) 全球化通常意指通訊和運輸科技的改變，資本流動和商 品貿易日增的國際化，以及經濟競爭的主戰場從國內市 場轉移到世界市場。
Globalization in my eyes Globalization has penetrated into all aspects of our life around the world. We can see it everywhere and anytime. It benefits our life a lot. In view of going out to play, globalization in economy makes it convenient for people to travel all over the world and enjoy wonderful scenes in different places. Besides, globalization in food gives eating lovers chances to taste different foods easily. And globalization in industry creates more wisdom and has deep influence on the development of industry, etc. However, there are also disadvantages during the process of globalization. On the one hand, more and more Chinese people are used to the foreign lifestyle, and they usually celebrate foreign holidays instead of our traditional ones. On the other hand, globalization has a great impact on our national products. There is a sense among people that foreign goods are better than goods made in China. Last but not least, it enlarge the distance between the developing countries and the developed countries, which is bad for the global harmony. In my eyes, globalization is a two-edged sword. If we master it validly, we can create a new world, or what wait us is destroy.
Good morning, everyone! I am deeply honored to give this speech, today, what I want to say is the impact of globalization and the attitude we should hold. 我深感荣幸做这次演讲，今天，我想说是全球化的影响以及我们应该持有的态度。 In most people’s minds, globalization refers to the unimpeded flows of capital, labor and technology across national borders, the world is gradually becoming a whole,connected and indivisible. Globalization is the inevitable trend of the development of human society, and it is changing the world. 在大多数人心目中，全球化是指资本、劳动力和技术不受阻碍的跨国界流动，世界正逐渐成为一个整体，相互连接、不可分割。全球化是人类社会发展的必然趋势，它正改变着世界。 In the era of economic globalization, cross-border transactions are everywhere. Many people engage in abroad business, as a result, some people’s national awareness gradually turns to be very weak. There are even some people saying that national identity makes no difference for them. I don't agree with this idea at all.There is a saying that businessmen feel at home wherever they are.However,as a matter of fact,each businessman has only one home,the place where he was born and grew up.Cite an example,a Chinese who has been working overseas for many years can't lose his sense of national awareness to China because of the long time stay in the overseas.Working abroad gives him the material life he wants,but his roots are still in China,which is his emotional attribution.He is a Chinese wherever he is,this sense of belonging can’t be lost. 在经济全球化的时代，跨境交易无处不在。很多人从事于国外业务，其结果是，一些人的国家意识渐渐变成是非常薄弱。甚至有些人说国家认同对他们来说没有什么影响。我根本不赞同这种观点。有一种说法说：商人四海为家。然而，实际上，每个商人有只有一个家，那个生他养他的地方。举个例子，一个长期在海外工作的中国人不能因为长时间呆在海外而失去了国家意识。在国外的工作给他想要的物质生活，但他的根还在他的情感归属地——中国。无论身在何方，他都是一个中国人，这种归属感不能丢失。 As borders and national identities become less important, some find that threatening and even dangerous.Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington describes Davos Man as an emerging global superspecies and a threat in an essay. He says that these people have little need for national loyalty,view national boundaries as obstacles.As far as I am concerned,endorse a global outlook does not mean erasing national identity.On the surface,they left their country, in fact, they not only drove the development of their own national economy, but also made a huge contribution to the development of the world economy.This has largely reflected their patriotic feelings. 随着国界和对国家的认同变得不那么重要，有些人将此当成威胁，甚至危险。哈佛大学教授塞缪尔·亨廷顿在一篇文章中将达沃斯人描写成新兴的全球超级物种和威胁。他说那些人不需要什么对国家的忠诚，将国界视为障碍。在我看来，对全球观表示赞同并不意味着去除对国家的认同。表面上，他们离开自己的国家，事实上，他们不仅带动本国经济的发展，还对世界经济的发展造成巨大的贡献。这也充分地反映了他们的爱国情怀。 The process of globalization is accompanied by opportunities and challenges .It promotes the development of human society, but also brings some disasters to the world.The terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11,2001 ,which is considered an example of the disaster of globalization,brought huge losses to the United States, and brought a warning to the world. Globalization fatigue is still much in evidence in Europe and America,while in places like China and India,globalization has brought a huge opportunity for their development. 全球化进程被伴随着机遇和挑战。它促进了人类社会的发展，但也给世界带来一些灾难。2001年9月11日
Unit 3 Word Pretest: For each italicized word or phrase, choose the best meaning below. 1.The collection is characterized by a mélange of bold graphics, statements and exotic Indian motifs that are both classic and contemporary. A.style B. feature C. mixture D. separation 2.The weather is one variable to be considered. A.something that is subject to change B. something of great importance C. key point D. necessity 3.You'll be biased to put extra weight on the cases that support your theory and diminish the cases that refute it. A.prove B. disapprove C. violate D. maintain https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b7473802.html,st week the government unveiled a media sector review intended to spawn a bit more competition. A. abolish B. destroy C. go beyond D. engender 5.Their latest computer outstrips all its rivals. A.surpasses B. defeats C. follows D. modifies 6.All the children are lumped together in one class, regardless of their ability. A.taken care of B. watched over C. put together D. brought up 7.As a journalist, she refuses to gloss over their faults or silence their critics. A.set up B. take over C. cover up D. get over 8.We can foresee a new paradigm in the global market in the 21st century. A.pattern B. problem C. scenario D. prospect 9.This kind of sedentary lifestyle costs you in more ways than you might think. A.tending to follow fashion B. tending to do much exercise C. tending to sit D. tending to move about https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b7473802.html,ck of time precludes any further discussion. A.speeds up B. slows down C. includes D. excludes Global Mélange Globalization and culture is not an innocent theme. The intervening variable in
Nowadays we can enjoy the same films, fashions, brands, advertisements and TV channels. The evident difference between countries is disappearing. To what extent do you think the disadvantages overweight the advantages of this? Globalization creates conditions for widening international exchanges, strengthening mutual understanding between nations, expanding cultural, educational, and scientific cooperation between nations and countries, enjoying the cultural achievements of people around the world which encourages the process of modernization and the enrichment of national culture. However, these conditions also create the possible danger of diminishing the national culture with a negative impact on the pre123vation of national identity. Through globalization and an open door policy, erroneous concepts and a lowering of ethical standards, a selfish and individualistic lifestyle and harmful cultural products can easily be imported into the country. At present, modern information technology which in the main is controlled by US is hourly and intensively disseminating US ideology, way of life, culture and films across the world. Even US food is promoted so that some people consider globalization as global Americanization. During the process of economic globalization, inequality between developed and developing countries has been increasing and the gap between the rich and the poor has become wider, most of the result of globalization go to assist developed countries. Globalization does not pose equal interests and risks to all nations. With an overwhelming advantage compared to most of the developing countries in terms of finance and the level of science and technology, developed ca123alist countries control the situation of economic globalization. For these reasons, globalization is a fierce and complicated struggle in both cultural and ideological fields. We take the initiative in international economic integration but also have to take the initiative in fighting to keep our distinct culture resisting pro-foreign and cross-bred phenomena, and overcoming the psychology of preferring money over ethical values. 雅思高分倒装句 1. But unpopular as red has been in the past, at the moment it is a favorite hair dye. 结构：全句有2个谓语动词：has been和is.其中，as引导的让步状语从句是一个部分倒装句，按照正常语序应该是Although red has been unpopular in the past.句子可被拆分为， 1). Red has been unpopular in the past. 2). But at the moment it is a favorite hair dye. 翻译：尽管过去红色不怎么流行，现在却是一种备受欢迎的染发颜色。 2. Only when he has lost his way does he realize that he wasn't careful enough to make sure that he really did understand. 结构：全句有4个谓语动词：has，does realize，wasn't和did understand..其中主句的是does realize.本句话是以only开头的强调句，其所强调的是when引导的条件状语从句。第一个that 引导的是realize的宾语从句。第一个that引导的是make sure的宾语从句。
大学英语作文 globalization Just as we know, the development of globalization brings tremendous positive effects to the whole world. It gives a chance not only for developed countries but also developing countries. Particularly,it brings the large favor for the world’s poor. To begin with, globalization makes capital and labor mobility greater than before. The poor, who live in the developing countries, can choose to work in some foreign corporations which can pay the higher salaries for them. They will improve the situations of their lives and make their children enjoy better education than ever. As capital and labor become more mobile, international tax competition rises.So many governments have to cut tax rates. As a result, tax systems around the world become more efficient, economic output and incomes will rise.
First of all, it has been asserted that globalization provides the increasing of productivity and life standard of societies. To begin with productivity is indeed increased as it can be seen that the population of the world is rising rapidly even uncontrollable and more people means that there is a need of more product too. Thus Globalization responds the needs of 7 billion people. Moreover the standards of life is a lot better than 50 years ago as they are more machines and systems invented in developed countries supporting all world. However there is another side of the facts. Globalization causes the poor citizens having more requirements. Secondly cultural intermingling is enlarging with globalization which lets the people from all over the world able to communicate easier. On the other hand sharing traditional behaviors cause them fading as boundaries are disappearing. The most important disadvantage of globalization is the increasing number of the loafer. After the industrial revolution, industry gravitated some particular countries. Because of that, these countries became a power in industry. However production decreased and so unemployment was raised in the other countries. Another reason of the unemployment rise is that the need of less manpower. As stated at Wikipedia, many workers found themselves suddenly unemployed, as could no longer compete with machines which only required relatively limited work to produce more product than a single worker. Another major damage of globalization is that some cultures are getting lost. The cultures of the countries that have more economic power are more dominant than others. Because, wealthy countries produce many things that can affect cultures, for example, clothes, movies and technologic products. According to Ikerd, while the global community is increasing, more and more people have became ignorant about social, ethical and moral values which are various in defining groups. (2002) Therefore, globalization damages small cultures which are in risk of being extinct. Big disadvantages. The final significant effect of globalization is the difficulty of competition. With globalization, trade between the countries has been started to remove limits. This situation of enterprises has prepared the ground to be in constant competition with not only national competitors but also international competitors. Therefore, business requires being in a more rigorous and challenging competitive atmosphere to maintain continuity and development. Rising of monopole companies and trough among production costs are the main effects of this hard competition in business. As pointed in Global Policy Forum, undeveloped countries choose to use foreign capital for their improvement however it disposes the equality and stability instead. In conclusion, unemployment, social degeneration and difficulty of competition are the killer disadvantages on people life that based on globalization. In my opinion, people must be aware of this exploitation. Globalization is a one-way tale. 首先，它一直宣称，全球化提供了增加生产力和社会生活的标准。要开始与生产力的确是，因为它可以看出，世界人口增长迅速，甚至无法控制和更多的人增加，意味着有需要更多的产品。因此，全球化响应7亿人的需要。此外，生活标准是很多比50年前，因为它们是在发达国家支持世界所有发明更多的机器和系统更好。然而，事实的另一面。全球化导致的贫困公民有更多的要求。其次，文化的交织是扩大它可以让