原文標題：
Can superstars like Beyoncé or Taylor Swift spur inflation?
Some economists think that tours by big acts drive up the consumer-price index
碧昂絲、泰勒·斯威夫特等超級巨星會加劇通貨膨脹嗎？
一些經(jīng)濟學家認為，大型巡演推高了消費者價格指數(shù)

[Paragraph 1]

THE SWORN enemies of Europe’s central bankers include Vladimir Putin, covid-19 and, apparently, Beyoncé.

歐洲各國央行行長的宿敵有普京、新冠，顯然還有碧昂絲。

All three have recently been blamed for hot inflation, but the American singer seems an unlikely macroeconomic force.

最近，這三者被認為是通貨膨脹的罪魁禍首，然而這位美國歌手似乎不太可能是影響宏觀經(jīng)濟的主要力量。

Hotel prices surged in Sweden when 46,000 fans flocked to the capital, Stockholm, for the pop star’s tour in May.

5 月份，4.6萬名歌迷涌入瑞典首都斯德哥爾摩參加這位巨星的巡回演唱會，導致瑞典的酒店價格飆升。

The country’s consumer-price index hit 9.7% that month, higher than expected.

當月瑞典的消費者價格指數(shù)達到9.7%，高于預期。

“Beyoncé is responsible,” declared one local economist, as though he had caught her red-handed.

當?shù)匾晃唤?jīng)濟學家稱："碧昂絲要負責"，仿佛他當著她的面說的一樣。

Do superstar tours really spur inflation?

巨星巡演真的會加劇激通貨膨脹嗎？

[Paragraph 2]
In most cases, probably not.
答案是，在大多數(shù)情況下不會加劇通貨膨脹。

Inflation is calculated by comparing the prices of a basket of goods, rather than measuring sudden price rises in one sector, such as hotels.
通貨膨脹是通過比較一籃子商品的價格來計算的，而不是衡量一個行業(yè)（如酒店業(yè)）價格的突然上漲。

Britain’s consumer-price index, for example, includes almost 750 goods and services. Concerts, theatre and cinema have a weight of less than 0.8% in the basket.
例如，英國的消費者價格指數(shù)包括近 750 種商品和服務。音樂會、劇院和電影院在籃子中的權重不到0.8%。

Countrywide inflation therefore rarely jumps as a result of a single event, unless it is on an enormous scale.
因此，全國范圍內(nèi)的通貨膨脹很少會因單一事件而飆升，除非事件規(guī)模巨大。

Fans of Taylor Swift, another pop giant, are projected to spend around $600m on tickets for her current tour of America—but the country’s consumers spent almost $7trn over an equivalent period last year. Tours are big business, but not that big.
另一位巨星泰勒·斯威夫特的歌迷粉絲預計將花費約 6 億美元購買她本次在美國巡演的門票--但去年同期美國歌迷的消費額接近7萬億美元。巡回演唱會確實是一筆大生意，但規(guī)模并沒有那么大。

[Paragraph3]
Nor should price rises in entertainment contaminate other goods or services and make them more expensive.
娛樂價格上漲應該不會影響其他商品或服務的價格上漲。

Pricier hotels may even be offset by falling costs elsewhere.
酒店價格的上漲可能會被其他方面價格的下降所抵消。

To afford eye-wateringly expensive tickets (up to $899 for Ms Swift’s American tour), some fans will skimp on other treats, bringing down demand—and in theory prices—for those goods for a short time.
為了買得起貴得離譜的門票（霉霉在美國巡演的門票高達 899 美元），一些歌迷會削減其他消費的開支，這在短時間內(nèi)降低了對這些商品的需求，理論上也降低了這些商品的價格。

[Paragraph 4]
For small countries, things may be different. They could see a small, temporary bump in inflation as a result of a huge tour, reckons Tony Yates, an economist formerly at the Bank of England.
對于小國家來說，情況可能有所不同。前英格蘭銀行的經(jīng)濟學家托尼·耶茨認為，一次大型巡演過后，小國家會出現(xiàn)通貨膨脹的短暫小高峰。

In Singapore, a city state of around 5.6m people, Ms Swift is putting on six shows—her only dates in South-East Asia.
新加坡是一個擁有約 560 萬人口的城邦國家，霉霉將在此地舉辦6場演出——這是她在東南亞唯一的演出計劃。

In theory around 6% of the population could attend. (The country’s education minister recently refused to grant children an ad hoc school holiday for the tour, in case it “fuelled further inflation”.)
理論上大約有 6% 的人口可以參加。（為了防止“進一步加劇通貨膨脹”，新加坡教育部長最近拒絕給孩子們安排臨時放假。）

In reality, thousands of Swifties are flying in from across the region, bringing a jolt of new demand and cash.
事實上，成千上萬的霉霉歌迷正從整個地區(qū)飛來，帶來了新的需求和現(xiàn)金的沖擊。

That could throttle the supply of hotels, pushing up prices enough to cause a small bump in inflation.
這可能會抑制酒店的供應，推高價格，從而導致通脹小幅上升。

Locals may dip into savings, too, spending money intended for the future. That could also push up prices.
當?shù)鼐用褚部赡軇佑脙π?，花掉本打算用于未來的資金。這也可能會推高物價。

[Paragraph 5]
Even then, any effect would be short lived.
即便如此，任何影響都是暫時的。

When die-hard fans depart, prices will fall; hotels cannot charge Swiftian rates year-round.
死忠粉離開后，價格就會下跌；酒店不可能全年都收取霉霉演出時的費用。

The inflation rate may look correspondingly lower the following month.
在接下來的一個月里，通貨膨脹率可能會相應降低。

This means tours are probably not something central bankers should bother responding to, says Mr Yates.
耶茨表示，這意味著巨星巡演可能不是央行應該擔憂的事情。

[Paragraph 6]
The price of seeing big acts perform has always been high.
觀看大型演出的價格一直居高不下。

Jenny Lind, a soprano who toured America in the 1850s, flogged tickets at $6 a pop. Adjusting for inflation, that is around $230 today.
1850 年代，女高音珍妮·林德在美國巡演的的門票價格為每張 6 美元。考慮到通貨膨脹因素，相當于今天230美元的票價。

The average cost to see Ms Swift is $254. But today acts visit fewer small venues and play to bigger crowds.
霉霉巡演平均票價為254美元。但是現(xiàn)在小型場館演出越來越少，大型演出越來越多。

One reason is the competition to stage bigger and better shows.
原因之一就是看誰的演出規(guī)模更大，誰的演出質(zhì)量更好。

Perhaps that is why Ms Swift has opted to perform her only South-East Asia dates in Singapore.
或許這就是霉霉選擇在新加坡舉行她唯一的東南亞場次的原因。

Carting sets around is riskier and more expensive than playing multiple times at the same venue, if the demand is there.
在有需求的情況下，與在同一地點多次演出相比，四處巡回演出風險更大、成本更高。

Coldplay and Harry Styles, two other big pop acts, are taking a similar approach.
“酷玩樂隊”和“哈里·斯泰爾斯”這兩大流行音樂團隊也采取了類似的做法。

The economics of touring may be changing—but that need not worry most central bankers.
巡演對經(jīng)濟的影響可能正在發(fā)生變化，但這不必讓大多數(shù)央行行長擔心。

（恭喜讀完，本篇英語詞匯量632左右）
原文出自：2023年7月29日《The Economist》The Economist explains版塊

精讀筆記來源于：自由英語之路

本文翻譯整理: Irene本文編輯校對: Irene
僅供個人英語學習交流使用。

【補充資料】（來自于網(wǎng)絡）

珍妮·林德（Jenny Lind）是19世紀著名的瑞典女高音歌唱家，被譽為“瑞典夜鶯”。她于1820年出生在瑞典，從小就展現(xiàn)出了音樂天賦。在她的母親的鼓勵下，她開始接受音樂訓練，并迅速展現(xiàn)出了出色的歌唱天賦。她的聲音甜美、婉轉動人，她的演唱風格充滿了情感和表現(xiàn)力。她的音樂才華被廣泛贊譽，很快就在瑞典和其他歐洲國家贏得了聲譽。然而，林德真正的國際聲譽是在19世紀50年代在美國巡回演出期間獲得的。她的演唱會引起了轟動，吸引了大量觀眾。她的演唱會門票價格高昂，但依然受到了巨大的歡迎。人們紛紛涌向演唱會場地，希望親眼目睹這位傳奇女高音的風采。

【重點句子】（3個）
Inflation is calculated by comparing the prices of a basket of goods, rather than measuring sudden price rises in one sector, such as hotels.
通貨膨脹是通過比較一籃子商品的價格來計算的，而不是衡量一個行業(yè)（如酒店業(yè)）價格的突然上漲。

Pricier hotels may even be offset by falling costs elsewhere.
酒店價格的上漲可能會被其他方面價格的下降所抵消。

Locals may dip into savings, too, spending money intended for the future. That could also push up prices.
當?shù)鼐用褚部赡軇佑脙π?，花掉本打算用于未來的資金。這也可能會推高物價。