经济类英语文章1000字

经济类英语文章1000字

Macroeconomics is a sub-field of economics that examines the behavior of the economy as a whole, once all of the individual economic decisions of companies and industries have been summed. Economy-wide phenomena considered by macroeconomics include Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and how it is affected by changes in unemployment, national income, rate of growth, and price levels.
In contrast, microeconomics is the study of the economic behaviour and decision-making of individual consumers, firms, and industries.
Macroeconomics can be used to analyze how to influence government policy goals such as economic growth, price stability, full employment and the attainment of a sustainable balance of payments.
Macroeconomics is sometimes used to refer to a general approach to economic reasoning, which includes long term strategies and rational expectations in aggregate behavior.
Until the 1930s most economic analysis did not separate out individual economics behavior from aggregate behavior. With the Great Depression of the 1930s, suffered throughout the developed world at the time, and the development of the concept of national income and product statistics, the field of macroeconomics began to expand. Particularly influential were the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, who formulated theories to try to explain the Great Depression. Before that time, comprehensive national accounts, as we know them today, did not exist .
One of the challenges of economics has been a struggle to reconcile macroeconomic and microeconomic models. Starting in the 1950s, macroeconomists developed micro-based models of macroeconomic behavior (such as the consumption function). Dutch economist Jan Tinbergen developed the first comprehensive national macroeconomic model, which he first built for the Netherlands and later applied to the United States and the United Kingdom after World War II. The first global macroeconomic model, Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates LINK project, was initiated by Lawrence Klein and was mentioned in his citation for the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1980.
Theorists such as Robert Lucas Jr suggested (in the 1970s) that at least some traditional Keynesian (after British economist John Maynard Keynes) macroeconomic models were questionable as they were not derived from assumptions about individual behavior, although it was not clear whether the failures were in microeconomic assumptions or in macroeconomic models. However, New Keynesian macroeconomics has generally presented microeconomic models to shore up their macroeconomic theorizing, and some Keynesians have contested the idea that microeconomic foundations are essential, if the model is analytically useful. An analogy might be that the fact that quantum phisics is not fully consistent with relativity theory doesn´t mean that realtivity is false. Many important microeconomic assumptions have never been proved, and some have proved wrong.
The various schools of thought are not always in direct competition with one another - even though they sometimes reach differing conclusions. Macroeconomics is an ever evolving area of research. The goal of economic research is not to be "right," but rather to be accurate. It is likely that none of the current schools of economic thought perfectly capture the workings of the economy. They do, however, each contribute a small piece of the overall puzzle. As one learns more about each school of thought, it is possible to combine aspects of each in order to reach an informed synthesis.
The traditional distinction is between two different approaches to economics: Keynesian economics, focusing on demand; and supply-side (or neo-classical) economics, focusing on supply. Neither view is typically endorsed to the complete exclusion of the other, but most schools do tend clearly to emphasize one or the other as a theoretical foundation.
• Keynesian economics focuses on aggregate demand to explain levels of unemployment and the business cycle. That is, business cycle fluctuations should be reduced through fiscal policy (the government spends more or less depending on the situation) and monetary policy. Early Keynesian macroeconomics was "activist," calling for regular use of policy to stabilize the capitalist economy, while some Keynesians called for the use of incomes policies.
• Supply-side economics delineates quite clearly the roles of monetary policy and fiscal policy. The focus for monetary policy should be purely on the price of money as determined by the supply of money and the demand for money. It advocates a monetary policy that directly targets the value of money and does not target interest rates at all. Typically the value of money is measured by reference to gold or some other reference. The focus of fiscal policy is to raise revenue for worthy government investments with a clear recognition of the impact that taxation has on domestic trade. It places heavy emphasis on Say's law, which states that recessions do not occur because of failure in demand or lack of money.
• Monetarism, led by Milton Friedman, which holds that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. It rejects fiscal policy because it leads to "crowding out" of the private sector. Further, it does not wish to combat inflation or deflation by means of active demand management as in Keynesian economics, but by means of monetary policy rules, such as keeping the rate of growth of the money supply constant over time.
• New Keynesian economics, which developed partly in response to new classical economics, strives to provide microeconomic foundations to Keynesian economics by showing how imperfect markets can justify demand management.
• Austrian economics is a laissez-faire school of macroeconomics. It focuses on the business cycle that arises from government or central-bank interference that leads to deviations from the natural rate of interest.
• Post-Keynesian economics represents a dissent from mainstream Keynesian economics, emphasizing the role of uncertainty and the historical process in macroeconomics.
• New classical economics. The original theoretical impetus was the charge that Keynesian economics lacks microeconomic foundations -- i.e. its assertions are not founded in basic economic theory. This school emerged during the 1970s. This school asserts that it does not make sense to claim that the economy at any time might be "out-of-equilibrium". Fluctuations in aggregate variables follow from the individuals in the society continuously re-optimizing as new information on the state of the world is revealed. Later yielded an explicit school which argued that macro-economics does not have micro-economic foundations, but is instead the tool of studying economic systems at equilibrium.
宏观经济学是一种分场经济学的行为,研究是在整个经济中,一旦所有的个人的经济决策,为公司和产业被。宏观经济学认为经济现象包括国内生产总值(GDP)以及它是如何变化影响失业的国民收入的)经济成长率、价格水平。

相反,微观经济学研究的就是经济行为和决策的个体消费者,公司和行业。

宏观经济学可以用来分析如何影响政府的政策的目标,比如经济增长,价格稳定,充分就业和获取可持续国际收支差额。

宏观经济学有时用来指一个经济理论的主要途径,包括长期战略的期望和理性综合行为。

直到30年代为止,大部分的经济分析没有独立的个人经济综合行为举止。与1930年代的经济大萧条,遭受了在所有发达国家,发展国民收入的概念和产品的统计数据,但是研究领域的宏观经济学开始扩展。具有特殊影响力的想法是,约翰•梅纳德凯恩斯理论,努力向他们解释制定了经济大萧条。在那时候,综合国民经济核算,如同我们知道他们今天,是不存在的。

经济学的一个挑战是一场斗争调和宏观经济政策和微观经济政策,模型。开始于20世纪50年代,macroeconomists发达micro-based模型的宏观经济行为(如消费函数)。1月Tinbergen荷兰经济学家第一个全面发展国家宏观经济模型,该模型他第一次建成为荷兰和后应用于美国和英国二战之后。第一个全球宏观经济模型,沃顿计量预测伙伴联系工程项目,发生在劳伦斯发起克莱恩和被提及他的嘉奖经济学诺贝尔经济学奖1980年。

理论家如罗伯特·卢卡斯认为(是在上世纪70年代),认为至少有一些传统的凯恩斯(英国经济学家约翰梅纳德凯恩斯)宏观经济模型都是可疑的,因为他们不是来源于假设的个人行为,虽然现在还不清楚这些失败在微观经济的假定,或是对宏观经济模型。然而,最新凯恩斯主义的宏观微观模型提出了大致以支持他们的宏观经济理论有争议,一些凯恩斯主义者的想法,微观经济基础是必要的,如果模型是分析有用的。打个比方可能是,这样的事实,即量子phisics并不完全符合相对论´,并不代表没有realtivity是假的。许多重要的微观经济假设从来没有被证明,而有些人的证明是错误的。

各种各样的思想学派并不总是在彼此的直接竞争,尽管他们有时会达到不同的结论。宏观经济学是一种前所未有的领域的研究。研究经济学的目标不是"正确",而是是精确的。很有可能是学校目前尚无一个经济思想完全捕捉运作方式的经济。不过,他们的贡献每一小块整体难题。当你学会更多关于每个思想学派,它能把方面的每一个为了达到一个通知的合成。

传统的区别是留给经济学两种不同的方法,重点凯恩斯经济学和供方需求;(或古典)经济学、关注供应。也都是典型的观点完全排除其他,但大多数学校都往往清晰地强调一个或另一个是的理论基础。

•凯恩斯经济学交融在总需求,以解释失业率和商业周期。商业周期波动,应减少通过财政政策(政府花费或多或少根据实际情况)和货币政策。早期凯恩斯主义的宏观经济学是“活动家,定期使用《召唤的政策稳定资本主义经济,虽然有些凯恩斯主义要求使用收入政策。

•供给的经济学的作用很明显地在当前货币政策与财政政策。关注于货币政策应该是完全对价格的钱所确定的货币供应的需求的特点,为了金钱。它提倡货币政策,直接目标钱的价值,不目标利率。典型的钱的价值在于用参考金或其他参考。财政政策的重点是提高政府农业投资价值的收入为一个明确的认识税收的影响在国内贸易。它设置了过度强调了说的法律,它表明不会发生经济衰退需求下降、因为没有缺钱。

•货币主义的带领下,由弗里德曼,认为始终通货膨胀是一种货币现象。财政政策拒绝,因为会导致“挤退”的私人生活。此外,它不希望对抗通货膨胀或通货紧缩采用主动需求管理在凯恩斯经济学,通过货币政策规则,即坚持的增长速度恒定的钱。

凯恩斯•新经济发达的部分原因是为了适应新古典经济学、致力于提供凯恩斯现代经济学的微观经济基础显示出了市场的不完善就能名正言顺的需求管理等。

•奥地利经济学是个自由放任主义的学校的宏观经济。它侧重于商业周期,而政府或中央银行的干扰导致偏离自然失业率的兴趣。

•Post-Keynesian经济学所代表了凯恩斯经济学主流的作用,强调历史过程中不确定性和宏观经济。

•新古典经济学。原理论动力的费用是凯恩斯经济学缺乏有效的微观经济基础——亦即其断言不成立于基本经济理论。这所学校出现在20世纪70年代。这所学校断言它是没有道理的主张经济会随时out-of-equilibrium”。波动的总变量遵从的在这个社会的个人不断re-optimizing新信息的状态的世界就会显现出来。后来取得了一个显式学校一样,认为宏观经济学没有微观经济基础,反而学习经济系统的工具在平衡。

求一篇2000字的经济类英文文章及翻译（英文要2000字），谢谢！

Health care
A new prescription for the poor
为贫穷者新开的处方
America is developing a two-tier health system, one for those with private insurance, the other for the less well-off
美国正在发展一个双重的健康系统，一重是为那些有个人保险的人群，而另一重则是为那些不那么富裕的人群
Oct 8th 2011 | NEW YORK | from the print edition

“IT’S
time for Dancing with the Stars!”, a woman announces enthusiastically.
At this New York health centre, wedged between housing projects to the
east and Chinatown to the west, “dancing with the stars” means dancing
with a physical therapist. An old man stands up with a nurse and begins a
determined samba.
“是时候和明星一起跳舞了！”一位女士满怀热情地宣告。在这个坐落于房屋工程的西面，唐人街东面的纽约健康中心，“和明星起舞”的意思是和一位物理治疗师跳舞。一位老者和一个护士站起来，开始跳事先确定好的桑巴舞。

Comprehensive
Care Management (CCM), which runs this centre, tries to keep old people
active. To do so, explains Joseph Healy, the chief operating officer,
is in the company’s best interest. The government pays CCM a capped rate
for the care of its members. If someone gets sick, his health costs
rise and the company’s margin shrinks. Mr Healy argues that the system
is the best way to provide good care at a low cost. Increasingly others
seem to agree.
经营这个中心的综合护理管理部门（CCM）努力保持老人们的活力。约瑟夫-海莉，首席运营官解释说，这样做符合公司
的最佳利益。政府给这个部门一个封顶的津贴来让他们照顾这些人。如果有人生病了，他的健康成本就会上升，公司的利润就会萎缩。海莉先生确定说这个系统能够
在一个低成本上提供最佳的护理。其他人也逐渐同意这个观点。

Medicaid, America’s health programme
for the poor, is in the process of being transformed. Over the next
three years, New York will move its entire Medicaid population into
“managed care”, paying companies a set rate to tend to the poor, rather
than paying a fee for each service. New York is not alone. States from
California to Mississippi are expanding managed care. It is the
culmination of a steady shift in the way most poor Americans receive
their health-care treatment.
公共医疗补助，即美国的穷人健康计划，正在被改造的过程中。在接下来的
三年内，纽约将把整个接受穷人健康计划的人群纳入“管理关怀”之中，付给公司们一个事先定好的费用来照顾那些穷人，而不是按照项目来付费。纽约不是唯一这
样做的州。加州，密西西比州正在拓展管理关怀计划。这代表一种正在进行中的稳步转变，即大部分贫穷美国人接受健康关怀方式的转变。

Medicaid
is America’s single biggest health programme. This year roughly one in
five Americans will be covered by Medicaid for a month or more. It
gobbles more federal and local money than any state programme, other
than education. Costs will rise even more when Barack Obama’s
health-care reform expands the programme by easing eligibility rules in
2014. Congress’s “supercommittee” is already considering cuts. However,
there are more immediate pressures behind the present drive for change.
公
共医疗补助是美国最大的单一健康计划。今年，五个美国人中的一个就会被纳入该计划一个月或更长时间。除了教育之外，它比其他任何州的财政计划耗去更多联邦
和地方的经费。当2014年奥巴马的健康保险改革放宽适用人群而使整个计划更加庞大的时候，成本将会进一步上升。众议院的“超级委员会”已经在考虑削减经
费。然而，选择这种变化，将会有更多即刻的压力存在。

Enrolment in Medicaid jumped during the
downturn, from 42.7m in December 2007 to 50.3m in June 2010. Mr Obama’s
stimulus bill helped to pay for some of this, but that money has dried
up. Faced with gaping deficits, some desperate governors slashed
payments to hospitals and doctors, or refused to pay for trips to the
dentist or oculist. But much the most important result has been
structural: the expansion of managed care.
公共医疗补助计划的参与人数在经济滑坡期间从2007年
12月的
4270万人跳到了2010年6月的5030万人。奥巴马先生的经济刺激经费能够帮助付掉其中的一部分，但是钱已经被用光。面对资金短缺，一些绝望的州长
砍掉了给医院和医生的补助，或是拒绝支付牙医和眼科医生的旅行费用。但是，更多地，最重要的结果是结构上的：管理关怀的拓展。

States
have dabbled in managed care for decades. The trend accelerated in the
1990s, with the share of Medicaid patients under this form of care
reaching 72% by 2009. Now, however, there is a strong push for the
remainder. States that did not have managed care, such as Louisiana, are
introducing it. Other states are extending it to people previously
deemed off limits: California and New York, for example, are moving the
elderly and disabled into that system of care. Texas is targeting more
than 400,000 Medicaid beneficiaries in the Rio Grande Valley. Local
politicians had resisted the move, nervous that care might deteriorate.
But the yawning deficit meant that they were overruled.
各个州涉足管理关怀已经有几
十年的历史了。这个趋势在90年代得到加速发展，在2009年前使用这种护理方式的公共医疗补助病人占到了72%。现在，对于剩下的人，这也是很强的推动
力。像路易斯安那州这样没有管理关怀的州正在引进管理关怀。其他州也把这个拓展到原先被认为不适用的人群：举例说像加州和纽约州，正在把老人和残障人士纳
入这个系统中，德州的目标是在格兰德河谷超过400000公共医疗补助收益人群。地方政治家反对这个举动，他们担心这个护理系统将会变质。但是巨大的赤字
意味着他们的观点注定要被批驳。

The result is a country with two distinct tiers
of health care. Most Americans with private insurance are still
horrified by thoughts of health-management organisations and prefer to
pay fees for each medical service. For the poor, managed care is
becoming the norm.
结果就是一个国家有两套截然不同的健康保险系统。大多数有个人保险的美国人仍旧害怕那些健康管理组织的想法而宁愿为单独的医疗服务付费。对于穷人来说，管理关怀已经成为一种常规。

Advocates
of managed care have high expectations. First, they hope that it will
make costs more predictable. Second, they believe that the change will
improve patients’ health. In managed care, a patient has a network of
doctors and specialists. If the programme works properly, doctors can
monitor all aspects of care, in contrast to the fragmented
fee-for-service system. The contracts that states have with firms can
set standards for quality. Texas, for instance, will cut 5% from a
company’s payment if it does not meet what is required.
管理关怀的鼓吹者有着很高的
期待。首先，他们希望这能让成本变得可以预测，其次，他们相信，这个改变可以改善病人的健康。在管理关怀中，一个病人有一个由医生和专家组成的网络。如果
这个计划运行良好，医生可以监测关怀的各个方面，相对于分离的的按服务付钱的系统来说。州政府和公司的合同可以为质量定下标准。德州，举例说，将会在付款
中扣除5%如果公司没有达到要求的标准。

The next step is to integrate care for those
eligible for both Medicaid and Medicare, the federal programme for the
old. These “duals” account for almost 40% of Medicaid’s costs and just
15% of its population. “If managed care can really deliver better care
than fee-for-service”, says Diane Rowland, chair of the commission that
advises Congress on Medicaid, “this is the population that could prove
it.”
下一步是整合那些同时符合公共医疗补助和长者医疗补助计划（联邦老人医疗补助）的人群。这些“双符合”人群占据了将近40%的公共医疗补
助成本和仅仅15%的人口数量。“如果管理关怀能真正比按项目付费带来更好的服务”，戴安-罗兰德，委员会（指导国会在公共医疗补助政策上进行决策）主任
说：“这是一群能证明管理关怀可行的人。”

But some, such as Norma Vescovo, are
sceptical. As the head of the non-profit Independent Living Centre of
Southern California (ILCSC), Ms Vescovo serves Medicaid patients with
severe health problems. Over the years she has often sued California on
policies that she thinks will hurt her vulnerable clients. On October
3rd her case moved to the Supreme Court.
但是一些人，例如像诺玛-凡斯科夫就对此表示怀疑。作为非盈利的南加州独立生活中心主任，凡斯科夫女士服务于那些有严重健康问题的接受公共医疗补助的病人。在这些年间，她经常控告加州政府在一些政策上会伤害她的一些脆弱的客户。在10月3日，她的案子被移到了上诉法院。

The
outcome of Douglas v Independent Living Centre will have profound
implications for the future of Medicaid. Ms Vescovo’s suit concerns cuts
to hospitals and doctors. But the case will also guide the course of
managed care. If ILCSC and its co-plaintiffs win, private groups will
continue to be able to challenge states on policies they think violate
federal Medicaid law. Ms Vescovo, who argues that California’s payment
cuts would eviscerate her clients’ access to services, worries that
under managed care the disabled might not be able to see the specialists
they need.
道格拉斯 v
独立生活中心的结果将会对公共医疗补助有深远的意义。凡斯科夫女士的诉讼影响到医院和医生的津贴削减。但是这个案子将会引领管理关怀的进程。如果中心和其
他原告胜诉，私人团体将会继续在那些他们认为违反联邦法律的政策上挑战州政府。凡斯科夫女士认为说加州的支付削减计划会让她的客户失去得到服务的机会，她
还担心，在管理关怀之下，那些残障人士可能不能见到那些他们需要的专家。

The question is how to
supervise the experiments with managed care that are being carried out
in various states. To date, Medicaid beneficiaries have been able to
challenge the states in court. However, if the Supreme Court rules
against ILCSC, that avenue will be closed. The Centres for Medicare and
Medicaid Services (CMS) technically can intervene if states do not
provide proper access to care. In reality, CMS has few tools to do so.
问
题是怎么监管在不同州试运行的管理关怀。到目前为止，公共医疗补助受益者已经能够在法庭中挑战政府。然而，如果上诉法庭结果不利于中心，那么这条路将会被
关闭。如果州政府没有提供合适的关怀的话，公共医疗补助和长者医疗关怀中心理论上是能对此进行干涉，但事实上，他们没有太多办法。

“I’m
a big fan of managed care”, says Sara Rosenbaum, a professor at George
Washington University, “but this transformation may happen with almost
no federal oversight.” Medicaid beneficiaries are vulnerable, in worse
health than Americans as a whole. Companies may struggle to cut costs
and provide good care as well. If states do not draft their contracts
properly, or fail to be vigilant in monitoring patients’ health, their
experiment in managed care could be a disaster. On the other hand, if
states are careful they could provide an answer to the question that has
vexed America for years: how to provide good, cheap health care.
“我是
管理关怀的拥护者”，萨拉-罗森博姆，一位乔治华盛顿大学教授说，“但是这种转变可能在没有联邦监管的情况下发生。”公共医疗补助的受益者和你脆弱，健康
程度整体上比一般美国人要差。公司可能在削减成本的同时挣扎着同样提供良好的服务。如果州政府们不好好起草他们的合同，或没有警觉地监控病人的健康的话，
他们在管理关怀上的实验可能会是一场灾难。另一方面，如果州政府们认真的话，他们能为那个困扰美国人多年的问题提供答案，即怎么提供优质的便宜的健康关
怀。

寻找一篇1000字的英文文章。希望有中文翻译。做好是经济商务类的，最好是网上找来的。谢谢啊

Since reform and opening, China’s sustained, rapid and healthy development has made great achievements for the environmental protection. While the central environmental and resource protection acts as one of the basic national policies, but the situation of environmental protection remains grave, the total discharge of industrial pollutants has not completely solved.

　一、产业发展与生态环境的关系。
坚持一手抓产业发展，一手抓生态建设，二者相互促进和互利双赢。
二、城乡建设与生态保护的关系。
　　在城市建设上，坚持世界精品城市的标准，高起点规划、高标准建设、高效能管理、高水平经营，促进城市建设与生态环境共同发展

金融类英语文章

经济学人：加拿大的住宅市场
Finance and Economics; 财经；
Canada's housing market; 加拿大的住宅市场；
Time for a bigger needle; 该出手时就出手；
The latest attempt to prick a bubble;戳破泡沫的最新举措；
经济学人：
Canada's reputation for financial regulation is starry. Its banksgot through the crisis unscathed. According to Moody's, a ratings agency, Royal Bank of Canadasits alongside HSBC and JPMorgan Chase in the top tier of global banks. And Canadianpolicymakers are old hands at pulling “macroprudential” levers of the sort now in vogue amongrich-world central banks.
加拿大的金融监管一向广受赞誉。它的银行业在这场危机中做到了独善其身。根据评级机构穆迪的报告，加拿大皇家银行与汇丰银行以及摩根大通同列，跻身全球银行界的第一梯队。同时，加拿大的政策制定者也是运用宏观审慎政策的老手，这一政策如今也常被其他富国的央行使用。
But questions still nag. Some say that Canada's banks are flattered by a huge indemnity offeredby Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp (CMHC), a public institution that insures mortgages witha loan-to-value ratio of more than 80%. CHMC's book grew to 567 billion Canadian Dollar(557 billion Dollar) in 2011, up from 345 billion Canadian Dollar four years earlier. And Canada'shousing market looks very frothy on some measures: The Economist's analysis of price-to-rentratios suggests that Canadian properties were about 75% above their long-run “fair value” in thefirst quarter of 2012 (see chart). Although less than 0.5% of CHMC's mortgages are in arrears, such exuberance is a worry. The central bank recently labelled housing as “the most importantdomestic risk to financial stability in Canada”.
但是，仍有问题缠身。部分人士认为，加拿大的银行被加拿大抵押和住房公司（CMHC）提供的巨额补偿金美化了，CMHC是一家为贷款估值比率超过80%的抵押贷款提供保险的公共机构。在2011年，CHMC的抵押贷款额从四年前的3450亿增长到了5670亿加元（合5570亿美元）。并且，从一些指标来看，加拿大的房地产充斥着泡沫：《经济学人》以房价租金比所做的分析显示，在2012年第一季度，加拿大的物业价格高出它们的长期公允价值75%。纵然仅有低于0.5%的CHMC抵押贷款存在拖欠的情况，但这样的繁荣仍让人忧虑。最近，央行也冠以楼市 “危及加拿大金融稳定性的最大国内隐患”。
Repeated efforts by policymakers to take the heat out of housing have not had a noticeableeffect. So on June 21st Jim Flaherty, the finance minister, had another go, his fourth in fouryears. Some of the new measures were cosmetic. Buyers of homes worth more than 1m Dollarhave been able to get mortgage-default insurance from CMHC with a downpayment of only 5%. In practice, it is hard to find buyers in this bracket who do not have lots of equity in their homes. But after July 9th mortgages for homes of this value will not be eligible for CMHC coverage.
政策制定者们给楼市降温的不断尝试并无明显成效。于是，在6月21日，加拿大财长吉姆·费拉逖，在四年来第四次出台了一些新举措。新措施中的一些不过是表面功夫。价值过百万美元住宅的买主能得到由CMHC担保的债务违约保险以及首付仅付5%的优惠待遇。而事实上，很少有这类购房者在购房时不以大量自有资金支付价款的。不过，在6月9日之后，这类住宅将不再适用于CMHC的保险范围。
Other measures have more teeth. The maximum amortisation period for a mortgage will now be25 years, down from 30. That should hurt demand: last year about 40% of new mortgages werefor terms longer than that. Refinancing a home will be allowed only up to 80% of its value, downfrom 85%. Homebuyers will have to demonstrate their housing costs are no more than 39% oftheir gross household income. On top of Mr Flaherty's measures, the Office of theSuperintendent of Financial Institutions, Canada's banking regulator, slapped a loan-to-value limitof 65% on borrowing against home equity.
其他那些则更为有力。抵押贷款最长还贷期限如今将从30年降低至25年。这势必将减少需求：去年约有40%的新贷款的期限是超过25年的。允许的房屋再融资的上限从房屋价值的85%降至只有80%。购房者还须证明他们的住房支出不超过家庭总收入的39%。费拉逖的举措中，紧随其后的是，加拿大的银行监管部门，联邦金融机构监督办公室，将贷款和自有资金间的贷款估值比率的限制猛降至65%。
Craig Alexander, the chief economist for TD Financial Group, estimates all this will be theequivalent of about a 1% rise in mortgage rates for most homebuyers. He believes that willproduce a slow unwinding of the housing market. If he is right, and Mr Flaherty's variousinterventions avoid the collateral damage that would be caused by an actual interest-rate rise, Canada's admirers will have another thing to swoon over.
多伦多道明银行金融集团首席经济学家，克雷格·亚历山大估计，所有这些措施对于购房者而言将等同于抵押贷款利率上升1%。他认为这将促使房产市场缓慢回归。如果他的观点正确，并且费拉逖的各种干预手段能够避免可能引发实际利率上升的附带伤害，那么如此一来，加拿大的崇拜者们又将有一个可以津津乐道的话题了。

【200分】求一篇有关经济移民类的英文论文，字数1000字以上

INTRODUCTION
The 19-member Global Commission on International Migration (GCIM) released
a six-chapter consensus report on 5 October 2005 calling on all nations to
respect the human rights of migrants and recommending a new Interagency
Global Migration Facility to help coordinate migration policies at the regional
and eventually global level. The GCIM mandate was to put migration on the
global agenda, to highlight gaps in policy responses to people crossing national
borders, and to examine links between migration and other global issues.
The report includes six principles and 33 more specific recommendations aimed
at creating a comprehensive global framework in six broad areas: migrants in a
globalizing labour market, migration and development, irregular migration, migrants
in society, the human rights of migrants, and the governance of migration.
Of the 33 recommendations, 25 are directed primarily at developed or receiving
countries, 15 to sending countries, and eight to the international community.
Many of these recommendations have been made previously, and some are
included in earlier United Nations’ system reports and declarations.
MIGRANT WORKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
Chapter one begins with the estimate that 200 million people are outside their
countries of birth or citizenship (the UN is revising this figure to 190 million in
2005), that half are in the labour forces of receiving countries, and that development
and demographic disparities, as well as deficits in the protection of human
rights, promise more migration. Perhaps the most important GCIM recommendation
is the call to open more doors for guest workers in order to reduce illegal
migration.
GCIM praises traditional immigration countries such as Australia, Canada, and
the United States, but calls for more temporary worker programmes because
they are more acceptable in “non-immigrant Europe” as well as in many developing
countries attracting migrants from their poorer neighbours. GCIM asserts that
some sending countries believe that the circular migration promised by guest
worker programmes is more beneficial to them, and concludes that “the old
paradigm of permanent migrant settlement is giving way to temporary and circular
migration” (GCIM: 31).
GCIM acknowledges the problems of temporary worker programmes, including
the fact that migrant workers have limited rights and may settle rather than
return, but argues that well-designed programmes can work as intended, that is,
admit temporary workers rather than permanent residents. GCIM says that welldesigned
guest worker programmes are those that fully inform migrants of their
rights and obligations; allow them to change jobs in receiving countries; and
have governments enforcing laws that regulate contractors, employers, and
others involved in moving workers over borders and employing them. GCIM
believes that regular returns to countries of origin as well as reintegration assistance
can minimize guest worker settlement.
Most migrants cross national borders for higher wages and more opportunities,
but only 25 per cent work in countries in which they are covered by bilateral
pension agreements, so that the work-related taxes paid abroad by 75 per cent
of the migrants do not necessarily provide them with benefits. GCIM argues
that non-portability of pension benefits is one reason why migrants are willing
to work in the informal sector abroad and reluctant to return home.
GCIM generally welcomes the movement of professionals from developing to
developed countries, but also notes that their exodus can slow development.
The idea of receiving countries compensating migrant countries of origin for
the loss of their human capital is rejected as impractical, and GCIM does not
think that codes of conduct that discourage, e.g. “aggressive recruiting” of
health-care personnel can be effective. Instead, GCIM calls for sending countries
to value nurses and other professionals likely to emigrate more highly, for
receiving countries to train more nurses rather than recruit foreigners, and for
both to co-invest in human capital in developing countries, such as by using
foreign aid to train health-care workers.
GCIM urges that the GATS Mode 4 negotiations be brought to a “successful
conclusion”, and notes that some developing countries see Mode 4 as a way to
begin to liberalize the movement of professionals. GCIM asserts that global
corporations want and should get more power to “deploy the right people at the
right time and place”.
Chapter two covers migration and development. GCIM sees mostly benefits
from the US$150 billion in remittances to developing countries in 2004. GCIM
emphasizes that remittances belong to migrants and should not be “subject
to undue official regulation”; urges efforts to reduce transfer costs with technology,
education, and competition; and calls on sending countries to create a
“conducive environment” to encourage migrants to invest their remittances at
home (GCIM: 27-28). GCIM recognizes that remittances can lead to dependency
among recipients, and that going abroad to earn them can impose significant
psychological costs on migrant families.
The third “R” in the migration and development nexus is returns. GCIM highlights
the development potential of diasporas, noting that many of the 600 Mexican
Hometown Associations (HTAs) in the United States voluntarily contribute to
develop the infrastructure of their communities of origin, with their contributions
matched by federal, state, and local governments under 3 x 1 programmes
(US$3 in government funds for each US$1 of HTA contributions). In addition to
providing funds, diasporas can forge trade and investment links and provide the
ideas and energy needed to get development going, but GCIM emphasizes that
development must begin at home. GCIM notes that diasporas can, but need not
always, contribute to development, and can impede development when they, for
example, finance conflicts in their countries of origin.
IRREGULARS AND INTEGRATION
Chapter 3 tackles irregular migration, emphasizing that 25 to 35 per cent of all
migrants in many industrial countries are irregular and that there are large numbers
of irregular migrants in some developing countries as well. GCIM acknowledges
both the complexity of irregular status and the conditions that encourage
migrants to risk migrating illegally, and laments the divide between those concerned
primarily with human rights and those concerned primarily with national security.
Differences between these extremes can prevent governments from adopting
one or both of GCIM’s preferred solutions – regularization or returns (GCIM:
37-38).
GCIM notes the significant investments that have been made in border controls,
and calls on receiving countries to combat irregular migration by opening new
channels for legal migrants (“appropriately designed temporary migration
programmes”). GCIM also calls for prosecuting employers of irregular workers
to de-magnetize the labour market for irregular migrants and the smugglers
and traffickers who emerge to facilitate illegal migration.
States are called on to protect the human rights of the migrants they are removing,
and countries of origin are reminded that they should accept the return of
their nationals. Meanwhile, GCIM urges case-by-case regularization. In another
difficult trade off, GCIM acknowledged the link between irregular migration
and asylum and called for maintaining respect for asylum by having a fair
and fast procedure to determine if an applicant is in need of protection while
implementing policies to reduce irregular migration.
Chapter 4 turns to integration, noting that major cities in industrial countries
have become very diverse. Diverse societies can find it difficult to achieve consensus,
especially when residents cannot communicate easily and there is competition
for limited resources. GCIM calls on host countries to respect the human
and labour rights of migrants, and for employers, unions, and migrants and their
associations to cooperate to promote integration. As with irregular migration,
GCIM sought a balance between respecting cultural differences and condemning
cultural practices that violate international human rights standards.
GCIM noted the special problems of women, children, and irregular migrants,
asserting that irregular migrants “who have been living in a country for long
periods of time” have some claim on the services of the state (GCIM: 51).
GCIM takes aim at journalists and groups who fan xenophobia, calling instead
for a “responsible debate on migration” (GCIM: 52).
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND GOVERNANCE
Chapter 5 turns to the international legal framework for managing international
migration. It notes that international law sets out the rights and responsibilities
of governments to regulate migration into their countries, the rights and responsibilities
of migrants, and areas in which cooperation among states is essential to improving responses to international flows of people. GCIM emphasizes that
the basic rights of migrants are established in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and seven human rights treaties, most of which have been
ratified by a large majority of states. The exception is the 1990 International
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members
of their Families, which has been ratified by 30 mostly migrant-sending
countries. Recognizing that receiving countries are unlikely to ratify the Migrant
Rights Convention in large numbers, GCIM focuses on the pressing need for
governments to implement the laws that they have ratified and recommends that
the UN human rights machinery should be used more effectively to ensure the
protection of migrant rights.