失業當自強~ 從 Economists 開始: The Oil Price - Recoil
CFA 看不下去，短期也不能準備...
GMAT 天天做也是很煩...
如何能增進競爭力，把腦袋重新動一動，再多活個幾年？
我決定，定時翻譯Economist的文章...一週一篇...絕不偷懶.....(吧....)
當然啦，詞藻就不特別修飾了，留待時間讓我慢慢進步吧！
以下
The oil price
Recoil
May 29th 2008From The Economist print edition
油價
豬羊變色
2008年五月二十九日 經濟學人雜誌
Painful though it is, this oil shock will eventually spur huge change. Beware the hunt for scapegoats
儘管油價高漲帶來苦痛，但最後仍會造成巨變。頂罪的羔羊們，小心了！
IN THE early 1970s a fourfold rise in the price of oil almost brought the world to a standstill. The shock of the Arab embargo left a deep mark in many countries: America subjected its cars to fuel-efficiency standards, France embraced nuclear power—though sadly shoene rukku, or “energy-conscious fashion”, the inspiration for Japan's fetching short-sleeved business suit, was ahead of its time.
在1970年代早期，高達四倍漲幅的油價幾乎造成世界停止運轉。阿拉伯對石油的禁運在許多國家身上烙下深深的印記：美國將車輛改為省油標準，法國投向核能發電的懷抱，而造成日本辦公室人人短衫裝扮的「節能風」也正獨領時代風騷。
Thirty-five years on, oil prices have quadrupled again, briefly soaring to a peak of just over $135 a barrel. But, so far, this has been a slow-motion oil shock. If the Arab oil-weapon felt like a hammer-blow, this time stagnant oil output and growing emerging-market demand have squeezed the oil market like a vice. For almost five years a growing world shrugged it off. Only now is it recoiling in pain.
三十五個年頭來，油價又飆漲了四倍，到達每桶135美金的新高。但目前看來，這都只是慢版的石油震撼彈。如果阿拉伯油國真想來場破壞，那麼停滯性石油輸出以及新興市場的持續需求都將一點一滴的榨乾石油市場的生命。近五年來，這個成長中的世界都對此不屑一顧，而現在卻被反咬一大口。
This week French fishermen clogged up the port of Dunkirk and British lorry-drivers choked roads into London and Cardiff. Nicolas Sarkozy, France's president, suggested subsidising the worst affected and curbing taxes on petrol; Britain's beleaguered government is being pressed to forgo its tax increases on motorists. In America falling house prices have left consumers resentful—and short of money. Congress and presidential candidates have been drafting schemes and gas-tax holidays like so many campaign leaflets.
這個禮拜法國的漁夫們封堵了Dunkirk港，英國的貨車司機圍堵進入London與Cardiff的道路。法國總理Nicolas Sarkozy提議降低有如脫韁野馬的石油關稅，而萬夫所指的英國政府也正面臨壓力，必須取消對汽車使用人的增稅。在美國，一落千丈的房價以及資金缺口，都造成人民的不滿。國會與總統候選人也在競選文宣上提出許多政策與瓦斯燃料稅的減免。
Gordon Brown, Britain's prime minister, thinks the big oil producers can be persuaded to come to the rescue. But only Saudi Arabia shows any enthusiasm for that. Elsewhere, output is growing agonisingly slowly. That is causing hardship and recrimination. But it could also come to represent an opportunity. The slow-motion shock seems irresistible today, but in time it will give rise to an equally unstoppable and more positive slow-motion reaction (see article).
英國首相Gordon Brown認為或許可以說服大型石油公司來進行救援，然而卻只有沙烏地阿拉伯表現出些許的熱誠。其他地方的產出都緩慢到讓人痛心疾首，不僅雪上加霜，更招致非議。但這卻也代表著轉機。這慢速震撼彈目前看來是阻止不了的，但遲早會帶來同樣無法抵擋的正面影響。
Action replay
好戲重新上演
It is clear that high oil prices are hurting many economies—especially in the rich world. Goldman Sachs reckons consumers are handing over $1.8 trillion a year to oil producers. The wage-price spiral of the 1970s has been avoided, but the income shock is painful. Beset by scarce credit, falling asset prices and costly food, developed-country households are hardly well-equipped to foot the oil bill. America's emergency tax rebate, voted this year to help people cope with the credit crunch, has in effect been taken right away again.
高漲的油價重創許多經濟體，這是顯而易見的，尤其是有錢人的世界。Goldman Sachs估計消費者們每年都付出1.8兆美金以上給石油製造公司。1970年代的薪資波動已經被避免掉了，但是收入面造成的衝擊卻令百姓痛苦。開發中國家的人民遭到信用貸款短缺，資產價格下滑，以及昂貴的糧價等多重包圍，已經無法支付用油的開銷了。美國為了幫助人民對抗信貸短缺，在今年提出的緊急退稅案，也已經立即通過並實施了。
Stuck for answers, politicians have been looking for scapegoats. Top of the list are the speculators profiting from other people's hardship. Some $260 billion is invested in commodity funds, 20 times the level of 2003. Surely all that hot money has supercharged the demand for oil? But that is plain wrong. Such speculators do not own real oil. Every barrel they buy in the futures markets they sell back again before the contract ends. That may raise the price of “paper barrels”, but not of the black stuff refiners turn into petrol. It is true that high futures prices could lead someone to hoard oil today in the hope of a higher price tomorrow. But inventories are not especially full just now and there are few signs of hoarding.
走投無路的政客們，轉而在代罪羔羊身上尋找答案。天字第一號就是從別人的困境中獲利的投機客。在商品基金上的投資金額高達2億6000多萬美金，是2003年的20倍。可想而知這些熱錢都增加了對石油的需求？那可是大錯特錯。這些投機客並非真正擁有石油；他們在期貨市場購買的每桶石油都在到期之前被賣回市場。如此便造成「紙桶」石油的上漲，而不是那些由黑不隆冬的石油所粹煉而來的汽油。的確，預期上漲心理會造成人們囤積，以換得未來的高價。但庫存不是天天滿載，而需要囤積的跡象也少之又少。
If the speculators are not to blame, what about the oil companies, which have failed to increase output in spite of record profits? Profiteering, say some. However, that accusation doesn't stand up to much scrutiny either. The oil price is set in a market. For Shell, Exxon et al to hoard oil underground would be to leave billions of dollars of investment languishing unused. Others fear that oil is pricey because it is running out. But there is little evidence to support the doctrine of “peak oil” in its extreme form. The Middle East still seems to contain a sea of the stuff. Even if new finds elsewhere have been rarer and less accessible than in the past, vast quantities of oil could now be profitably stripped from tar sands and shale.
如果不怪投機客，那麼那些無法增加產出，但帳面卻獲利的石油公司呢？有些人會用不當暴利來形容，但仔細推敲卻又不是如此。油價是由市場制定；對Shell, Exxon這些公司來說，囤積地底下的油根本是白白糟蹋數百萬的投資。另外一些人擔心，昂貴的油價是因為所剩無幾，但是只有極少數的證據能證明「石油危機」的迫切性，中東地區似乎還蘊藏著滿滿一片的石油。即使其他地方所新開採的油田與過去相比有越來越難取得的跡象，但現在能從焦油沙地與頁岩中取得的石油量卻是大大提高了。
The truth is more prosaic. Finding and developing new oil fields is an expensive and time-consuming business. The giant new fields in the deep water off Brazil are unlikely to produce oil for a decade or more. Furthermore, oil is perverse. When prices are low, oil-rich countries welcome the low-cost, high-tech and well-capitalised oil firms. When prices are high, countries like Russia and Venezuela kick them out again. Likewise the engineers, survey ships and seismic rigs that oil firms need to find and produce new deposits are expensive right now. The costs of finding oil have, temporarily, doubled precisely because everybody wants to give them work.
其實真相再簡單不過了。尋找與開發新油田是費時又昂貴的事業。巴西地下水層之下的廣大新油田不太可能產油超過十年。此外，石油其實是難以捉摸的。當油價低迷時，儲量豐富的國家對低成本，高科技以及穩健資本的石油公司敞臂歡迎。而當油價上揚時，俄國與委內瑞拉等國又馬上對這些公司視如敝徙。同樣的，工程師，探勘船，以及尋找與開挖油藏的地震儀器，在目前來說更是昂貴。尋找油田的成本，就這樣臨時上漲了兩倍，原因就是每個人都想撈一份油水。
Hope at the bottom of the barrel
藏在油桶下的希望
So the oil shock will take time to abate. Some greens may welcome that, seeing three-figure oil as a way of limiting greenhouse emissions. Conservation will indeed increase. But everything high prices achieve could be done better by sensible carbon taxes. As well as curbing oil use, high prices have put tar sands in business which create far more carbon dioxide than conventional oil. Profits are going to ugly oil-fed regimes, not Western exchequers. And the wild unpredictability of prices will blunt the effect of dear oil on people's behaviour.
這場石油震撼需要時間來平息。一些綠能人士或許認為石油的三態是種限制溫室氣體排放的方式。節能會慢慢增加，但所有高價所帶來的影響卻可以透過碳稅來解決。如同石油濫用，高價使得焦油沙地成了商業的一部分，而製造出比傳統石油更多的二氧化碳。所有的利益都跑到醜陋的石油組織，而非西方世界的國庫裡。而無法預測的瘋狂油價將會損害寶貴石油對於人類行為的影響。
From this perspective, governments should speed up the adjustment—or at least stop delaying it. Half the world's people are sheltered from fuel prices by subsidies—which, perversely, have boosted demand and mostly benefited the better off. Now countries like Indonesia, Taiwan and Sri Lanka have begun to realise that they can ill afford this. Cutting fuel taxes in the rich world makes no sense either (see article). There are better ways to return cash to struggling voters.
從這個角度來看，政府必須加快變革腳步，不然至少也要停止繼續延宕。全球半數的人口都透過補助津貼來躲避油價的衝擊，但這卻反而造成需求增加，進而讓那些有錢人獲利。目前，一些國家像是印尼，台灣，以及斯里蘭卡都已經發現他們再也無法承擔這些了。而富裕國削減燃料稅的作法似乎也沒有道理。應該有更好的方法，把鈔票還給那些奮鬥的選民。
The 1970s showed how demand and supply, inelastic in the short run, eventually give rise to conservation and new production. When all those new fields are on-stream, when the SUVs have been sold and the boilers replaced, the downcycle will take hold. By then the slow-motion oil shock could have catalysed momentous change. Right now motorists have no substitute for oil. But it is no coincidence that car companies are suddenly accelerating their plans to sell electric hybrids that are far cheaper to run than petrol or diesel cars at these prices. The first two oil shocks banished oil from power generation. How fitting if the third finished the job and began to free transport from oil's century-long monopoly.
1970年代見證了在短期彈性疲乏的需求與供給之下，是如何造就庫存提高與新式生產。當所有新領域都成為潮流時，當SUV車款大賣，鍋爐動力遭到淘汰時，低迷的景氣就會過去。屆時，這顆慢速震撼彈就會催化出巨變。目前車輛使用者並無石油替代品，但車廠會突然加速開發油電混合車也不是巧合，這些車與汽油或柴油車比起來，油耗更低省錢更多。前兩次的油價衝擊將石油從發電廠名單中除名。如果第三次危機發生，將幾世紀來石油壟斷交通產業的局面改變，那有多好。
$$Copyright: 原文所有權為 Economists所有，嚴禁使用於商業用途$$
##Copyleft: 中文所有權為本網站所有，歡迎告知後取用##
GMAT 天天做也是很煩...
如何能增進競爭力，把腦袋重新動一動，再多活個幾年？
我決定，定時翻譯Economist的文章...一週一篇...絕不偷懶.....(吧....)
當然啦，詞藻就不特別修飾了，留待時間讓我慢慢進步吧！
以下
The oil price
Recoil
May 29th 2008From The Economist print edition
油價
豬羊變色
2008年五月二十九日 經濟學人雜誌
Painful though it is, this oil shock will eventually spur huge change. Beware the hunt for scapegoats
儘管油價高漲帶來苦痛，但最後仍會造成巨變。頂罪的羔羊們，小心了！
IN THE early 1970s a fourfold rise in the price of oil almost brought the world to a standstill. The shock of the Arab embargo left a deep mark in many countries: America subjected its cars to fuel-efficiency standards, France embraced nuclear power—though sadly shoene rukku, or “energy-conscious fashion”, the inspiration for Japan's fetching short-sleeved business suit, was ahead of its time.
在1970年代早期，高達四倍漲幅的油價幾乎造成世界停止運轉。阿拉伯對石油的禁運在許多國家身上烙下深深的印記：美國將車輛改為省油標準，法國投向核能發電的懷抱，而造成日本辦公室人人短衫裝扮的「節能風」也正獨領時代風騷。
Thirty-five years on, oil prices have quadrupled again, briefly soaring to a peak of just over $135 a barrel. But, so far, this has been a slow-motion oil shock. If the Arab oil-weapon felt like a hammer-blow, this time stagnant oil output and growing emerging-market demand have squeezed the oil market like a vice. For almost five years a growing world shrugged it off. Only now is it recoiling in pain.
三十五個年頭來，油價又飆漲了四倍，到達每桶135美金的新高。但目前看來，這都只是慢版的石油震撼彈。如果阿拉伯油國真想來場破壞，那麼停滯性石油輸出以及新興市場的持續需求都將一點一滴的榨乾石油市場的生命。近五年來，這個成長中的世界都對此不屑一顧，而現在卻被反咬一大口。
This week French fishermen clogged up the port of Dunkirk and British lorry-drivers choked roads into London and Cardiff. Nicolas Sarkozy, France's president, suggested subsidising the worst affected and curbing taxes on petrol; Britain's beleaguered government is being pressed to forgo its tax increases on motorists. In America falling house prices have left consumers resentful—and short of money. Congress and presidential candidates have been drafting schemes and gas-tax holidays like so many campaign leaflets.
這個禮拜法國的漁夫們封堵了Dunkirk港，英國的貨車司機圍堵進入London與Cardiff的道路。法國總理Nicolas Sarkozy提議降低有如脫韁野馬的石油關稅，而萬夫所指的英國政府也正面臨壓力，必須取消對汽車使用人的增稅。在美國，一落千丈的房價以及資金缺口，都造成人民的不滿。國會與總統候選人也在競選文宣上提出許多政策與瓦斯燃料稅的減免。
Gordon Brown, Britain's prime minister, thinks the big oil producers can be persuaded to come to the rescue. But only Saudi Arabia shows any enthusiasm for that. Elsewhere, output is growing agonisingly slowly. That is causing hardship and recrimination. But it could also come to represent an opportunity. The slow-motion shock seems irresistible today, but in time it will give rise to an equally unstoppable and more positive slow-motion reaction (see article).
英國首相Gordon Brown認為或許可以說服大型石油公司來進行救援，然而卻只有沙烏地阿拉伯表現出些許的熱誠。其他地方的產出都緩慢到讓人痛心疾首，不僅雪上加霜，更招致非議。但這卻也代表著轉機。這慢速震撼彈目前看來是阻止不了的，但遲早會帶來同樣無法抵擋的正面影響。
Action replay
好戲重新上演
It is clear that high oil prices are hurting many economies—especially in the rich world. Goldman Sachs reckons consumers are handing over $1.8 trillion a year to oil producers. The wage-price spiral of the 1970s has been avoided, but the income shock is painful. Beset by scarce credit, falling asset prices and costly food, developed-country households are hardly well-equipped to foot the oil bill. America's emergency tax rebate, voted this year to help people cope with the credit crunch, has in effect been taken right away again.
高漲的油價重創許多經濟體，這是顯而易見的，尤其是有錢人的世界。Goldman Sachs估計消費者們每年都付出1.8兆美金以上給石油製造公司。1970年代的薪資波動已經被避免掉了，但是收入面造成的衝擊卻令百姓痛苦。開發中國家的人民遭到信用貸款短缺，資產價格下滑，以及昂貴的糧價等多重包圍，已經無法支付用油的開銷了。美國為了幫助人民對抗信貸短缺，在今年提出的緊急退稅案，也已經立即通過並實施了。
Stuck for answers, politicians have been looking for scapegoats. Top of the list are the speculators profiting from other people's hardship. Some $260 billion is invested in commodity funds, 20 times the level of 2003. Surely all that hot money has supercharged the demand for oil? But that is plain wrong. Such speculators do not own real oil. Every barrel they buy in the futures markets they sell back again before the contract ends. That may raise the price of “paper barrels”, but not of the black stuff refiners turn into petrol. It is true that high futures prices could lead someone to hoard oil today in the hope of a higher price tomorrow. But inventories are not especially full just now and there are few signs of hoarding.
走投無路的政客們，轉而在代罪羔羊身上尋找答案。天字第一號就是從別人的困境中獲利的投機客。在商品基金上的投資金額高達2億6000多萬美金，是2003年的20倍。可想而知這些熱錢都增加了對石油的需求？那可是大錯特錯。這些投機客並非真正擁有石油；他們在期貨市場購買的每桶石油都在到期之前被賣回市場。如此便造成「紙桶」石油的上漲，而不是那些由黑不隆冬的石油所粹煉而來的汽油。的確，預期上漲心理會造成人們囤積，以換得未來的高價。但庫存不是天天滿載，而需要囤積的跡象也少之又少。
If the speculators are not to blame, what about the oil companies, which have failed to increase output in spite of record profits? Profiteering, say some. However, that accusation doesn't stand up to much scrutiny either. The oil price is set in a market. For Shell, Exxon et al to hoard oil underground would be to leave billions of dollars of investment languishing unused. Others fear that oil is pricey because it is running out. But there is little evidence to support the doctrine of “peak oil” in its extreme form. The Middle East still seems to contain a sea of the stuff. Even if new finds elsewhere have been rarer and less accessible than in the past, vast quantities of oil could now be profitably stripped from tar sands and shale.
如果不怪投機客，那麼那些無法增加產出，但帳面卻獲利的石油公司呢？有些人會用不當暴利來形容，但仔細推敲卻又不是如此。油價是由市場制定；對Shell, Exxon這些公司來說，囤積地底下的油根本是白白糟蹋數百萬的投資。另外一些人擔心，昂貴的油價是因為所剩無幾，但是只有極少數的證據能證明「石油危機」的迫切性，中東地區似乎還蘊藏著滿滿一片的石油。即使其他地方所新開採的油田與過去相比有越來越難取得的跡象，但現在能從焦油沙地與頁岩中取得的石油量卻是大大提高了。
The truth is more prosaic. Finding and developing new oil fields is an expensive and time-consuming business. The giant new fields in the deep water off Brazil are unlikely to produce oil for a decade or more. Furthermore, oil is perverse. When prices are low, oil-rich countries welcome the low-cost, high-tech and well-capitalised oil firms. When prices are high, countries like Russia and Venezuela kick them out again. Likewise the engineers, survey ships and seismic rigs that oil firms need to find and produce new deposits are expensive right now. The costs of finding oil have, temporarily, doubled precisely because everybody wants to give them work.
其實真相再簡單不過了。尋找與開發新油田是費時又昂貴的事業。巴西地下水層之下的廣大新油田不太可能產油超過十年。此外，石油其實是難以捉摸的。當油價低迷時，儲量豐富的國家對低成本，高科技以及穩健資本的石油公司敞臂歡迎。而當油價上揚時，俄國與委內瑞拉等國又馬上對這些公司視如敝徙。同樣的，工程師，探勘船，以及尋找與開挖油藏的地震儀器，在目前來說更是昂貴。尋找油田的成本，就這樣臨時上漲了兩倍，原因就是每個人都想撈一份油水。
Hope at the bottom of the barrel
藏在油桶下的希望
So the oil shock will take time to abate. Some greens may welcome that, seeing three-figure oil as a way of limiting greenhouse emissions. Conservation will indeed increase. But everything high prices achieve could be done better by sensible carbon taxes. As well as curbing oil use, high prices have put tar sands in business which create far more carbon dioxide than conventional oil. Profits are going to ugly oil-fed regimes, not Western exchequers. And the wild unpredictability of prices will blunt the effect of dear oil on people's behaviour.
這場石油震撼需要時間來平息。一些綠能人士或許認為石油的三態是種限制溫室氣體排放的方式。節能會慢慢增加，但所有高價所帶來的影響卻可以透過碳稅來解決。如同石油濫用，高價使得焦油沙地成了商業的一部分，而製造出比傳統石油更多的二氧化碳。所有的利益都跑到醜陋的石油組織，而非西方世界的國庫裡。而無法預測的瘋狂油價將會損害寶貴石油對於人類行為的影響。
From this perspective, governments should speed up the adjustment—or at least stop delaying it. Half the world's people are sheltered from fuel prices by subsidies—which, perversely, have boosted demand and mostly benefited the better off. Now countries like Indonesia, Taiwan and Sri Lanka have begun to realise that they can ill afford this. Cutting fuel taxes in the rich world makes no sense either (see article). There are better ways to return cash to struggling voters.
從這個角度來看，政府必須加快變革腳步，不然至少也要停止繼續延宕。全球半數的人口都透過補助津貼來躲避油價的衝擊，但這卻反而造成需求增加，進而讓那些有錢人獲利。目前，一些國家像是印尼，台灣，以及斯里蘭卡都已經發現他們再也無法承擔這些了。而富裕國削減燃料稅的作法似乎也沒有道理。應該有更好的方法，把鈔票還給那些奮鬥的選民。
The 1970s showed how demand and supply, inelastic in the short run, eventually give rise to conservation and new production. When all those new fields are on-stream, when the SUVs have been sold and the boilers replaced, the downcycle will take hold. By then the slow-motion oil shock could have catalysed momentous change. Right now motorists have no substitute for oil. But it is no coincidence that car companies are suddenly accelerating their plans to sell electric hybrids that are far cheaper to run than petrol or diesel cars at these prices. The first two oil shocks banished oil from power generation. How fitting if the third finished the job and began to free transport from oil's century-long monopoly.
1970年代見證了在短期彈性疲乏的需求與供給之下，是如何造就庫存提高與新式生產。當所有新領域都成為潮流時，當SUV車款大賣，鍋爐動力遭到淘汰時，低迷的景氣就會過去。屆時，這顆慢速震撼彈就會催化出巨變。目前車輛使用者並無石油替代品，但車廠會突然加速開發油電混合車也不是巧合，這些車與汽油或柴油車比起來，油耗更低省錢更多。前兩次的油價衝擊將石油從發電廠名單中除名。如果第三次危機發生，將幾世紀來石油壟斷交通產業的局面改變，那有多好。
$$Copyright: 原文所有權為 Economists所有，嚴禁使用於商業用途$$
##Copyleft: 中文所有權為本網站所有，歡迎告知後取用##
**********************
好像，一週一篇不太夠阿.....