正文翻譯

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：大衛(wèi)王 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處


A nationalliving wage is on the table. Now let’s talk about a global living wage

全國基本生活工資公開?，F(xiàn)在來討論全球基本生活工資

Australia’s HarvesterJudgement of 1907 defined a living wage as ‘fair and reasonable’ paymentsufficient for an unskilled worker to support a family in reasonable comfort.

澳大利亞1907年的《收獲者意見》將基本生活工資定義為“公平合理”的薪酬，可以讓一名非技術(shù)工人在合理舒適的條件下養(yǎng)家糊口。

Theidea of the living wage is back on the political agenda. In the United Statesthe Democrats are proposing to double the federal minimum wage. In Australiathe federal Labor Party has promised to deliver a living wage.

基本生活工資的概念又回到了行政議程上。在美國，民主黨提議將最低工資提高一倍。在澳大利亞，聯(lián)邦工黨承諾保障國民基本生活工資。

“A living wage should make sure people earn enough tomake ends meet, and be informed by what it costs to live in Australia today –to pay for housing, for food, for utilities, to pay for a basic phone and dataplan,” Opposition leader Bill Shorten said this week.

反對(duì)黨領(lǐng)袖Bill Shorten本周表示:“應(yīng)該了解現(xiàn)在澳大利亞生活的成本——衣、食、住、用、行的費(fèi)用，以便保障人們的收入可以維持生計(jì)?！?br/>
Theprinciple of the living wage is the subject of my book published in January. Towrite the book I spent five years researching working conditions in countriesincluding Australia, Bulgaria, Cambodia, India and Thailand.

基本生活工資的原則是我一月份出版的書的主題。為了寫這本書，我花五年時(shí)間研究了澳大利亞、保加利亞、柬埔寨、印度和泰國等國家的工作條件。

Twelveyears later the principle was enshrined in international labour law, when theInternational Labour Organisation was established in 1919. It defined a livingwage as one “adequate to maintain a reasonable standard of life as this isunderstood in their time and country”.

12年后，當(dāng)1919年國際勞工組織成立時(shí)，這一原則被載入了《國際勞工法》。它將基本生活工資定義為“符合國家時(shí)代標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可以維持合理的基本生活水平”。

Acentury on, Australia’s industrial relations system has long abandoned thecentral premise of the living wage. Around the world being paid enough to liveon remains elusive. We are all intimately connected to many of these workers.They have assembled the phones we handle. They have sewn our clothes.

一個(gè)世紀(jì)過去了，澳大利亞的勞資關(guān)系體系已脫離了基本生活工資的核心前提。在世界各地，要想獲得足夠的收入來維持生計(jì)仍然是一件難以實(shí)現(xiàn)的事情。工人們組裝了我們的電話，工人們縫制了我們的衣服。我們的生活和這些工人都有著密切的聯(lián)系。

Bangladeshi garmentworker Marium lost her left arm when an eight-storey building in Dhakacollapsed in April 2012. A reported 1,134 workers died in the tragedy.

2012年4月，孟加拉國一名服裝工人Marium在達(dá)卡一棟8層建筑倒塌時(shí)失去了她的左臂。據(jù)報(bào)道，當(dāng)時(shí)有1134名工人死于這場(chǎng)悲劇。

Womenin Bangladesh who make clothes for brands such as Big W, Kmart, Target andCotton On earn as little as 51 cents an hour, according to an Oxfam reportpublished last month.

樂施會(huì)上月發(fā)布的一份報(bào)告顯示，孟加拉國為Big W、Kmart、Target和Cotton等品牌制作服裝的女性每小時(shí)的工資僅為51美分。

Thereport is based on interview with 470 garment workers in Bangladesh andVietnam. Three-quarters of the Vietnam workers and all of the Bangladeshiworkers earned less than a living wage (as calculated by the Global Living WageCoalition).

根據(jù)對(duì)孟加拉國和越南470名服裝工人的采訪得出的報(bào)告顯示四分之三的越南工人和所有孟加拉國工人的收入低于基本生活工資（由全球生活工資聯(lián)盟計(jì)算）。

Fear of capital flight

害怕資本外逃

Itis very hard for workers to mobilise for higher wages in many countries aroundthe world. In January 5,000 garment workers in Bangladesh were sacked after going on strike for higher wages.During protests, police shot dead one worker. More than 50 others were injured.Striking garment workers in Cambodia have also been shot dead by police duringprotests.

世界上很多國家的工人很難爭(zhēng)取到更高的工資。今年1月，孟加拉國5000名服裝工人因要求加薪舉行罷工而被解雇。在抗議期間，警方擊斃了一名工人。另有50多人受傷。柬埔寨罷工的服裝工人也在抗議活動(dòng)中被警察擊斃。

Cambodian garmentworkers assist a woman injured during a protest in Phnom Penh on January 3,2014.

2014年1月3日，柬埔寨服裝工人在金邊幫助一名在抗議活動(dòng)中受傷的婦女。

Especiallyin price-sensitive industries, globalisation exerts strong pressure ongovernments to keep minimum wages low, lest any increase lead to “capitalflight”. This competition pits countries in a race to the bottom.

特別是對(duì)價(jià)格敏感的行業(yè)，全球化給政府施加了巨大的壓力，要求政府將最低工資維持在較低水平，以免任何加薪導(dǎo)致“資本外逃”。這種狀況使各國陷入了不良競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。

Shouldlabour costs go up in Bangladesh, for example, its government fears garmentbrands moving production to, say, Ethiopia. It’s a legitimate fear; in my 15years of research I’ve seen whole garment factories dismantled and truckedacross borders to countries where the labour is cheaper.

例如，如果孟加拉國的勞動(dòng)力成本上升，該國政府擔(dān)心服裝品牌將生產(chǎn)遷往埃塞俄比亞等國。這是一種合乎情理的恐懼;在我15年的研究中，我見過企業(yè)拆除整個(gè)服裝廠，然后用卡車跨境運(yùn)往勞動(dòng)力更便宜的國家。

Cooperation is the answer

合作才是解決辦法

Theobvious solution would be for countries to cooperate and raise minimum wagescollectively and incrementally (at an agreed percentage every year). Thisapproach would help overcome “first mover risk”. Business would have lessincentive to look for cheaper labour elsewhere.

顯而易見的解決辦法是各國進(jìn)行合作，共同逐步提高最低工資（每年按商定的百分比）。這種方法將有助于克服“先行者風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”。企業(yè)在其他地方尋找更廉價(jià)勞動(dòng)力的動(dòng)力會(huì)減少。

Emulating trade law

模仿貿(mào)易法

However,there is one area of international law that comes close to what we usuallythink of as law: international trade and investment law.

然而，有一個(gè)國際法領(lǐng)域接近法律：國際貿(mào)易和投資法。

Inaddressing goals like reducing tariffs, countries faced similar coordinationproblems. Beginning with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which cameinto effect in 1948, half a dozen major multilateral trade deals werenegotiated before the agreement in 1994 to establish the World TradeOrganisation.

從1948年生效的《關(guān)稅和貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》開始，在解決降低關(guān)稅等目標(biāo)時(shí)，各國面臨著類似的協(xié)調(diào)問題。在1994年建立世界貿(mào)易組織的協(xié)議之前，六項(xiàng)重要的多邊貿(mào)易協(xié)定都是經(jīng)過談判達(dá)成的。

TheWTO has since adjudicated hundreds of disputes in which one nation has accusedanother of failing to meet its WTO commitments. Investors can also take statesto tribunals to seek compensation for unfair behaviour. States take thesetribunals very seriously.

此后，世貿(mào)組織對(duì)數(shù)百起爭(zhēng)端進(jìn)行了裁決。在這些爭(zhēng)端中，一個(gè)國家指責(zé)另一個(gè)國家未能履行其對(duì)世貿(mào)組織的承諾。投資者還可以將政府告上法庭，要求對(duì)不公平行為進(jìn)行賠償。各國都非常重視這些法庭。

Whynot emulate this architecture of international trade law for living wages?

為什么不模仿這種國際貿(mào)易法的體系結(jié)構(gòu)來提高基本生活工資呢？

Insteadof having separate national conversations about living wages, now is a goodtime to start the conversation at a global scale.

現(xiàn)在是在全球范圍內(nèi)展開討論的好時(shí)機(jī)，而不是就基本生活工資進(jìn)行單獨(dú)的全國性對(duì)話。

評(píng)論翻譯

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.com 翻譯：大衛(wèi)王 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處


Graeme Bennett
ThoseCambodian textile workers taking their government to court would be putting theirlives in jeopardy.
TheWest can’t fix itself, let alone impose solutions on the developing world. Unless you are proposing force be usedagainst recalcitrant governments it would seem we are just virtue signalling

那些柬埔寨紡織工人將他們的政府告上法庭將危及他們的生命。
西方國家無法獨(dú)自解決問題，更不用說將解決方案強(qiáng)加給發(fā)展中國家了。除非你提議對(duì)頑固不化的政府使用武力，否則我們只是宣揚(yáng)美德而已。

Kaplan Barla
No,We are suffering from cognitive dissonance.
Weare living in a resource rich continent with only 25 million people, and herewe are talking about:
“A living wage should make sure people earn enough to make ends meet,and be informed by what it costs to live in Australia today – to pay forhousing, for food, for utilities, to pay for a basic phone and data plan,”
strugglingto make ends meet ..hahaaa … I’m going insane :)

不, 我們的認(rèn)知是錯(cuò)誤的。
我們生活在只有2500萬人口的資源豐富的大陸上，這里我們討論的是：
“應(yīng)該了解現(xiàn)在澳大利亞生活的成本——衣、食、住、用、行的費(fèi)用，以便保障人們的收入可以維持生計(jì)?！?br/>努力維持生計(jì)。哈哈哈…我要瘋了:)

Kaplan Barla
…or as Norway does.
Australiais famous for its commodity wealth. You name it, Australia more often than nothas it in abundance. Australia recently overtook Qatar to become the world’slargest exporter of gas (LNG). And yet, we pay so much more than our customersdo in Asia. Australian gas is being sold for less to overseas customers than tolocal customers despite the costs of liquefaction and shipping.
Thisis absurd!
So,
Theproblem is NOT about HOW much money we should have in our pockets to pay forbasic needs.
Theproblem is about WHO owns and controls resources and sets the price for basicneeds.
(ofcourse you know all this but I keep saying this for the sake of others.)

…或者像挪威那樣。
澳大利亞以豐富的商品資源而聞名。你可以說，澳大利亞擁有豐富的資源。澳大利亞最近取代卡塔爾成為世界上最大的天然氣出口國。然而，我們支付天然氣的費(fèi)用比我們?cè)趤喼薜目蛻舾叩枚唷１M管液化和運(yùn)輸成本高昂，但澳大利亞天然氣的海外銷售價(jià)格仍低于本地客戶。
這太荒謬了!
因此,
問題不在于我們口袋里應(yīng)該有多少錢來支付基本需求。
問題在于世衛(wèi)組織擁有和控制資源并為基本需求設(shè)定價(jià)格。
(當(dāng)然你知道這一切，但我一直是為了別人才這么說的。)

Mark Osborne
Wedo own the resources. The states (Crownor us) own them. They lease tenements toorganisations with the skills, knowledge and investment power to monitise whatare effectively rocks. The states earnroyalties on the profits as a result.
Ifyou believe this is a simple process, then go find a rock and sell it.
I’mnot saying it is perfect but your statements are factually incorrect.

我們擁有資源。國家(王權(quán)或我們)擁有它們。它們將不動(dòng)產(chǎn)租給那些擁有技能知識(shí)和投資能力的機(jī)構(gòu)，這些機(jī)構(gòu)能夠利用巖石賺錢。因此，各州從這些利潤(rùn)中收取特許權(quán)使用費(fèi)。
如果你覺得這是一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單的過程，那就去找一塊巖石然后把它賣掉試試。
我不是說它是完美的，但你的說法事實(shí)上是不正確的。

Kaplan Barla
Whichstatements?

哪種說法？

Kaplan Barla回復(fù)Mark Osborne
You won’t answer, Okay. Then I will answer. Thestatement you are referring to is this one: The problem is about WHO owns andcontrols resources and sets the price for basic needs.
Confrontedwith a phrase I used in a non-literal sense for rhetorical effect, Mark Osbornesought safety in semantics.
Ofcourse he’s right.
I’m“factually incorrect”.
I’mfactually incorrect, too, when I say “we sold public utilities to privatesector”. In fact, we did not sell them. We leased them to private companies fora certain number of years.
Weleased our utilities to private companies because we wanted to get shafted somuch.
Duckingsemantics! – My butt hurts.

你不會(huì)回答的，好吧。我來回答。您所指的說法是這樣的：?jiǎn)栴}在于世衛(wèi)組織擁有和控制資源并為基本需求設(shè)定價(jià)格。
對(duì)于我使用一個(gè)非字面意義的修辭短語，Mark Osborne要求在語義上準(zhǔn)確無誤。
他當(dāng)然是對(duì)的。
我“其實(shí)不正確”。
當(dāng)我說“我們把公共事業(yè)賣給私營部門”時(shí)，我也是不正確的。事實(shí)上，我們沒有出售它們。我們只是將它們租給私營公司一定年限。我們想得到更多的好處所以把公用設(shè)施租給私營公司。
回避語義學(xué)！——肉疼。

Inmentioning this, Shorten undermines his own argument. Why not simply addressthe mechanisms that have made housing, food, utilities and basic phone and dataplans so expensive?

shorten提到的這一觀點(diǎn)自相矛盾。為什么不直接解決造成衣、食、住、用、行費(fèi)用高的制度呢？

Tim Arden
umbecause its due to failures of government policy. This way Shorten makes itsomeone else’s problem to deal the with symptom rather than as a politiciantaking responsibility for failure of government policies, the cause, and takingresponsibility for fixing policy failures.

嗯，因?yàn)檫@是政府政策失敗造成的。這種方式縮短了處理問題的時(shí)間，而不是作為一個(gè)政治家對(duì)政府政策的失敗、原因和修復(fù)政策失敗承擔(dān)責(zé)任。

Kaplan Barla
Insteadof addressing, why not look at other countries where they perfected themechanism – Nordic Model?
Arewe stupid in Australia?

與其解決這個(gè)問題，不如看看其他制度完善的國家——北歐模式?
在澳大利亞的我們是傻瓜嗎？

Noel Bugeia
Forsome reason a series of posts were moderated out.
Someonesaid the Nordic model was based on oil revenues and when they dried up theNordic model would go the way of the dodo.
Thewhole of Scandanavia, not just Norway do the welfare state right.
Mycomment was that while this Might be true for Norway and Denmark, Sweden andFinland have no oil at all. How can the last two be explained sans Oil?
(Can’tfir the life of me understand why these comments (and not just mine) wereouted. Relevant and a legitimatedebating point.)

由于某種原因，一些帖子被刪減了。
有人說北歐模式是建立在石油收入的基礎(chǔ)上的，當(dāng)石油枯竭時(shí)，北歐模式將走上絕路。
不僅僅是挪威，整個(gè)斯堪達(dá)納維亞半島的福利國家都做得很好。
我想說的是，盡管挪威和丹麥可能是這樣，但瑞典和芬蘭根本沒有石油。沒有石油，如何解釋后兩者是建立在石油收入的基礎(chǔ)上的呢?

Kaplan Barla回復(fù)Noel Bugeia
Ithappens to everyone. Bite the bullet, as I sometimes do in this blog.

每個(gè)人都有這種情況。就像我在博客里經(jīng)常做的那樣，咬緊牙關(guān)面對(duì)困難。

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Matthew WilliamTomczyk
Ithink that is a great point. What do youhave in mind in terms of addressing increases in food, housing, utilities andbasic phone and data plans?

我認(rèn)為這是一個(gè)很好的觀點(diǎn)。在解決衣、食、住、用、行費(fèi)用的增長(zhǎng)方面，您有什么建議？

Matthew William Tomczyk
“Youappear to be attacking the only ones at least trying to resolve very real wageissues.”

“你似乎是在攻擊那些試圖解決工資問題的人?！?br/>
Shortenhimself is implying that the issue isn’t wages, but the fact that wages areabsorbed by a handful of consumer goods. Shorten is turning this around, byclaiming it’s employers who aren’t paying enough, when in reality Australiansare some of the highest earners in the world.
IfShorten said that he would begin dismantling every policy that causes highproperty prices I’d be all for it.

Shorten的意思是，問題不在于工資，而在于工資被少數(shù)消費(fèi)品所控制。Shorten扭轉(zhuǎn)了這一局面，他聲稱雇主支付的工資不夠，而實(shí)際上澳大利亞人是世界上收入最高的人群之一。
如果Shorten說他將要廢除所有導(dǎo)致高房?jī)r(jià)的政策，我會(huì)全力支持。

Tony Dickson回復(fù)Matthew WilliamTomczyk
Actually,I suggest a significant aspect of inflated housing prices is consequent to theHowards Govt’s idiotic “reforms” to Keating’s original CGT, which included the50% discount. However, it is arguable that of more significance was doing awaywith indexation of capital gains.The result of this was to make inflationtaxable, rather than real increases in asset prices. This strongly discouragedlong term investment in housing stock in favour of quick turnover speculation.
Thereare so many ways in which neo-liberal ideologues demonstrate a lack ofunderstanding of economics.
Iagree that negative gearing is another significant factor. However, effectivelylegislating a cogent distinction between legitimate business financing costsand speculative borrowing is not easily achieved without risking collateraldamage.

事實(shí)上，我認(rèn)為房?jī)r(jià)上漲的一個(gè)重要原因是由于霍華德政府愚蠢的“改革”保羅·基延（澳大利亞總理）原先所執(zhí)行的資本收益稅，其中包括50%的折扣。然而，更重要的是取消資本收益指數(shù)化，這是有爭(zhēng)議的。導(dǎo)致對(duì)通貨膨脹征稅，而不是對(duì)資產(chǎn)價(jià)格的實(shí)際上漲征稅。這嚴(yán)重阻礙了對(duì)房地產(chǎn)股票的長(zhǎng)期投資，而更傾向于投機(jī)快速的成交量。
新自由主義理論家在很多方面都表現(xiàn)出對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)缺乏理解。
我同意負(fù)扣稅是另一個(gè)重要因素。然而，要立法區(qū)分合法的企業(yè)融資成本和投機(jī)性借款之間的切實(shí)差別，不造成附帶損害的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)是不容易實(shí)現(xiàn)的。

Kaplan Barla
“A living wage should make sure people earn enough to make ends meet,and be informed by what it costs to live in Australia today – to pay forhousing, for food, for utilities, to pay for a basic phone and data plan,”

“應(yīng)該了解現(xiàn)在澳大利亞生活的成本——衣、食、住、用、行的費(fèi)用，以便保障人們的收入可以維持生計(jì)?！?br/>
Amazing!How is this possible?
Gas:privatized
Water:privatized
Electricity:privatized
Telecommunication:privatised
Thesecorporations are gonna feel sorry for us and reduce prices?

驚人！這怎么可能？
氣體：私有化
水：私有化
電力：私有化
電信：私有化
這些公司會(huì)為我們感到抱歉并降低價(jià)格嗎？

Glenda Bunning
OurGovernment has deliberately allowed colonisation of Australia by multinationalcorporations and home grown service providers and contractors. The PublicService has been rebuilt as a far right deliverer of ideology.
Privateersstrip assets, harvest as much as possible and then leave the third world theycreat behind taking off with profits.
Mumblingabout living wages and believing we have any power left is a waste of time now.
Hitlerused privatisation as a tool in his conquest of Germany and control of workers.At least he had a plan and supported favourites at home. Unlike our Politicalsalespersons who seem unaware of what they have done or the consequences. Thoseconsequences will not be easily undone now though after contracts and dealshave been signed locking winner/loser positions.

我國政府故意允許多國公司和本國的服務(wù)供應(yīng)商和承包商在對(duì)澳大利亞進(jìn)行殖民統(tǒng)治。公共服務(wù)被重建為意識(shí)形態(tài)的極右翼支持者。
私掠者盡可能多地掠奪資產(chǎn)，然后離開他們創(chuàng)造的第三世界，帶著利潤(rùn)起飛。
現(xiàn)在相信我們還有任何權(quán)力，抱怨基本生活工資是在浪費(fèi)時(shí)間。
希特勒利用私有化作為征服德國和控制工人的工具。至少他有一個(gè)計(jì)劃，支持國內(nèi)最受歡迎的人。不像我們的政治推銷員，他們似乎不知道自己做了什么或造成了什么后果。盡管合同和交易簽訂后鎖定了贏家/輸家的位置，但這些后果現(xiàn)在不會(huì)輕易消除。

Enzo Fable回復(fù)Garry Baker
Iwould have thought the main reason for Shorten’s/Labor’s demand for a livingwage instead of a minimum wage was to recognise the very issues you mentionrelated to privatisation. Similarly, Shorten repeatedly calls for a fairerprocess to enable consideration for higher pay packets.
TheFair work Commission is beholden to the parameters the Government of the daysets.
Lookno further than the current government as the greatest obstacle. All data showsthe correlation between the current governments reign and wage growth goingbackwards and not keeping pace with living cost issues you raise.

我認(rèn)為Shorten （反對(duì)黨領(lǐng)袖）/勞工組織要求領(lǐng)基本生活工資而不是最低工資的主要原因是你提到的與私有化有關(guān)的問題。Shorten反復(fù)呼吁采用更公平的流程來提高工資待遇。
公平交易委員會(huì)受政府參數(shù)所約束。
目前最大的障礙是政府。所有的數(shù)據(jù)都顯示當(dāng)前政府統(tǒng)治與工資增長(zhǎng)相關(guān)聯(lián)，而工資增長(zhǎng)與你提出的生活成本問題不一致。

Enzo Fable
“Proletarier aller L?nder, vereinigt euch!”

“全世界無產(chǎn)階級(jí)，團(tuán)結(jié)起來！”

Trev Astle
Wow—nowonder that there is no such thing as a Free Trade deal!

哇，難怪沒有自由貿(mào)易協(xié)議！

John Kampert
Indeed,there are only “Make the corporations rule” deals.

事實(shí)上，只有“制定公司規(guī)則”的交易。

Dean Taylor
Ilove this in principle, but how do you overcome the ‘a(chǎn)gent’s fees’ problem?
Here,‘skilled’ migrants in areas with very common skills pay a significantproportion of their wages to agents to secure them a job, much of which thengoes back to the employer. What’s to stop companies in Bangladesh engagingagent’s to rake back a chunk of the wages for a $10 or $20 per day job?

原則上我很喜歡這一點(diǎn)，但是你如何解決‘代理費(fèi)’的問題呢？
在普通技能地區(qū)，“有技能”的移民將他們工資的大部分支付給中介機(jī)構(gòu)，以確保他們得到一份工作，而這些工資的大部分又回到雇主手中。有什么辦法能阻止孟加拉國的公司雇傭代理商從每天10美元或20美元的工作中拿回一大筆工資呢?

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Dean Taylor
Youraise a very valid point in my mind. Agents fees are indeed a big problem in many countries around theworld. Families go into a lot of debt topay agents to place family members in work.
Itis my understanding that agents thrive in environments of high inequality, whencertain sectors pay a lot more than other sectors. People are willing to payagent fees because of the rewards of working in that sector. However, when minimum wages work to equalisethe pay of low wage workers, agents are less attractive.

我覺得你的觀點(diǎn)很有道理。世界上許多國家的代理費(fèi)確實(shí)是一個(gè)大問題。家庭為了給家庭成員安排工作而欠下大量的債務(wù)。
我的理解是，代理人是在高度不平等的環(huán)境中發(fā)展壯大的，某些行業(yè)的薪酬要比其他行業(yè)高得多。為了能到薪酬高的行業(yè)去工作，人們?cè)敢庵Ц洞碣M(fèi)用。然而，當(dāng)最低工資與低工資工人的工資持平時(shí)，代理人就不那么有吸引力了。

Margaret Quillen
Anexcellent idea whose time has come. The vehicle for creating this transition toa humanised economy, as distinct from a corporatised one, is co-operation.International trades-unionism will be essential as will be the revival ofinternational friendship societies, people’s tours of other countries toexamine and understand living conditions and develop common programs.
Democracywill be the governing principle of this process.
Ifthe ruling classes oppose this then they need to be taught that there is nosafe place to run or hide from the people’s wrath.

好主意，時(shí)機(jī)已到。與企業(yè)化經(jīng)濟(jì)不同，實(shí)現(xiàn)這種向人性化經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)型的途徑是合作。國際貿(mào)易聯(lián)盟將是必不可少的，復(fù)興國際友好協(xié)會(huì)、人們到其他國家考察和了解生活條件和制定共同計(jì)劃的旅行也將是必不可少的。
民主將是這一進(jìn)程的主導(dǎo)原則。
如果統(tǒng)治階級(jí)反對(duì)這樣做，就必須告訴他們，沒有安全的地方可以逃避或躲避人民的憤怒。

Noel Bugeia
Itwould only not work because there are too many shrill voices on the right whowould decry giving free money to “shirkers and lay abouts”. There are enough of them now who wouldprefer there was no social security system.
TheRepublicans in the US would love to dismantle the whole show. And I think thesame thinking applies here, deep down.
Unlessof course, you are a big company and you want tax breaks and direct governmentassistance to establish or grow your business. But no governing regulations ofcourse. That would stifle capitalism and interfere in the market…

這樣子行不通，因?yàn)橛刑嗟挠乙砑怃J的聲音會(huì)譴責(zé)給“逃避者和閑散者”免費(fèi)花錢?，F(xiàn)在有足夠多的人寧愿沒有社會(huì)保障制度。
美國的共和黨人很想徹底毀掉這場(chǎng)秀。我認(rèn)為同樣的想法也適用于這里。
當(dāng)然，除非你是一家大公司，你想要稅收優(yōu)惠和政府直接援助來建立或發(fā)展你的業(yè)務(wù)。而且沒有監(jiān)管規(guī)定。那將干預(yù)市場(chǎng)，扼殺資本主義……

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Matt Arthurs
Thanksfor your comment. Which part is‘childish’, in your view, if you think a living wage for all would be great?

謝謝你的評(píng)論。在你看來，如果你認(rèn)為所有人的基本生活工資都很好，那么哪個(gè)部分是“幼稚的”?

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Mick Shadwick
Thanksfor your comment. Which part wouldn’twork, in your opinion? Is it that thereis unlikely to ever be political will?

謝謝你的評(píng)論。你認(rèn)為哪部分行不通？難道永遠(yuǎn)不可能有政治意愿嗎?

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Kien Choong
Thanks. The proposal depends on countries agreeing toraise the minimum wage, as a starting point. The point is to have coordination around doing so.

謝謝。這一提議取決于各國是否同意將提高最低工資作為起點(diǎn)。關(guān)鍵是要在這方面進(jìn)行協(xié)調(diào)。

Kumudhu Alwis
India’sopposition is proposing a living wage for its billions. Is the writer taken apage from the Indian elections?

印度反對(duì)派提議為其數(shù)十億人提供基本生活工資。作者是否借鑒了印度大選的經(jīng)驗(yàn)?

Shelley Marshall回復(fù)Kumudhu Alwis
Thanksfor your comment. I have indeed takeninspiration from India. A living wage is enshrined in the IndianConstitution. Under law, India’s minimumwage is supposed to be a living wage. The problem is that it has not beenincreased in line with living costs. However, there is very good evidence thatthe Indian minimum wage has made a great deal of difference to workers in termsof lifting them out of poverty.

謝謝你的評(píng)論。我確實(shí)從印度那里得到了靈感。印度憲法規(guī)定了基本生活工資。根據(jù)法律，印度的最低工資應(yīng)該是基本生活工資。問題是它并沒有隨著生活成本的增加而增加。然而，有證據(jù)表明，印度的最低工資在幫助工人脫貧方面對(duì)他們產(chǎn)生了很大的影響。

Enzo Fable
Thefact the concept of a living wage may be adopted is excellent however is onlythe first step. The inevitable political angle always remains that theGovernment of the day defines the rules for the government entity as to theparameters it can apply. There would be little doubt that this is why India’sliving wage has not increased in line with living costs. That likely won’t happenuntil it is again politically expedient.

事實(shí)上，基本生活工資的觀念可能被采用是好的，但這只是第一步。政治觀點(diǎn)始終是政府定義了政府實(shí)體可以應(yīng)用的參數(shù)規(guī)則。這就是為什么印度的基本生活工資沒有與生活成本同步增長(zhǎng)的原因。在它再次成為政治權(quán)宜之計(jì)之前，這可能不會(huì)發(fā)生。

Kumudhu Alwis
“adequate to maintain a reasonable standard of life as this is understoodin their time and country”.
Thequestion is do the farm workers in these countries earn enough to feed theclothes workers?
Wein the West are supremists

“足以維持他們國家和時(shí)代所理解的合理的基本生活水平”。
問題是，這些國家的農(nóng)場(chǎng)工人掙的錢足夠養(yǎng)活制衣工人嗎?
我們西方人是至上主義者。

Graeme Bennett
Iwas about to make that point. InAustralia in 1907 a much larger proportion of the population was living off theland. My paternal grandfather had areally tough existence with his father abandoning the family when mygrandfather was 14. My father tells thestory of being asked in class about the books they had at home. None. A living wage in 1907 would seem to have been either a judicial fantasyor brought into being to benefit unionists.

我正要說明這一點(diǎn)。1907年，澳大利亞大多數(shù)人靠土地為生。我祖父14歲時(shí)，他的父親拋棄了他的家庭，我的祖父過著非常艱難的生活。我父親講述了在課堂上被問到家里有什么書。他的答案是一本也沒有。1907年的基本生活工資要么是司法幻想，要么是為了讓工會(huì)主義者受益而制定的。

Shelley Marshall
Whatis the argument against paying workers a living wage for their work? How would you justify paying someone below aliving wage if they worked hard and full-time?

反對(duì)為工人的工作支付基本生活工資的理由是什么？如果一個(gè)人全職努力工作，卻拿著低于基本生活工資的薪水，你怎么解釋?

David Jenkins
Companyprofits have grown on average by 5.1% p.a over the last ten years, compared to2.6% for wages. At the same time the wages share of national income has fallenwhile the profit share has increased.
Sure,profits are volatile over a year compared to wages, so you have to be cautiousabout data that is relatively short term - but the longer term trend is clear.As Matthias Cormann himself pointed out, the industrial relations laws we havehave been specifically designed to achieve exactly this outcome

在過去的十年里，公司利潤(rùn)平均每年增長(zhǎng)5.1%。工資只增長(zhǎng)2.6%。與此同時(shí)，工資在國民收入中所占的比例有所下降，而利潤(rùn)所占的比例有所增加。
當(dāng)然，與工資相比，一年的利潤(rùn)波動(dòng)較大，因此你必須對(duì)相對(duì)短期的數(shù)據(jù)保持謹(jǐn)慎態(tài)度——但長(zhǎng)期趨勢(shì)是明顯的。正如MatthiasCormann本人所指出的，勞資關(guān)系法則是專門為實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)而制定的。

Brad Elliott
50years is a long period of no real wages growth in the US. Nothing to do withminers there. Everything to do with earlier start of extreme free trade.

在美國，50年是一段沒有實(shí)際工資增長(zhǎng)的漫長(zhǎng)時(shí)期。與那里的礦工無關(guān)。一切都與早期的極端自由貿(mào)易有關(guān)。

Graeme Bennett回復(fù)Brad Elliott
No,not assuming that.
Theanswer is simple. Everyone can become aconsultant, set up a company and join in the feasting.
Slightlymore seriously America continues to attract low skilled emigrants from Southand Central America. They must have aproblem absorbing that flow. Increasingwages would only accelerate the inflow. The instability would become too much. Add to that increased levels of unemployment and the issues that flowfrom that and I can’t imagine a good result.

不，我不這么認(rèn)為。
答案很簡(jiǎn)單。每個(gè)人都可以成為一名顧問，成立一家公司，參加宴會(huì)。
稍微嚴(yán)重一點(diǎn)的是，美國繼續(xù)吸引來自南美和中美洲的低技能移民。他們吸收這種流動(dòng)的移民一定有問題。增加工資只會(huì)加速資金流入。不穩(wěn)定會(huì)變得更大。再加上失業(yè)率的上升和由此產(chǎn)生的問題，我無法想象會(huì)有什么好結(jié)果。