翻譯小比賽，總獎金 P 幣 16000　:D - 翻譯

四月翻譯比賽已於二ＯＯ八年五月三日完成評審。

得獎名單如下：
┌───┬───────┬──────┬────┬──────┐
│名　次│　得　獎　者　│最低得分標準│實際得分│獎金（P 幣）│
├───┼───────┼──────┼────┼──────┤
│第一名│　從　　　缺 │ 90 + │ ─ │ 11,840 │
├───┼───────┼──────┼────┼──────┤
│第二名│　從 缺 │ 80 + │ ─ │ 6,500 │
├───┼───────┼──────┼────┼──────┤
│第三名│　cefy │ 70 + │ 72 │ 4,500 │
├───┼───────┼──────┼────┼──────┤
│佳　作│　vivaadante │ 60 + │ 64 │ 1,500 │
└───┴───────┴──────┴────┴──────┘

在此恭喜所有得獎者。

活動名稱：四月翻譯小比賽

活動內容：翻譯指定文章，由英文翻譯至正體中文

參賽資格：除我以外之人皆可參加。

參賽方式：以回覆到作者信箱之方式，將應答內容回覆到我的信箱，請勿回到板上。
　須由本人自行作答，一人限作答一次，重複提交答案者喪失參賽資格。
　提交答案後不得來信請求更改答案，違者喪失參賽資格。

截止期日：民國九十七年四月三十日二十三點五十九分五十九秒。

評審方式：在截止期日後三日內我會將所有參賽者的答案以不記名方式公佈於本板供
　大家評論。比賽最後結果由我決定，我會參酌大家的意見，不過大家的意
　見對我不具拘束力。

獎勵辦法：(2008/04/16 修訂)
第一名一名 P 幣 7000
第二名一名 P 幣 4500
第三名一名 P 幣 2500
　佳　作二名 P 幣 1000
　　　註：如品質未達本人認可之標準者，獎項可從缺

稅金負擔：(2008/04/16 增訂)
給付獎金時，其稅金由得獎人負擔，並自給付金額中預先扣除

贊 助：(2008/04/16 增訂)
1)板友可贊助本比賽
2)板友贊助金額將全額反應於獎金金額
3)板友暫助金額宜於評審結果公布日以前寄給本人，以利統籌分配
　4)因獎項從缺而未使用之贊助金額，以將扣除稅金後之餘額返還原贊助人
為原則，但原贊助人表示續供未來類似比賽使用者，得不返還而供未來
類似比賽使用
　5)應返還予各贊助人之金額，以其贊助金額佔總獎金金額之比例計算之

評審結果公佈日：民國九十七年五月十日二十三點五十九分五十九秒以前

給獎條件：參賽人數不足五人時，評審照常進行，但所有獎項得全部從缺。

資料來源：Economist (Apr. 10th 2008)
------------------------ (作答時請將本行以上內容刪除) ----------------------

翻譯段落：

Foreign capital ought to be good for countries that have profitable ventures
that lack funding because of low savings at home. But Messrs Rodrik and
Subramanian argue that for many countries, it is not low savings but a
shortage of good investments that is the binding constraint. Weak property
rights, poorly enforced contracts and the fear that profits will be siphoned
away make it hard to conceive of ventures that might generate a reliable
return. When investment opportunities are scarce, capital inflows simply
displace domestic savings and encourage consumption.

Whatever their misgivings about cosmopolitan capital, the authors do not
deny that deeper financial markets in general help to foster prosperity.
Even in economies short of good investment projects, a sturdier channel
connecting domestic savers and borrowers will help growth. The more domestic
savings can be put to work, the less need is there for foreign capital,
and using local funds helps keep the exchange rate down and promotes export
growth. By contrast, encouraging foreign capital to flood in can put upward
pressure on the exchange rate, making exports less competitive. In some
circumstances, capital controls may be justified if they keep the currency
cheap and promote growth.

Why do the authors make such a strong case for export-led growth as a means
to development in poor countries, even if it is at the expense of more open
capital markets? First, they believe, exports are a force for institutional
reform. A firm making clothes to sell abroad demands consistent state
regulation, reliable transport links and enforceable contracts with suppliers
to a degree that a barbershop serving the domestic market does not. Second,
exporters foster skills, technology and expertise that can fruitfully spill
over to other enterprises.

Messrs Rodrik and Subramanian conclude that with the benefits of liberalised
finance under the microscope in rich countries, it is time for more subtle
thinking about the global picture. “Depending on context and country,”
they write, “the appropriate role of policy will be as often to stem the
tide of capital flows as to encourage them.”

That bold conclusion leaves some troubling issues unresolved. As China's
experience suggests, keeping the exchange rate weak in support of export-led
growth becomes harder to sustain over time. Nor is it easy to keep foreign
capital out. Capital controls can be evaded by adjusting trade invoices:
exporters can bring funds in secretly by over-invoicing for foreign sales.
The authorities can use sterilised intervention to stop inflows pushing the
exchange rate up, but this imposes its own costs on the economy—in terms of
higher interest rates or a distorted allocation of credit.

It is possible too that over time capital inflows are becoming less risky
and the collateral benefits more tangible. And more stable direct investments
account for an increasing share of capital inflows. Countries will ultimately
have to come to terms with global capital and the choice is not only whether
to embrace or resist it. There is a third option: find ways to manage it.
After all, few would now argue that financial progress should not be policed
at all.

--