| 查看: 131 | 回复: 2 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
| 【悬赏金币】回答本帖问题，作者haihe将赠送您 30 个金币 | |||
[求助]
【求一篇物流或者经济方面的有中文翻译的英文文献】【有效期至2008年10月28日】，
|
|||
|
俺马上要答辩了，还差一篇有中文翻译的英文文献，物流或者经济方面的，大家有的话给我一篇啊，救命！！！！ [ Last edited by haihe on 2008-10-26 at 18:59 ] |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
国自然申请面上模板最新2026版出了吗？
已经有10人回复
-
推荐一本书
已经有12人回复
-
基金申报
已经有4人回复
-
计算机、0854电子信息（085401-058412）调剂
已经有4人回复
-
溴的反应液脱色
已经有6人回复
-
纳米粒子粒径的测量
已经有7人回复
-
常年博士招收(双一流，工科)
已经有4人回复
-
参与限项
已经有5人回复
-
有没有人能给点建议
已经有5人回复
-
萌生出自己或许不适合搞科研的想法，现在跑or等等看？
已经有4人回复
2楼2008-10-26 17:50:46
|
世界经济 印度经济过热 不深化改革，印度就无法赶上中国 印度这只老虎正在四处觅食（寻找投资机会）。本周，塔塔钢铁集团（Tata Steel）收购了英国科鲁斯（Corus）集团，一跃成为世界最大钢铁制造商之一。塔塔创立于英帝国殖民统治时代（Raj），而科鲁斯又是古老的英帝国钢铁制造业历史的仅存见证，因而这次并购案具有很好的象征意义。塔塔公司并非特例——印度新生代企业如Infosys和Wipro都在抢占国际市场。与此同时，世界企业人和投资者也纷纷把钱“砸”在才华横溢的印度工程师和计算机专家身上。 德里的热闹传遍了亚洲。印度这个“捕猎者”作为中国的近邻，多年来一直表现不佳，心情急躁，如今正奋起直追。过去一年印度经济显著增长，达9.2%，接近于中国的10.4%.在一定的时期内印度今年的增长速度甚至可能超过中国；如果按购买力平价（purchasing power parity, PPP）计算，印度很快就会超过日本，成为仅次于美国和中国的世界第三大经济体。 很显然，印度越来越多的商人、决策人士和经济学家满以为他们国家彻底摆脱了官僚主义的束缚，形势一片大好。这个曾经以“印度式发展速度”（即每年3%）著称的经济体，从上世纪90年代开始进行改革开放，其中很多改革措施都是由现任总理曼莫汉?辛格推动实施的。辛格政府最新推出的五年计划指出，印度有能力维持 9%的平均增长速度。用印度旅游业的发展口号来说，就是要建设一个“令人难以置信的印度”，这一点谁会怀疑呢？ 揪住“长尾巴” 要想让数亿印度人摆脱贫困，就必须快速发展，因此他们说要创造一个“令人难以置信的印度”，我们不好泼冷水。不过，当有种种迹象表明经济过热时，泼点冷水就很有必要了。现在的印度，物价快速上涨，工厂产能过剩，信贷不断增长。20世纪90年代初的经济改革确实刺激了竞争，迫使企业增强生产力，进而提高了印度趋势（或可持续）增长率，然而问题是事实上现在的增长速度几乎肯定比这一新确定的最大增速要快。如果对历史数据进行分析，略高于7%的速度应该比较合适，但要大大低于中国的9~10%. 一说起经济过热，不少分析人士都会想到中国，不过印度的“过热征象”要严重得多。通胀已升至6~7%，而中国仅为2.8%；印度企业中有创纪录的99%报告说运转已经超过最佳产能；信贷以每年30%的速度增长，比中国快一倍。不同于中国的是，印度的经常项目赤字（current-account deficit）也日益恶化，而这恰好是经济过热的典型表现，它表明国内已经是供不应求。股市泡沫也存在，印度股价过去四年来增长了4倍，远远超过中国。如果无所举措，印度将不可避免地迎来经济“硬着陆”。 在为内需降温方面，印度储备银行（央行）显得过于缩手缩脚：本周虽然它把利率提高了25个基点，但过去两年半以来利率的总增长始终低于消费者价格通胀水平。不过政府的主要精力还是应该放在供给上，同时要搬掉令其最大增速度落后于中国的众多绊脚石。 迄今印度改革一直致力于将私有创新企业从这个世界上最可怕的官僚体制中解放出来，企业家们因此得以人尽其才，但其他方面也亟需改革，当务之急就是解决国有部门问题。公路、能源等基础建设和教育、饮水等公共事业资源不足，让人痛心不说，还制约了经济发展。国家经济不断繁荣，而许多公共服务业状况却甚至每况愈下。一个人一边拿着移动电话，一边却要排上好几个钟头的队等水喝，这种状况看上去非常不协调。印度顶尖计算机专家遍布世界，享受着优厚待遇，而印度农村地区的大多数儿童却无法接受基础教育，因而也就无法找到生产力较强的工作。印度妇女约有一半是文盲，而中国仅为1/7. 辛格曲高和寡 印度领导人指出了未及解决道路、学校和医院问题的两个理由，但都不住脚。第一个是理论上的。印度许多经济评论员认为，虽然深化结构改革再好不过，但凭借“人口红利”（demographic dividend），要维持8%或更高的增长速度也是能做到的。有了劳动力人口的快速增长以及人口负担系数（dependency rate）的减小（出生率较低之故），就不愁没有更多的劳动力、更多的储蓄进而有更多的投资。 的确在人口结构上，印度的现状与当初处于发展起步阶段的东亚越来越相像。但是，如果如此机械地看待发展问题，就不免会得出人口因素决定一切以及经济政策并不重要的结论。事实上，东亚的成功“三要素”是市场开放、教育开放和投资开放（特别是在基础建设领域）。人口增长了，只有在年轻人接受教育和创造新的就业机会情况下，才会促进经济繁荣。印度应对劳动法加以改革，这些法规的限制规定实在荒唐（在印度，雇员在100人以上的公司要解雇员工必须先得到邦政府的批准。——译者按），对制造业规模扩大的制约作用尤为突出。 印度无所作为的第二个理由则是现实意义上的——无法拿出更多的资金投入到学校和医院。在新兴的大经济体中，印度的预算赤字名列前茅（按照最常用的计算方法，可达GDP的8%）。事实上只要改革，就能获得足够资金，不能一心就想着投入。个人投资者对是否把钱投到基础设施建设中正举棋不定，这是因为监管部门和希望有利可图的人民党人还是有扯不清的瓜葛。 如果这些问题得以解决，印度是可以赶上中国的。辛格一如既往坚持改革，但他的政府却指望共产党的支持，并且经济繁荣如斯，他们也没有闲情逸致去同共产党角力，怕就怕经济过热到“沸腾”的地步时他们的脑子还没有转过弯来。 The world economy India overheats Feb 1st 2007 From The Economist print edition India cannot run as fast as China without further reform THE Indian tiger is on the prowl[1]. This week, in an apt piece of symbolism, Tata Steel, which dates back to the days of the Raj, leapt into the league of top producers when it bought Britain's Corus, which includes the steelmaking remnants of the old imperial power. Nor is Tata alone: younger Indian companies such as Infosys and Wipro are storming international markets. Meanwhile, the world's business people and investors queue up to lavish money on India's talented engineers and computer scientists, The roar from Delhi is echoing across Asia. After peevish[2] years cast as China's underperforming neighbour, the huntress is now in hot pursuit. Over the past year the Indian economy has grown by an impressive 9.2%, not far behind China's 10.4%. At some point this year India's growth rate could even outpace China's; and if you measure things by purchasing power parity, India should soon overtake Japan and become the third-biggest economy, behind only America and China. No wonder an increasing number of Indian businessmen, policymakers and economists are basking[3] in the belief that their country is burning bright having at last broken free of its bureaucratic cage. An economy once famous for the “Hindu rate of growth”, of 3% a year, was opened up by the reforms of the 1990s, many of them pushed through by the man who is now prime minister, Manmohan Singh. His government's latest five-year plan assumes that India can sustain average growth of 9%. Who can doubt “Incredible India”, to borrow the slogan of its tourism campaign? Tweaking the long tail ” Fast growth is essential to pull millions of Indians out of poverty, so it is sad to pour cold water on this story. But that is precisely what is needed when there are so many alarming signs of overheating. Across India prices are rising fast, factories are at full capacity, loans are piling up. Yes, the economic reforms of the early 1990s spurred competition, forced firms to become more productive and boosted India's trend—or sustainable—rate of growth. But the problem is that this new speed limit is almost certainly lower than the government's one. Historic data would suggest a figure not much above 7%—well below China's 9-10%. When you mention overheating, many analysts point towards China. Yet India displays far more symptoms of the disease. Inflation has risen to 6-7% （compared with 2.8% in China）; a record 99% of Indian firms report that they are operating above their optimal capacity; and credit is expanding at an annual rate of 30%, twice as fast as in China. Unlike China, India also has a widening current-account deficit—a classic sign of overheating, as domestic output fails to keep pace with surging demand. And if you are looking for a stockmarket bubble, Indian share prices have risen more than four-fold over the past four years, far more than in China. If something is not done, then a hard landing will become inevitable. The Reserve Bank of India has been too timid in cooling down domestic demand: although one interest rate was raised this week by a quarter point, the overall rise in rates over the past two and a half years has not even kept up with consumer-price inflation. But the main focus of the government's attention should be on supply—and dismantling[4] the many barriers that keep its speed limit below China's. So far, reform in India has focused on setting its inventive private sector free from the world's most fearsome bureaucracy. This has unleashed[5] entrepreneurial talent, but more change is needed. Now is the time to tackle the public sector itself. Infrastructure, such as roads and power, and public services, such as education and drinking water, are woefully inadequate and limit growth. Even as the economy has been booming, many public services have worsened. It seems incongruous that somebody can own a mobile phone, yet has to waste hours queuing for drinking water. India's top computer scientists are feted[6] around the world, yet most children in rural areas lack the basic education needed to find more productive work. Around half of all Indian women are illiterate, compared with a ratio of around one in seven in China. Singh's songsheet India's rulers have two bad excuses for not dealing with those roads, schools and hospitals. The first is theoretical. Many Indian economic commentators say that further structural reforms, though desirable, are not essential to keep the economy growing at 8% or more because of the “demographic dividend”. A fast-growing working population and a falling dependency rate （thanks to a lower birth rate） will ensure more workers, more saving and hence more investment. India's demographic structure is indeed starting to look more like that in East Asia when its growth took off. But this mechanistic view of growth assumes that demography is destiny and that economic policies do not matter. In fact, open markets, education and investment, especially in infrastructure, were the three chief ingredients of East Asia's success. Population growth by itself does not add to prosperity, unless young people are educated and new jobs are created. India needs to reform its absurdly restrictive labour laws which hold back the expansion of manufacturing particularly. The second excuse for doing nothing is practical: there is little room to spend more on schools and hospitals. India already has one of the biggest budget deficits among the large emerging economies （as much as 8% of GDP going by the widest measure）. In fact, plenty can be achieved by reform, rather than just spending. Private investors are hesitant about putting money in infrastructure, because the regulators are not independent enough of populist politicians to guarantee a decent return. If these things can be tackled, India can indeed match China's growth. Mr Singh remains a reformer, but his government relies on the support of the communist parties and, with today's prosperity, there is no stomach to take them on. The worry is that today's overheating will need to boil over before that mindset changes. |
3楼2008-10-27 19:11:12