英国财政紧缩导致脱欧危机？，今天小编就来说说关于总是在旅行前制定计划翻译?下面更多详细答案一起来看看吧!
总是在旅行前制定计划翻译
2019-08-24至09-17Did Austerity in the UK Lead to the Brexit Crisis?英国财政紧缩导致脱欧危机？
The new UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has just under three months to hammer out a process for the UK to leave the EU. The official mantra now is for the UK to leave the EU “do or die” by Halloween. Yet, the so-called “No Deal” Brexit that now appears likely does not resemble what the electorate was offered in 2016. A No Deal Brexit is the anathema to the Vote Leave campaign’s promise that any departure from the EU would be gradual and smooth. In fact, if that happens, most of the Leave side’s promises, such as the UK’s continued participation in the single market, would be broken.
新任首相鲍里斯*约翰逊只有大约三个月的时间设计出脱欧进展。现在，官方的口头禅就是英国在万圣节前“要么做，要么死”地离开欧盟。然而，所谓的脱欧阵营现在看起来并没有像2016年选民所期待的那样。脱欧阵营曾许诺，任何的脱欧行为都有序、平稳地进行。事实上，如果这些都发生了，绝大多数的脱欧诺言都会不攻自破，比如英国将继续统一市场。
While a political solution to the Brexit crisis is yet to be found, our academic understanding of why the Brexit vote happened has developed significantly over the last three years. Studies have found that areas that supported Leave had an overall weaker economic structure, with lower levels of income and life satisfaction, fewer high status-jobs, an aging demographic, and lower levels of educational attainment. In a recent paper, forthcoming in the American Economic Review, I show that these “left-behind” parts of the UK were particularly reliant on the welfare state – and hence, particularly vulnerable to welfare cuts.
然而针对脱欧危机的政策尚未找到，我们对英国退欧公投原因的学术理解比过去三年有了更深的理解。研究发现，支持脱欧的一方，整体经济结构较弱,低收入，不能很好的满足生活需求，更少的高端工作者，老龄化，教育程度低。在最近等我报道中，即将发表在《美国经济评论》上，我指出，英国这些“落后”地区特别依赖于福利国家，因此特别容易受到福利削减的影响。
My analysis shows that austerity-induced cuts to the welfare system since 2010 played an important role in shoring support for the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and Vote Leave. I gathered data from all electoral contests that took place in the UK since 2000, and assembled a detailed individual-level panel data set covering almost 40,000 households since 2009. Through these data, I studied to what extent an individual’s or region’s exposure to welfare cuts since 2010 was associated with increased political support for UKIP in the run up to the Brexit referendum in 2016. The analysis suggests that this association was so strong that the 2016 EU referendum would have resulted in a clear victory for Remain (or the referendum might never have happened) had it not been for austerity measures such as extensive cuts to public spending.
我的分析指出自2010年以来，财政紧缩导致的福利体系削减，在支持英国独立党(UKIP)和公投退欧方面发挥了重要作用。我收集了从2000年开始的英国选举竞赛的数据，聚集了从2009年开始的覆盖4万户家庭的个人详细信息集。通过这些数据，我发现，在一定程度上，个人或地区从2010年以来的福利消减与2016年英国脱欧公投前，英国独立党获得了更多的政治支持有关。分析发现，这种联系是如此强烈，以致在2016年的脱欧公投上取得显著的胜利，因为如果没有像大规模削减公共开支这样的紧缩措施，留欧(或者公投可能永远不会发生)是不可能的。
Beyond shifting support to UKIP and Leave, individuals exposed to specific benefit cuts demonstrated marked increases in wider political dissatisfaction. They became much more disaffected with the UK’s political system, increasingly believing that “public officials do not care”, that “they have no say in government policy” and that their vote does not matter.
除了支持英国独立党和脱欧，受到具体利益削减影响的个人对政治不满的情绪显著上升。他们变得对英国政治系统越来越不满，越来越相信“政府官员对此不在意”，“他们对政府政策没有话语权”以及他们的选举权无关紧要。
The Impact of Austerity
财政紧缩的影响
The vast benefit cuts starting in 2010 predominantly hit already struggling regional economies that were recovering very slowly from the global financial crisis. Millions of working families were left worse off. Aggregate figures suggest that overall government spending for social welfare and protection, such as unemployment, housing, tax credits and disability-related benefits contracted by 16% in real per capita terms (see the chart below), reaching levels last seen in the early 2000s. And the Office of Budget Responsibility estimates a total of £45.4 billion will have been cut from the welfare budget from 2010 to 2021. By 2020, relative to 2010, day to day real government spending per capita will be 15% lower.
从2010年开始的大规模利益消减主要打击了本已举步维艰的地区经济体，这些经济体缓慢地从全球经济危机中复苏。数以百万计的工薪家庭情况变得更糟。数据显示，政府用于社会福利和保障的总支出，比如失业、住房、税收抵免和与残疾有关的福利，按实际人均计算下降了16%（见下图），达到了本世纪处的水平。预算责任部门估计从2010到2021年大约有454亿被削减。与2010年相比，到2020年，政府人均实际支出将逐日下降15%
While the healthcare system was not affected by direct cuts, the aging population led to significant increases in demand for healthcare, worsening the quality and access for many and contributing to the now regular crisesthat bring the healthcare system to near collapse during seasonal demand peaks. Overall public spending on education also contracted with much of the burden of the cost of university education being shifted from public to private responsibility – resulting in a near tripling of tuition fees across many universities. At the same time, the tax cuts curtailing public revenues mostly benefited the wealthy or those on higher incomes.
然而医疗保健系统没有被财政紧缩所影响，人口老龄化对医疗保健的需求显著增加，恶化了许多人的医疗质量和可获得性，并导致了目前的经常性危机，在季节性需求高峰期，这些危机使医疗保健系统几乎崩溃。教育的公共支出部分也缩减了，使得大学教育的大部分成本由公共责任转向私人责任，导致许多大学的学费上升将近两倍。同时，公共收入的税收缩减主要有利于富人或那些高收入者。
At the level of districts, spending per person fell by about 23% in real terms between 2010 and 2015. The poorest parts of the UK were hit the hardest since they were most reliant on welfare and transfers to begin with: some local authority districts had to cut spending by up to 46%. Many austerity-measures affecting individuals (e.g., cuts to housing benefits and tax credits) were implemented through the Welfare Reform Act of 2012. It was estimated that these measures combined would cost every working-age Briton, on average, around £440 per year, with combined estimated fiscal savings of £18.8 billion per year.
在地区层面，2010至2015年的人均实际支出下降23%。英国最贫穷的地区受到的冲击最大，因为他们从一开始就最依赖社会福利和转移支付，一些当地政府不得不减少高达46%的支出。许多影响个人的财政紧缩政策（比如缩减住房福利和税收抵免）都是通过2012年的福利改革法案实施的。据估计，这些措施的结合将使每一个处于工作年龄的英国人每年花费大约440英镑，每年财政节省188亿英镑。
Of course, the overall impact of the cuts was far from uniform across the UK: it varied from around £914 per working age adult per year in Blackpool to just above £177 per working age adult per year in the City of London. And the loss of benefit income due to cuts had further consequences for local economies. I estimate that for every pound in benefit-income that was lost, local area incomes contracted by around 2.4 pounds due to the multiplier effect. A simple back of the envelope calculation suggests that the VAT revenues on the foregone economic activity due to the welfare reforms could have easily paid for the UK’s annual contribution to the EU budget – rendering（渲染） one of the Leave campaign’s major sticking points inconsequential.
当然，削减的总体影响在英国各地远非一致的。布莱克浦的每个成年的工作人员每年约914英镑到伦敦的每个成年的工作人员每年略高于177英镑。由于减缩导致福利收入减少对吧当地的经济产生深远的影响。我估计每缺少一英镑的福利收入，再结合多方面因素，当地的收入将会缩减204英镑。一份简单的信封背面计算表明，由于福利改革而丧失的经济活动的增值税收入本可以轻松支付英国对欧盟预算的每年贡献——这使得脱欧运动的主要症结点之一变得无关紧要了
From Austerity to Brexit
从财政紧缩到脱欧
My analysis shows that voters hit hardest by the cuts were more receptive to the Leave campaign, which shouldn’t be surprising as campaigners promised fiscal windfalls from leaving the EU that could prop up ailing public services. In the years leading up to the 2016 EU referendum, UKIP, the main populist party advocating for Brexit, saw significant electoral gains, largely driven by areas and among voters most affected by the welfare cuts. I found that UKIP vote shares increased by between 3.5 to 11.9 percentage points due to the welfare cuts, suggesting that the tight 2016 EU referendum could have resulted in a victory for Remain had it not been for austerity. Leave won by a margin of 3.8 percentage points.
我的分析显示，受削减支出影响最大的选民更容易接受退欧运动，这并不奇怪，正如竞争者所承诺的，退欧带来的财政收入可能支撑境况不佳的公共服务。在2016年英国退欧公投前的几年里，主张退欧的主要民粹主义政党英国独立党(UKIP)在选举中获得了显著的优势，主要是受地区和受福利削减影响最大的选民的推动。我发现，由于财政紧缩，英国独立党的得票率从3.8上升到11.9个百分点，这说明，如果不是因为紧缩，2016年紧张的欧盟公投可能会导致留欧的胜利。脱欧方以超3.8个百分点的得票获胜。
Why was UKIP and Leave so successful? The evidence suggests that support for UKIP and Leave represented, for many voters, a way to voice protest against the UK’s domestic political settlement. Only 43% of 2014 UKIP voters stated that they support UKIP because of its goal to Leave the EU – this compares with 26% who stated that they supported UKIP as they are “unhappy with other three parties to send a message as a protest vote.” The marginal Leave-supporter that swung the EU referendum in favor of Leave is unlikely to have been a die-hard long-time EU sceptic, but rather, a disaffected and disillusioned voter. The narrow vote of the English to leave the EU in 2016 was, to a significant extent,a manifestation of the political fallout from austerity.
为什么英国独立党和脱欧方如此成功？证据显示，对于许多选民来说，支持英国独立党和脱欧方是一种反抗英国国内政治解决方案的方方式。2014年，只有43%的英国独立党选民声称，他们支持英国独立党是因为他们的脱欧目标——相比之下，26%的人表示他们支持英国独立党，因为他们对其他三个党派投出的反对票的不满。支持退欧的边缘人士在脱欧公投中摇摆不定，不太可能是长期以来顽固的欧盟怀疑论者，而是一位心怀不满、幻想破灭的选民。2016年，英国人以微弱优势投票退出欧盟，在很大程度上反映了紧缩政策带来的政治后果。
The effect of austerity is detectable not only in aggregate voting outcome data, but also when looking at how people’s political preferences shifted once they had experienced a benefit cut. For example, consider one of the welfare-reform measures implemented through the 2012 Welfare Reform Act: the so-called “bedroom tax.” This benefit cut aimed to reduce housing benefits paid to low income families living in social-rented housing. It placed a maximum number of bedrooms allowed per household, which led to around 600,000 households losing a significant part of their housing benefit due to having “an excess bedroom.” This predominantly affected older, low income working age families whose children had moved out.
紧缩政策的效果不仅可以从总体投票结果数据中检测出来，还可以通过观察人们在经历福利削减后的政治偏好如何变化来检测出来。比如，考虑2012年福利改革法案实施的一项福利改革措施即所谓的“卧室税”。这项削减福利的目的是减少支付给住在廉租房的低收入家庭的住房福利。
I studied households vulnerable to this cut and those that weren’t, and compared their political preferences and a host of other outcomes in the years following. Not surprisingly, households exposed to the bedroom tax increasingly fell into arrears paying their rent after the cut became effective, with some households moving into smaller housing. My results show that individuals living in such households increasingly shifted toward supporting UKIP and Leave.
我研究了易受紧缩政策影响的家和不易受影响的家，并比较了他们的政治偏好和随后几年将要发生的后果。毫无疑问，在减租生效后，承担卧室税的家庭越来越多地拖欠房租，一些家庭搬进了较小的住房。我的调查结果显示生活在这样家庭的人们逐渐转向支持英国独立党和脱欧。
Austerity Amidst Growing Grievances
在怨声载道中厉行紧缩
The political and economic crisis that austerity helped to unleash was long in the making. By curtailing the welfare-state, austerity activated a broad range of existing economic grievances that had developed over a long period of time, as a result of many different factors, such as job or wage losses due to increased trade, immigration, and automation.
紧缩政策帮助引发的政治和经济危机酝酿已久。通过削减福利，财政紧缩引发了长期形成的广泛的经济怨声，原因有很多，比如因贸易、移民和自动化增加而造成的工作或工资的损失。
Many of these economic trends are set to continue. And the welfare state plays an important role in ensuring that there’s social consensus to embrace globalization, international exchange, and technological progress. Public policy needs to deliver solutions for those who lose out or feel left behind. This is where welfare spending comes in, from continued investment in education, training and other forms of welfare benefits, to helping individuals weather the transition between jobs.
这些经济趋势中有许多将继续下去。同时福利国家在确保社会一致接受全球化、国际交流和技术进步方面发挥着重要作用。公共措施需要为那些失败或感觉落后的人提供解决方案。这就是福利支出的来源，从持续的教育、培训和其他形式的福利的投资，到帮助个人度过工作之间的过渡期。
The UK’s welfare system did fulfill this function, at least in part, up to 2010. My research shows that from 2001 to 2010 the UK’s welfare-state was responsive, expanding benefit and transfer payments to those who became, in relative terms, increasingly worse-off economically. The welfare state was tackling some of the grievances and the growing inequality brought about by rapid economic changes. Yet, with the onset of austerity from 2010 this trend of expanding benefit payments to those losing out came to an abrupt halt. The increase in support for UKIP and the Brexit vote can be linked to this reshaping of the social contract.
直到2010年，英国福利系统至少在一定程度上实现了这一功能。我的调查表明从2001年到2010，英国的福利地区作出了回应，将福利和转移支付扩大到那些相对而言经济状况日益恶化的地区。然而，随着2010年开始的财政紧缩，这种向失败者扩大福利支出的趋势戛然而止。支持英国独立党和脱欧公投的人数增加可能和社会契约的重塑有关。
The consensus among economists is that the UK economy in 2019 is considerably smaller than what it would have been without the 2016 vote — even with Brexit not having happened yet. A No Deal departure is set to produce an economic shock that will hit millions of working poor, many of which have been swayed to support Brexit in 2016, based on promises that entirely contradict the No Deal realities. Even worse, the hollowing out of the welfare state that contributed to the Leave victory in 2016 leaves many of the working poor in a worse position to weather any prospective economic downtown. One can only hope that the sunlit uplands that were promised in 2016 appear much sooner than the 50 years or so that prominent leavers admit it would take for material benefits of leaving the EU to emerge. If anything is clear, Brexit is a guarantee for more political, economic, and social instability to come.
经济学家的共识是，2019年的英国经济规模与2016年公投前相比小的多，即使脱欧并未真正发生。“不达成协议”的退出势必会造成一场经济冲击，将打击数以百万计的贫困工薪家庭，其中许多家庭转向支持2016年英国脱欧，其依据是承诺与“不达成协议”的现实完全相悖。更糟糕的是，福利地区的空心化导致2016年的脱欧胜利，使得贫困的工薪阶级处于更糟糕的位置，无法承受可能发生的经济衰落。人们只能希望，2016年承诺的阳光普照的高地出现得比50年左右的时间要早得多，以便于一些著名的退欧派承认，脱离欧盟将带来物质利益。如果一切都是清晰的，那么脱欧就是未来更多的政治、经济、社会不稳定的保障。
,
