正文翻譯

Why Is America So Rich?

美國為什么這么富有啊？

評(píng)論翻譯

Elvir
Rich ? U.S.A debt is huge

美國富？ 一屁股債。

SchaeFeR X
Elvir gdp. Debt is not wealth. gdp determines a nations wealth. Our gdp Is largest and most influential gdp in on the planet. But it would only be such a way because of the capitalism established all those years ago

gdp，兄，富不富裕，不看債務(wù)，而是，gdp才是一個(gè)國家的決定性財(cái)富。我們的gdp全球第一，gdp影響力全球第一。這是因?yàn)橘Y本主義制度早早就確立了.

Another one
USA military strength will relinquish all debts

放心，美軍會(huì)銷賬所有債。

Alex W S Chan
They also have very bad geography and desserts and also isolated for some countries, Europe have navigation canals

非洲的地理位置非常不好，跟其他一些國家也隔絕，還有沙漠。歐洲有航運(yùn)運(yùn)河。

Sgt. Kilrain
I disagree. Japan has very limited resources and land mass, was bombed to rubble during the second world war and yet today is an economic powerhouse. Why? Free Enterprise, a functioning democracy and an educated populous.

我不同意。日本資源貧乏，國土狹小，二戰(zhàn)后被炸成廢墟，但是，現(xiàn)在它是個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)動(dòng)源。為什么？ 自由企業(yè)制度，民主運(yùn)行良好，人民受教育程度高。

Alex W S Chan
Well actually Japan only kick started out of the rubbles of WW2 because USA was fighting a war in Korea and needed lots of products, thus Japan was revived by selling America large quantity of war stuff. This can be achieved without Free Enterprising, Functioning democracy, it still need an educated populous but countries don't need Free enterprise and Functional democracy to be rich.

實(shí)際上，日本只是在二戰(zhàn)時(shí)被炸成廢墟，過后，因?yàn)槌r戰(zhàn)爭爆發(fā)，美國需要大量的戰(zhàn)略物資，日本靠提供大量的后勤物資而恢復(fù)活力。
這種成就，并不要求自由企業(yè)制度和民主運(yùn)行良好。因此一個(gè)國家要富裕，是需要有受教育的人民，但那兩項(xiàng)不是必需。

Sgt. Kilrain
Alex W S Chan- You honestly believe that state owned and operated factories could have seen the opportunity, then pumped out the products in sufficient quantity and quality to raise Japan out of the ashes? I'm extremely dubious!

你真的相信國有企業(yè)和國管工廠能瞅準(zhǔn)機(jī)會(huì)？ 然后大量制造出足量優(yōu)質(zhì)的產(chǎn)品，把整個(gè)日本從廢墟中拉起來？ 我非常懷疑！

Alex W S Chan
Well the only difference between State owned factories and Private factories is just that one is controlled by the state and the other is not, other than that they don't really have much of a difference

國企和民企之間唯一的區(qū)別是所有者不同。除此之外，沒什么本質(zhì)區(qū)別。

Sgt. Kilrain
Alex W S Chan - I certainly will not pretend to be an expert in economics but didn't communist China only become a major economic player after they gave their Industry a great deal of autonomy?

我不會(huì)假裝自己是個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，但是，中國變成一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)大玩家，難道不是在對(duì)民企放權(quán)之后嗎？

Lucian cahil
america has a lot of money because it has a lot of people. when you compare gdp per capita, many "socialist" countries are almost as rich or even richer.

美國有很多錢，是因?yàn)槊绹娜丝诙唷．?dāng)你比較人均gdp的時(shí)候，很多共產(chǎn)主義國家?guī)缀醺绹粯痈辉Ｉ踔粮辉！?/p>

Simon Khorolskiy
So that makes China the wealthiest country in the world. Besides the fact that they all work in factories making 2 cents per hour

這么說，中國就是世界上最富裕的了。爽癮過后，他們就得全部到廠里去，每小時(shí)掙2分錢。

JoeysWorldTour
Beautiful free market capitalism

美國富裕的原因是健全的資本主義自由市場

nattygsbord
Its a socialist economy. socialism for the rich

美國是shzy經(jīng)濟(jì)，shzy致富。

Sh0cKwavE
nattygsbord then it isn't socialism?

他不是共產(chǎn)主義國家。

Noel Fallstrom
nattygsbord Do you have any evidence or even an anecdote? Or do you just expect people to agree because rich bankers are an easy target?

哪里來的說法？你有證據(jù)嗎？ 還是僅因富人和銀行家易成仇富之的，你就指望別人贊同你？

2. What tools do these rich people have to keep themselves rich and plan the economy? Bankers do reject many loan applications, but they are eager to loan money to someone they think will succeed and become rich. Their biggest tool is the government which they constantly lobby for subsidies and for laws that hurt their competitors more than themselves.

2. 你說說富人用什么工具“計(jì)劃”經(jīng)濟(jì)可以保證自己立于不敗之地？銀行家很多時(shí)候確實(shí)會(huì)拒絕發(fā)放貸款， 那是因?yàn)樗麄兪窍Ｍ刨J給那些有成功希望的人。富人和銀行家最大的工具就是“政府”了， 他們經(jīng)常為獲取補(bǔ)助而游說政府，或游說政府制定有利于自己的法律，從而打擊對(duì)手。

3. The economy consists of millions of individual voluntary transactions that are made every single day by ordinary people. Unless you can implement some form of force (using government), you won't have much control.?

3. 經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)是由普通人每天自動(dòng)進(jìn)行的大量交易構(gòu)成的。除非你能運(yùn)用某種力量（比如政府），否則你根本就無法控制那些經(jīng)濟(jì)活動(dòng)。

Apple didn't get rich from stealing money. Every transaction was voluntary because people wanted an iPod/iPhone. Now that they are rich, they still can't force anyone to buy an iPhone instead of a Samsung, HTC, or an old flip phone. They still need to innovate or eventually go out of business... or ask for government help if they can't keep producing things we want to buy.?

蘋果公司的錢，那可不是靠偷竊來的，他的每個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)交易活動(dòng)，都是自由自愿，沒有半分強(qiáng)迫你去買他的iPod/iPhone。現(xiàn)在蘋果公司錢多了，他們還是無法不讓別人買三星、HTC或老古董翻蓋機(jī)而要買自己公司的iPhone。他們還得不斷創(chuàng)新，不然也會(huì)被踢出市場。 如果他們無法提供我們需要的產(chǎn)品，難道他們還能指望政府來幫他強(qiáng)買強(qiáng)賣？

nattygsbord
The rich can buy up politicians and corrupth the government and rig the system in their own favour. Their group of people owns the commanding hights of the economy, and often they have contrary interests to the low/middle classes, and also the country as a whole. So the private sector intrude upon the governmental and democratical sphere in order to bend rules in their own favour.

富人可以收買政客，腐蝕政府，按自己利益操控政治體系。他們是經(jīng)濟(jì)上層的操控者。然而他們的利益又經(jīng)常跟底層/中產(chǎn)階級(jí)有沖突的。
國家作為一個(gè)整體來運(yùn)行，私人部門侵入政治層面，操控民主領(lǐng)域，就能使社會(huì)規(guī)則偏向自己的利益。

And Apple is an interesting example of a company taking government support and stealing scientific discoveries like GPD, SIRI, and the Internet and use them in their products, and then avoid paying taxes back to America. They are basicly just free riders and doesn't pay their fair share. So Apple don't mind transferring other peoples tax money to themselves for funding their research, but they doesn't contribute back to society in any fair proportion to how much they have gained from the research society have funded for them.

蘋果公司是個(gè)非常好的例子。他騙取政府補(bǔ)助，攫取科學(xué)成果比如互聯(lián)網(wǎng)，GPD,SIRI，用于自己的產(chǎn)品上面，然后又沒有向美國納稅?；旧纤麄兙褪谴畋丬嚥毁I票，沒有上交自己應(yīng)付的那部分。蘋果公司面不改色地把他人的納稅錢用于自己的產(chǎn)品研發(fā)，但是，這個(gè)社會(huì)供給了科技成果，他們只攫取而無回饋。

So it fair to call this another case of socialism for the rich

所以，公平地說，這就是另一種“共產(chǎn)主義致富”。