英国银行行长说，“世界末日”级食品价格对世界贫困人口将是灾难性的
正文翻译
(Local government officials and Ukrainian soldiers inspect a grain warehouse shelled by Russian forces in Novovorontsovka this month.)
（当地政府官员和乌克兰士兵检查本月俄罗斯军队在新沃龙佐夫卡炮击的一个粮仓。）
新闻：
‘Apocalyptic’ food prices will be disastrous for world’s poor, says Bank governor
-Bank of England’s Andrew Bailey blames UK’s highest inflation rate for three decades on Russia-Ukraine war and Covid
银行行长说，“世界末日”级食品价格对世界贫困人口将是灾难性的
——英格兰银行的安德鲁·贝利将英国30年来最高的通胀率归咎于俄乌战争和疫情
-Bank of England’s Andrew Bailey blames UK’s highest inflation rate for three decades on Russia-Ukraine war and Covid
银行行长说，“世界末日”级食品价格对世界贫困人口将是灾难性的
——英格兰银行的安德鲁·贝利将英国30年来最高的通胀率归咎于俄乌战争和疫情
(Local government officials and Ukrainian soldiers inspect a grain warehouse shelled by Russian forces in Novovorontsovka this month.)
（当地政府官员和乌克兰士兵检查本月俄罗斯军队在新沃龙佐夫卡炮击的一个粮仓。）
新闻：
The Bank of England governor has blamed the war in Ukraine for the highest inflation in the UK for three decades and warned that “apocalyptic” food prices caused by Russia’s invasion could have a disastrous impact on the world’s poor.
这位英国央行行长将英国30年来最高的通胀归咎于乌克兰战争，并警告称，俄罗斯入侵造成的“灾难性”食品价格，可能对全球穷人产生灾难性影响。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
这位英国央行行长将英国30年来最高的通胀归咎于乌克兰战争，并警告称，俄罗斯入侵造成的“灾难性”食品价格，可能对全球穷人产生灾难性影响。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Defending Threadneedle Street before an announcement on Wednesday of the sharpest annual increase in four decades, Andrew Bailey told MPs that while he was unhappy about the level of price rises, 80% of the inflation target overshoot was caused by factors outside the Bank’s control.
在周三宣布四十年来最急剧的年度涨价之前，安德鲁·贝利为针线街辩护，他告诉议员们，尽管他对价格上涨的水平感到不满，但80%的通胀目标超出是由银行无法控制的因素造成的。
在周三宣布四十年来最急剧的年度涨价之前，安德鲁·贝利为针线街辩护，他告诉议员们，尽管他对价格上涨的水平感到不满，但80%的通胀目标超出是由银行无法控制的因素造成的。
Bailey said the Bank could not have been expected to predict a war in Ukraine, which he warned would have consequences for the UK and the developing world.
贝利表示，人们不可能指望世行预测出乌克兰的战争，他警告称，乌克兰战争将对英国和发展中国家产生影响。
贝利表示，人们不可能指望世行预测出乌克兰的战争，他警告称，乌克兰战争将对英国和发展中国家产生影响。
Countries such as Egypt and Tunisia rely heavily on exports of Ukraine’s wheat and cooking oil, and the governor said his concerns about food supplies had been heightened after speaking to Kyiv’s finance minister at last month’s IMF meeting in Washington.
埃及和突尼斯等国严重依赖乌克兰的小麦和食用油出口。乌克兰央行行长表示，上月在华盛顿举行的国际货币基金组织会议上与基辅财政部长交谈后，他对粮食供应的担忧加剧了。
埃及和突尼斯等国严重依赖乌克兰的小麦和食用油出口。乌克兰央行行长表示，上月在华盛顿举行的国际货币基金组织会议上与基辅财政部长交谈后，他对粮食供应的担忧加剧了。
“He said he was optimistic about crop planting, but at the moment there was no way of shipping the food out, and it’s getting worse,” Bailey said. “That’s not just a major worry for this country, but a worry for the developing world. I’m sorry for being apocalyptic, but it is a worry.”
贝利说：“他说他对农作物耕种很乐观，但目前没有办法把食物运出去，情况越来越糟。这不仅是这个国家的主要担忧，也是发展中国家的担忧。我很抱歉我提到了世界末日，但这确实令人担忧。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
贝利说：“他说他对农作物耕种很乐观，但目前没有办法把食物运出去，情况越来越糟。这不仅是这个国家的主要担忧，也是发展中国家的担忧。我很抱歉我提到了世界末日，但这确实令人担忧。”
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Amid growing concern about Britain’s cost-of-living crisis, the head of the CBI, Tony Danker, called on the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, to offer immediate help to those struggling to feed themselves at a time of rising food and energy prices. The director-general of the employers’ organisation said there was a “moral imperative” on the government to act.
在人们对英国生活成本危机日益担忧之际，英国工业联合会主席托尼·丹克呼吁财政大臣里希·苏纳克立即向那些在食品和能源价格上涨之际难以养活自己的人提供帮助。该雇主组织的总干事表示，政府采取行动是“道义上的责任”。
在人们对英国生活成本危机日益担忧之际，英国工业联合会主席托尼·丹克呼吁财政大臣里希·苏纳克立即向那些在食品和能源价格上涨之际难以养活自己的人提供帮助。该雇主组织的总干事表示，政府采取行动是“道义上的责任”。
Official figures due out on Wednesday are expected to show the annual inflation rate climbing above 9%, with the Bank of England expecting the figure to climb above 10% when the energy price cap is raised further in October.
定于周三发布的官方数据预计将显示，年通胀率将攀升至9%以上。英格兰银行预计，当10月份能源价格上限进一步上调时，通胀率将攀升至10%以上。
定于周三发布的官方数据预计将显示，年通胀率将攀升至9%以上。英格兰银行预计，当10月份能源价格上限进一步上调时，通胀率将攀升至10%以上。
Asked if the Bank could have prevented inflation from soaring by raising interest rates sooner, Bailey told the Treasury sext committee: “I don’t think we could. I don’t think we could foresee a war in Ukraine.
当被问及银行是否本可以通过提前提高利率来阻止通货膨胀时，贝利告诉财政部特别委员会:“我认为我们做不到。我认为我们无法预见乌克兰会发生战争。
当被问及银行是否本可以通过提前提高利率来阻止通货膨胀时，贝利告诉财政部特别委员会:“我认为我们做不到。我认为我们无法预见乌克兰会发生战争。
“Another factor that we’re dealing with at the moment is a further leg of Covid, which is affecting China. We have seen a series of supply shocks coming one after another, and that’s unprecedented.”
“我们目前正在应对的另一个因素是新冠肺炎的进一步蔓延，它正在影响中国。我们已经看到一系列供应冲击接踵而至，这是前所未有的。”
“我们目前正在应对的另一个因素是新冠肺炎的进一步蔓延，它正在影响中国。我们已经看到一系列供应冲击接踵而至，这是前所未有的。”
The Bank’s nine-strong monetary policy committee has raised interest rates at its last four meetings after it doubled its forecast for the peak in inflation this year from 5% to 10%.
英国央行货币政策委员会的九名成员已经在过去的四次会议上提高了利率，此前他们将今年的通胀峰值预期从5%提高到了10%。
英国央行货币政策委员会的九名成员已经在过去的四次会议上提高了利率，此前他们将今年的通胀峰值预期从5%提高到了10%。
“I don’t feel at all happy and it’s a bad situation to be in,” the governor said after MPs asked him to explain why the Bank had waited until December before acting.
“我一点也不高兴，现在的情况很糟糕，”这位行长表示。此前，议员们要求他解释为何英国央行一直等到12月才采取行动。
“我一点也不高兴，现在的情况很糟糕，”这位行长表示。此前，议员们要求他解释为何英国央行一直等到12月才采取行动。
In the wake of reports at the weekend that unnamed cabinet ministers had questioned whether the Bank should remain independent, Bailey said: “This is the biggest test of the monetary policy frxwork in 25 years. There is no question about that.”
上周末有报道称，不愿透露姓名的内阁大臣们质疑英国央行是否应该保持独立性。随后，贝利表示：“这是25年来对货币政策框架的最大考验。这是毫无疑问的。”
上周末有报道称，不愿透露姓名的内阁大臣们质疑英国央行是否应该保持独立性。随后，贝利表示：“这是25年来对货币政策框架的最大考验。这是毫无疑问的。”
The governor reiterated the call for pay restraint that he made in February, urging the best-paid to set an example to workers earning less.
这位行长重申了他在2月份提出的限制工资上涨的呼吁，敦促收入最高的工人为收入较低的工人树立榜样。
这位行长重申了他在2月份提出的限制工资上涨的呼吁，敦促收入最高的工人为收入较低的工人树立榜样。
“I do think people, particularly people who are on higher earnings, should think and reflect on asking for high wage increases,” he said. “It’s a societal question. But I am not preaching about this. It’s not for me to go around telling people what to do.
他说：“我确实认为人们，特别是那些收入较高的人，应该对提高工资的诉求进行思考和反思。这是一个社会问题。但我不是在宣扬这个。我没资格到处告诉别人该怎么做。
他说：“我确实认为人们，特别是那些收入较高的人，应该对提高工资的诉求进行思考和反思。这是一个社会问题。但我不是在宣扬这个。我没资格到处告诉别人该怎么做。
“In that sense, I know I may have been interpreted as doing that, but I wasn’t. What I was saying is that maybe people should reflect on it, particularly people in that situation.”
“从这个意义上说，我知道我可能会被理解为这样做，但我没有。我想说的是，也许人们应该反思一下，尤其是处于那种情况下的人。”
“从这个意义上说，我知道我可能会被理解为这样做，但我没有。我想说的是，也许人们应该反思一下，尤其是处于那种情况下的人。”
Paul Nowak, deputy general secretary of the Trades unx Congress, said: “It is unbelievable that the Bank of England has repeated its calls for workers to take a wage hit – while saying virtually nothing about soaring profits at the likes of BP and Shell. The last thing working people need right now – in the middle of the worst living standards crisis in generations – is to have their wages held down.”
英国工会大会副秘书长保罗·诺瓦克表示：“令人难以置信的是，英国央行一再呼吁工人削减工资，却几乎没有提到英国石油和壳牌等公司利润飙升的问题。在几代人以来最糟糕的生活水平危机中，员工们现在最不需要的就是工资被压低。”
英国工会大会副秘书长保罗·诺瓦克表示：“令人难以置信的是，英国央行一再呼吁工人削减工资，却几乎没有提到英国石油和壳牌等公司利润飙升的问题。在几代人以来最糟糕的生活水平危机中，员工们现在最不需要的就是工资被压低。”
Asked about the future dangers to the cost of living, Bailey said there could be prolonged supply-chain bottlenecks as a result of disruption in China or higher energy prices if Russia decided to cut off gas supplies.
在被问及未来生活成本面临的危险时，贝利表示，中国的供应中断可能会导致供应链瓶颈延长，如果俄罗斯决定切断天然气供应，能源价格可能会上涨。
在被问及未来生活成本面临的危险时，贝利表示，中国的供应中断可能会导致供应链瓶颈延长，如果俄罗斯决定切断天然气供应，能源价格可能会上涨。
However, he said the Bank could not have been expected to foresee recent events. “I do see comments based on hindsight, but we have to take [monetary policy] decisions based on the facts and evidence at the time.”
不过，他表示，不可能指望英国央行预测近期的事件。“我确实看到了基于事后诸葛亮的评论，但我们必须根据当时的事实和证据做出（货币政策）决定。”
不过，他表示，不可能指望英国央行预测近期的事件。“我确实看到了基于事后诸葛亮的评论，但我们必须根据当时的事实和证据做出（货币政策）决定。”
His comments followed an announcement by Great Britain’s energy regulator, Ofgem, that it was planning to make changes to its price cap four times a year, as opposed to twice at present.
在此之前，英国能源监管机构天然气与电力市场办公室宣布，计划每年对价格上限进行四次调整，而不是目前的两次。
在此之前，英国能源监管机构天然气与电力市场办公室宣布，计划每年对价格上限进行四次调整，而不是目前的两次。
The regulator on Monday published a consultation on proposals to introduce new reviews of the price cap in January and July, adding to existing changes in April and October, in an attempt to respond more quickly to volatile markets.
监管机构周一发布了一份征求意见稿，建议在今年1月和7月对限价上限进行新的审查，此前已在4月和10月对限价上限进行了修改，以更快地应对市场波动。
监管机构周一发布了一份征求意见稿，建议在今年1月和7月对限价上限进行新的审查，此前已在4月和10月对限价上限进行了修改，以更快地应对市场波动。
Meanwhile, the RAC revealed that the average price of diesel at forecourts had hit a record of just over £1.80 a litre, with experts warning of further rises if EU plans to ban Russian oil imports go ahead.
与此同时，英国皇家汽车俱乐部透露，前院柴油的平均价格达到了每升略高于1.8英镑的创纪录水平，专家警告称，如果欧盟禁止进口俄罗斯石油的计划继续实施，柴油价格还将进一步上涨。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
与此同时，英国皇家汽车俱乐部透露，前院柴油的平均价格达到了每升略高于1.8英镑的创纪录水平，专家警告称，如果欧盟禁止进口俄罗斯石油的计划继续实施，柴油价格还将进一步上涨。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
评论翻译
Adult_Reasoning
I am genuinely bothered by how globalized we have become-- to the point where there are supposedly, and I use that word loosely, negative downstream impacts on one end of the world stemming from some nonsense that is occurring on the other side of it.
Imagine building up and putting systems in place where countries are so fucking co-dependent on one another that they have the audacity to blame events happening thousands and thousands miles away instead of looking internally and wondering, "why the fuck did we not bother to insulate ourselves and ensure we can withstand any ripple effects in case they occur?"
Or perhaps these precautions are already in place and blaming another country for things occurring in your own is a very convenient and politically 'safe' thing to do. Which if I am being completely honest, I think is really what is happening here.
Taking ownership over your own political missteps is a lot more difficult than deflecting it over onto a boogeyman where "we" can "all" be angry at in unison.
Rant over. THanks for reading.
我真的对我们变得如此全球化感到困扰——到了这样一种程度——我粗略地用了这个词——在世界的一端产生了负面的下游影响，而这些负面影响居然只是源于世界另一端发生的一些扯淡的事。
想象一下，在这样一个国家建立和建立系统，他们是如此tmd相互依赖，以至于他们有胆量指责发生在几千英里以外的事件，而不是审视内部和疑惑，“我们为什么不把自己隔离起来，确保我们能承受住万一发生的任何连锁反应？”
或者这些预防措施已经存在了，但把自己国家发生的事情归咎于另一个国家是一件非常方便和政治上“安全”的事情。如果我完全诚实的话，我认为这就是正在发生的事情。
对自己的政治失误承担责任，要比把它转移到一个“我们”可以“所有人”一致表达愤怒的魔鬼身上困难得多。
我失态了。感谢你的阅读。
I am genuinely bothered by how globalized we have become-- to the point where there are supposedly, and I use that word loosely, negative downstream impacts on one end of the world stemming from some nonsense that is occurring on the other side of it.
Imagine building up and putting systems in place where countries are so fucking co-dependent on one another that they have the audacity to blame events happening thousands and thousands miles away instead of looking internally and wondering, "why the fuck did we not bother to insulate ourselves and ensure we can withstand any ripple effects in case they occur?"
Or perhaps these precautions are already in place and blaming another country for things occurring in your own is a very convenient and politically 'safe' thing to do. Which if I am being completely honest, I think is really what is happening here.
Taking ownership over your own political missteps is a lot more difficult than deflecting it over onto a boogeyman where "we" can "all" be angry at in unison.
Rant over. THanks for reading.
我真的对我们变得如此全球化感到困扰——到了这样一种程度——我粗略地用了这个词——在世界的一端产生了负面的下游影响，而这些负面影响居然只是源于世界另一端发生的一些扯淡的事。
想象一下，在这样一个国家建立和建立系统，他们是如此tmd相互依赖，以至于他们有胆量指责发生在几千英里以外的事件，而不是审视内部和疑惑，“我们为什么不把自己隔离起来，确保我们能承受住万一发生的任何连锁反应？”
或者这些预防措施已经存在了，但把自己国家发生的事情归咎于另一个国家是一件非常方便和政治上“安全”的事情。如果我完全诚实的话，我认为这就是正在发生的事情。
对自己的政治失误承担责任，要比把它转移到一个“我们”可以“所有人”一致表达愤怒的魔鬼身上困难得多。
我失态了。感谢你的阅读。
raptorman556
I am genuinely bothered by how globalized we have become-- to the point where there are supposedly, and I use that word loosely, negative downstream impacts on one end of the world stemming from some nonsense that is occurring on the other side of it.
It is impossible to completely insulate yourself from any shocks. There is a misconception out there that domestic production is safer and more reliable, but it is not. It actually means that when a domestic shock does occur, the effect will be much more severe. In fact, international trade has reduced volatility for most countries. (Not to mention making us richer in the process)
America is experiencing significant shortages of infant formula right now largely because they relied so heavily on domestic production that became highly concentrated--and when something went wrong, it's suddenly a huge problem.
“我真的对我们变得如此全球化感到困扰——到了这样一种程度——我粗略地用了这个词——在世界的一端产生了负面的下游影响，而这些负面影响居然只是源于世界另一端发生的一些扯淡的事”
要使自己完全不受任何冲击的影响是不可能的。有一种误解，认为在国内生产更安全、更可靠，但事实并非如此。这实际上意味着，当国内发生冲击时，影响会严重得多。事实上，国际贸易减少了大多数国家的供应波动。（更不用说让我们在这个过程中变得更富有了）
美国目前正经历婴儿配方奶粉的严重短缺，这主要是因为他们严重依赖国内生产，而国内生产变得高度集中——一旦出现问题，就会突然成为一个大问题。
I am genuinely bothered by how globalized we have become-- to the point where there are supposedly, and I use that word loosely, negative downstream impacts on one end of the world stemming from some nonsense that is occurring on the other side of it.
It is impossible to completely insulate yourself from any shocks. There is a misconception out there that domestic production is safer and more reliable, but it is not. It actually means that when a domestic shock does occur, the effect will be much more severe. In fact, international trade has reduced volatility for most countries. (Not to mention making us richer in the process)
America is experiencing significant shortages of infant formula right now largely because they relied so heavily on domestic production that became highly concentrated--and when something went wrong, it's suddenly a huge problem.
“我真的对我们变得如此全球化感到困扰——到了这样一种程度——我粗略地用了这个词——在世界的一端产生了负面的下游影响，而这些负面影响居然只是源于世界另一端发生的一些扯淡的事”
要使自己完全不受任何冲击的影响是不可能的。有一种误解，认为在国内生产更安全、更可靠，但事实并非如此。这实际上意味着，当国内发生冲击时，影响会严重得多。事实上，国际贸易减少了大多数国家的供应波动。（更不用说让我们在这个过程中变得更富有了）
美国目前正经历婴儿配方奶粉的严重短缺，这主要是因为他们严重依赖国内生产，而国内生产变得高度集中——一旦出现问题，就会突然成为一个大问题。
theyux
You could call it the Globalization trap.
The market hates inefficiency, its less efficient for a company to run 100% domestic than globalized and in the game of capitalism being the less efficient company means you lose. It works both ways if the global becomes less efficient then domestic due to destabilization then your global companies lose.
The thing free market worshippers never really grasp is the shockwaves from market corrections can be brutal. To the point you should insulate against them.
However the GOP would have cried bloody murder if the US even tried, hell half them dems would have as well.
My solution is to have some public industries created. We have all seen the trouble with government supplanting industries. However working as a rivals would likely be beneficial. So not a govenment take over Tyson, but a rival company.
We already sort of do this with defense contracts. But other key industries such as farming and manufacturing would hopefully increase competition and help insulate shocks from the free market. This would of course be slightly less efficient and most importantly will literally never happen.
你可以称之为全球化陷阱。
市场讨厌低效率，对一家公司来说，100%的国内运营比全球化运营效率更低，在资本主义的游戏中，公司效率低就意味着你输了。但这是双向的，如果全球化由于不稳定而变得比国内生产效率低，那么你的全球公司就会失败。
自由市场的崇拜者从来没有真正意识到，市场调整带来的冲击可能是残酷的。你应该与他们隔绝开来。
然而，如果美国试图这么做，大老党（共和党）会嚷嚷“血腥谋杀”，见鬼，一半的民主党人也会这么做。
我的解决方案是建立一些公共产业。我们都看到了政府取代产业的麻烦。然而，（由政府来）充当（自由市场的）竞争对手可能是有好处的。所以接管泰森公司的不是政府，而是竞争对手。
我们已经在国防合同中这样做了。但农业和制造业等其他关键行业有望增加竞争，并帮助抵御来自自由市场的冲击。这当然会稍微降低效率，并且重要的是，这是永远不会发生的（个人愿望而已）。
You could call it the Globalization trap.
The market hates inefficiency, its less efficient for a company to run 100% domestic than globalized and in the game of capitalism being the less efficient company means you lose. It works both ways if the global becomes less efficient then domestic due to destabilization then your global companies lose.
The thing free market worshippers never really grasp is the shockwaves from market corrections can be brutal. To the point you should insulate against them.
However the GOP would have cried bloody murder if the US even tried, hell half them dems would have as well.
My solution is to have some public industries created. We have all seen the trouble with government supplanting industries. However working as a rivals would likely be beneficial. So not a govenment take over Tyson, but a rival company.
We already sort of do this with defense contracts. But other key industries such as farming and manufacturing would hopefully increase competition and help insulate shocks from the free market. This would of course be slightly less efficient and most importantly will literally never happen.
你可以称之为全球化陷阱。
市场讨厌低效率，对一家公司来说，100%的国内运营比全球化运营效率更低，在资本主义的游戏中，公司效率低就意味着你输了。但这是双向的，如果全球化由于不稳定而变得比国内生产效率低，那么你的全球公司就会失败。
自由市场的崇拜者从来没有真正意识到，市场调整带来的冲击可能是残酷的。你应该与他们隔绝开来。
然而，如果美国试图这么做，大老党（共和党）会嚷嚷“血腥谋杀”，见鬼，一半的民主党人也会这么做。
我的解决方案是建立一些公共产业。我们都看到了政府取代产业的麻烦。然而，（由政府来）充当（自由市场的）竞争对手可能是有好处的。所以接管泰森公司的不是政府，而是竞争对手。
我们已经在国防合同中这样做了。但农业和制造业等其他关键行业有望增加竞争，并帮助抵御来自自由市场的冲击。这当然会稍微降低效率，并且重要的是，这是永远不会发生的（个人愿望而已）。
doubagilga
Many countries are not the least bit dependent on Russian imports. They have price increases, not because of Russia, but because hungry people not receiving food have bid up these insulated countries exports. No amount of “insulation” or “self dependence” changes that the world needs X bushels of wheat and now there are only Y. People get hungry and growing 20% excess per year would mean a host of other problems.
This statement is naive at best. The world is affected because markets, logistics, and transport have given us closer access to one another. This is just supply and demand and it cannot be avoided. Resources will allocate to need, and when it’s wheat, thank God because somebody will literally die without it.
You can complain that this affects the UK or the US but this system is busy saving the lives of others who suddenly had their direct supply chain affected. Millions of lives will be saved but instead, we’ll complain we might also have to adjust.
许多国家一点也不依赖俄罗斯的进口。他们物价上涨，不是因为俄罗斯，而是因为得不到食物的饥饿人口推高了这些未受影响的国家的出口价格。再多的“不受影响”或“自给自足”也不能改变世界需要X蒲式耳小麦，而现在只有Y蒲式耳小麦的现实。人们会挨饿，并且每年以20%的速度增长将意味着一系列其他问题。
这种说法往最好了讲也是天真的。世界受到影响是因为市场、物流和运输使我们能够更紧密地联系在一起。这只是供求关系，不可避免。资源会分配给需要的人，当它是小麦的时候，感谢上帝，因为没有它，有人真的会死。
你可以抱怨这影响了英国或美国，但这个体系正忙着拯救其他直接供应链突然受到了影响的人的生命。数百万人的生命将（因这个市场体系的动态调整）得到拯救，但相反，我们会抱怨我们可能也必须做出调整（价格上涨了）。
Many countries are not the least bit dependent on Russian imports. They have price increases, not because of Russia, but because hungry people not receiving food have bid up these insulated countries exports. No amount of “insulation” or “self dependence” changes that the world needs X bushels of wheat and now there are only Y. People get hungry and growing 20% excess per year would mean a host of other problems.
This statement is naive at best. The world is affected because markets, logistics, and transport have given us closer access to one another. This is just supply and demand and it cannot be avoided. Resources will allocate to need, and when it’s wheat, thank God because somebody will literally die without it.
You can complain that this affects the UK or the US but this system is busy saving the lives of others who suddenly had their direct supply chain affected. Millions of lives will be saved but instead, we’ll complain we might also have to adjust.
许多国家一点也不依赖俄罗斯的进口。他们物价上涨，不是因为俄罗斯，而是因为得不到食物的饥饿人口推高了这些未受影响的国家的出口价格。再多的“不受影响”或“自给自足”也不能改变世界需要X蒲式耳小麦，而现在只有Y蒲式耳小麦的现实。人们会挨饿，并且每年以20%的速度增长将意味着一系列其他问题。
这种说法往最好了讲也是天真的。世界受到影响是因为市场、物流和运输使我们能够更紧密地联系在一起。这只是供求关系，不可避免。资源会分配给需要的人，当它是小麦的时候，感谢上帝，因为没有它，有人真的会死。
你可以抱怨这影响了英国或美国，但这个体系正忙着拯救其他直接供应链突然受到了影响的人的生命。数百万人的生命将（因这个市场体系的动态调整）得到拯救，但相反，我们会抱怨我们可能也必须做出调整（价格上涨了）。
Andreomgangen
I just calculated that if me and 2 friends combined our wages, we could buy enough rice to qualify as a 16 century feudal lord in Japan with 10,000 men under our command.
Globalisation has allowed us to create riches beyond humanity's wildest imagination, a mere hundred years ago.
But yes, it does come with major pitfalls. The largest pitfall i see in Europe at least is that energy isn't seen as critical infrastructure, but something you can trust private market to supply as demand increases. In a world of ever increasing and reliance on synthesized goods, energy is the chokepoint for everything.
We could make vertical led farms for every country to become self sufficient, but it would require enormous investment in energy, for returns that won't come until there is also enormous investment in those farms. Private sector doesn't do those kind of risks, so it has to be up to governments to bear that up front cost.
I've been saying this shit for ten years, warning that this is the way we are heading for ten years, I am NOT happy to be right, and even less happy that my government is STILL not being proactive about this shit. This is the last year we can, because once a food crisis start everything becomes survival mode, and the time for future investment has passed.
On the bright side I've always thought that world population must decrease dramatically if we are to survive our damage to it.....
我刚刚算了一下，如果我和两个朋友把我们的工资加起来，我们可以买到足够的大米，可以成为一个16世纪有1万兵的日本战国大名。
全球化使我们能够创造出超出仅仅一百年还是人类最大胆想象的财富。
但是，是的，它也有很大的缺陷。至少我在欧洲看到的最大的陷阱是，能源不被视为关键的基础设施，但随着需求的增加，你可以相信私人市场会提供能源。在一个日益依赖合成商品的世界里，能源是一切事物的瓶颈。
我们可以让每个国家的垂直LED农场自给自足，但这需要大量的能源投资，只有在这些农场上也有大量投资，才能获得回报。私营部门不会承担这种风险，因此必须由政府来承担先期成本。
十年来，我一直在说这些“废话”，警告说这是我们未来十年要走的路，我很不高兴自己是对的，更不高兴的是，我的政府仍然没有积极应对这些“废话”。这是我们能够做到的最后一年，因为一旦粮食危机开始，一切都会切换成生存模式，并且未来投资的时机将不再。
往好的方面想，我一直认为，如果我们要在我们对世界的破坏中生存下来，那么世界人口必须大幅减少……
I just calculated that if me and 2 friends combined our wages, we could buy enough rice to qualify as a 16 century feudal lord in Japan with 10,000 men under our command.
Globalisation has allowed us to create riches beyond humanity's wildest imagination, a mere hundred years ago.
But yes, it does come with major pitfalls. The largest pitfall i see in Europe at least is that energy isn't seen as critical infrastructure, but something you can trust private market to supply as demand increases. In a world of ever increasing and reliance on synthesized goods, energy is the chokepoint for everything.
We could make vertical led farms for every country to become self sufficient, but it would require enormous investment in energy, for returns that won't come until there is also enormous investment in those farms. Private sector doesn't do those kind of risks, so it has to be up to governments to bear that up front cost.
I've been saying this shit for ten years, warning that this is the way we are heading for ten years, I am NOT happy to be right, and even less happy that my government is STILL not being proactive about this shit. This is the last year we can, because once a food crisis start everything becomes survival mode, and the time for future investment has passed.
On the bright side I've always thought that world population must decrease dramatically if we are to survive our damage to it.....
我刚刚算了一下，如果我和两个朋友把我们的工资加起来，我们可以买到足够的大米，可以成为一个16世纪有1万兵的日本战国大名。
全球化使我们能够创造出超出仅仅一百年还是人类最大胆想象的财富。
但是，是的，它也有很大的缺陷。至少我在欧洲看到的最大的陷阱是，能源不被视为关键的基础设施，但随着需求的增加，你可以相信私人市场会提供能源。在一个日益依赖合成商品的世界里，能源是一切事物的瓶颈。
我们可以让每个国家的垂直LED农场自给自足，但这需要大量的能源投资，只有在这些农场上也有大量投资，才能获得回报。私营部门不会承担这种风险，因此必须由政府来承担先期成本。
十年来，我一直在说这些“废话”，警告说这是我们未来十年要走的路，我很不高兴自己是对的，更不高兴的是，我的政府仍然没有积极应对这些“废话”。这是我们能够做到的最后一年，因为一旦粮食危机开始，一切都会切换成生存模式，并且未来投资的时机将不再。
往好的方面想，我一直认为，如果我们要在我们对世界的破坏中生存下来，那么世界人口必须大幅减少……
BurntmyFinger911
Is it possible they just have found an easy scape goat for inflation in Ukraine? I suspect certain products prices rising are connected. Like oil/gas for example. But that’s not inflation. That’s called supply and demand. I mean isn’t it more likely inflation is caused by printing a bunch of money to give to people as aid internally in the massive economic insanity bubble created by Covid? Not that I am against that decision. I think something g needed to be done to keep economies and people surviving. Just think this kind of shit politicians spew is annoying. I mean this is basic macroeconomics. Creating more money creates inflation. And a lot of economics is tied to the dollar which we printed a shit ton of during Covid. I’m sure other economies did similar things. And inflation lags. And now since the fed is changing the interest rate inflation is finally coming to a head along with a recession which is likely coming next.
有没有可能他们只是找了乌克兰来当通胀的替罪羊？我怀疑某些产品的价格上涨是有联系的。比如石油/天然气。但这不是通货膨胀。这就是供求关系。我的意思是，通货膨胀更有可能是由印刷大量钞票来给人们提供内部援助，以帮助新冠肺炎造成的巨大经济疯狂泡沫而导致的？我并不是反对这个决定。我认为需要采取一些措施来维持经济和人民的生存。想想看，政客们吐出来的这种垃圾真烦人。这就是基本的宏观经济学。印制更多的货币会导致通货膨胀。很多经济都与美元挂钩，在新冠疫情期间，我们印了很多美元。我相信其他经济体也做过类似的事情。然后通胀延时到来了。现在，由于美联储正在改变利率，通货膨胀终于达到了顶点，随之而来的可能是经济衰退。
Is it possible they just have found an easy scape goat for inflation in Ukraine? I suspect certain products prices rising are connected. Like oil/gas for example. But that’s not inflation. That’s called supply and demand. I mean isn’t it more likely inflation is caused by printing a bunch of money to give to people as aid internally in the massive economic insanity bubble created by Covid? Not that I am against that decision. I think something g needed to be done to keep economies and people surviving. Just think this kind of shit politicians spew is annoying. I mean this is basic macroeconomics. Creating more money creates inflation. And a lot of economics is tied to the dollar which we printed a shit ton of during Covid. I’m sure other economies did similar things. And inflation lags. And now since the fed is changing the interest rate inflation is finally coming to a head along with a recession which is likely coming next.
有没有可能他们只是找了乌克兰来当通胀的替罪羊？我怀疑某些产品的价格上涨是有联系的。比如石油/天然气。但这不是通货膨胀。这就是供求关系。我的意思是，通货膨胀更有可能是由印刷大量钞票来给人们提供内部援助，以帮助新冠肺炎造成的巨大经济疯狂泡沫而导致的？我并不是反对这个决定。我认为需要采取一些措施来维持经济和人民的生存。想想看，政客们吐出来的这种垃圾真烦人。这就是基本的宏观经济学。印制更多的货币会导致通货膨胀。很多经济都与美元挂钩，在新冠疫情期间，我们印了很多美元。我相信其他经济体也做过类似的事情。然后通胀延时到来了。现在，由于美联储正在改变利率，通货膨胀终于达到了顶点，随之而来的可能是经济衰退。
keklwords
Can we, please, for the love of god, start being honest about the causes of inflation? Inflation is caused by the wealth gap. In poor countries, it’s caused by the extreme internal and external gaps in buying power. But in “developed” countries, like the UK and the US, it’s often caused by the internal wealth gap in it’s own citizens. Whom are all the government’s responsibility, contrary to popular opinion. Corporations make our laws to benefit companies, not humans. And wealthy humans hoard their wealth by giving it to companies who make additional and increasingly dangerous anti-human decisions. And so there is less money available for the majority to spend, even while products and services increase in price. And this scares banks, who then raise interest rates. Inflation. In realistic terms that economists prefer not to acknowledge because then they have to acknowledge what they would have to do to fix it (share).
Also, it’s increasingly caused by inefficient and ridiculously bureaucratic government systems that waste resources without producing anything of value. We spend all of our tax dollars paying salaries of people who aren’t directly responsible for anything and couldn’t tell you the true purpose of their job. This by definition makes the system inefficient and wasteful. And it’s supported with our tax dollars. Taken unwillingly from our earned wages.
STOP pretending like inflation is some natural disaster that occurs every so often. It is the direct and traceable result of stupidity in the design and implementation of the systems that run our government and economy. Stop blaming your mistakes on everyone else.
看在上帝的份上，我们能不能诚实地说出通胀的原因？通货膨胀是由贫富差距引起的。在贫穷国家，这是由内部和外部购买力的巨大差距造成的。但在“发达”国家，比如英国和美国，这往往是由本国公民内部的贫富差距造成的。与流行的观点相反，这些都是政府的责任。公司来为我们制定服务公司利益，而不是民众利益的法律。并且富人通过把财富交给那些做出额外的、越来越危险的反人类决定的公司来囤积财富。因此，即使在产品和服务价格上涨的时候，大多数人可以消费的钱也会减少。这让银行感到恐慌，于是它们提高了利率。然后就通货膨胀了。从现实的角度来看，经济学家宁愿不承认，因为那样他们就不得不承认他们将不得不做什么来解决这个问题了（分享财富）。
此外，它越来越多地是由低效和荒谬的官僚政府系统造成的，这种体系浪费资源，而没有产生任何价值。我们把所有纳税人的钱都花在了那些对任何事情都不用负直接责任，也不能告诉你他们工作的真正目的的人身上。从定义上讲，这使得体系效率低下，浪费巨大。它是由我们的税收支持的。从我们挣来的工资中被不情愿地拿走。
不要假装通货膨胀是经常发生的“天灾”。这是我们在设计和实施运行政府和经济的系统时愚蠢的直接和可追溯的结果。不要把你们的错误归咎于别人。
Can we, please, for the love of god, start being honest about the causes of inflation? Inflation is caused by the wealth gap. In poor countries, it’s caused by the extreme internal and external gaps in buying power. But in “developed” countries, like the UK and the US, it’s often caused by the internal wealth gap in it’s own citizens. Whom are all the government’s responsibility, contrary to popular opinion. Corporations make our laws to benefit companies, not humans. And wealthy humans hoard their wealth by giving it to companies who make additional and increasingly dangerous anti-human decisions. And so there is less money available for the majority to spend, even while products and services increase in price. And this scares banks, who then raise interest rates. Inflation. In realistic terms that economists prefer not to acknowledge because then they have to acknowledge what they would have to do to fix it (share).
Also, it’s increasingly caused by inefficient and ridiculously bureaucratic government systems that waste resources without producing anything of value. We spend all of our tax dollars paying salaries of people who aren’t directly responsible for anything and couldn’t tell you the true purpose of their job. This by definition makes the system inefficient and wasteful. And it’s supported with our tax dollars. Taken unwillingly from our earned wages.
STOP pretending like inflation is some natural disaster that occurs every so often. It is the direct and traceable result of stupidity in the design and implementation of the systems that run our government and economy. Stop blaming your mistakes on everyone else.
看在上帝的份上，我们能不能诚实地说出通胀的原因？通货膨胀是由贫富差距引起的。在贫穷国家，这是由内部和外部购买力的巨大差距造成的。但在“发达”国家，比如英国和美国，这往往是由本国公民内部的贫富差距造成的。与流行的观点相反，这些都是政府的责任。公司来为我们制定服务公司利益，而不是民众利益的法律。并且富人通过把财富交给那些做出额外的、越来越危险的反人类决定的公司来囤积财富。因此，即使在产品和服务价格上涨的时候，大多数人可以消费的钱也会减少。这让银行感到恐慌，于是它们提高了利率。然后就通货膨胀了。从现实的角度来看，经济学家宁愿不承认，因为那样他们就不得不承认他们将不得不做什么来解决这个问题了（分享财富）。
此外，它越来越多地是由低效和荒谬的官僚政府系统造成的，这种体系浪费资源，而没有产生任何价值。我们把所有纳税人的钱都花在了那些对任何事情都不用负直接责任，也不能告诉你他们工作的真正目的的人身上。从定义上讲，这使得体系效率低下，浪费巨大。它是由我们的税收支持的。从我们挣来的工资中被不情愿地拿走。
不要假装通货膨胀是经常发生的“天灾”。这是我们在设计和实施运行政府和经济的系统时愚蠢的直接和可追溯的结果。不要把你们的错误归咎于别人。
Rightquercusalba
What an easy scapegoat, blame everything on conflicts in Ukraine. As if wars haven't been happening around the world for decades. Is it a contributor? Yes. Do China lockdowns play a part. Of course. But let's look at what has been consistent through this inflationary crisis, government spending and economic restrictions in response to Covid. Covid isn't a valid excuse anymore and that's why the shift is towards Ukraine.
真是个方便的替罪羊，把一切都归咎于乌克兰的冲突。就好像世界上几十年没有发生过战争一样。它是贡献者之一吗？是的。中国的封锁助推了吗？当然。但让我们看看在这场通胀危机中什么是一致的——政府（印钞）支出和应对新冠肺炎的经济限制措施。疫情不再是一个有效的借口了，这就是为什么他们转向了乌克兰。
What an easy scapegoat, blame everything on conflicts in Ukraine. As if wars haven't been happening around the world for decades. Is it a contributor? Yes. Do China lockdowns play a part. Of course. But let's look at what has been consistent through this inflationary crisis, government spending and economic restrictions in response to Covid. Covid isn't a valid excuse anymore and that's why the shift is towards Ukraine.
真是个方便的替罪羊，把一切都归咎于乌克兰的冲突。就好像世界上几十年没有发生过战争一样。它是贡献者之一吗？是的。中国的封锁助推了吗？当然。但让我们看看在这场通胀危机中什么是一致的——政府（印钞）支出和应对新冠肺炎的经济限制措施。疫情不再是一个有效的借口了，这就是为什么他们转向了乌克兰。
bfhurricane
That doesn't take away from the fact that countries who are dependent on wheat, cooking oils, and fertilizer from Ukraine and Russia all of the sudden find themselves with a huge lack of them.
First world countries might just deal with higher prices, but famine is a serious concern for poor countries that are having serious supply restrictions due to the war and sanctions.
但这并不能忽视这样一个事实：那些依赖乌克兰和俄罗斯的小麦、食用油和化肥的国家突然发现现在自己严重缺乏这些东西了。
第一世界国家可能只是要应对价格上涨，但饥荒会成为贫穷国家的严重问题——这些国家由于战争和制裁而面临严重的粮食供应限制。
That doesn't take away from the fact that countries who are dependent on wheat, cooking oils, and fertilizer from Ukraine and Russia all of the sudden find themselves with a huge lack of them.
First world countries might just deal with higher prices, but famine is a serious concern for poor countries that are having serious supply restrictions due to the war and sanctions.
但这并不能忽视这样一个事实：那些依赖乌克兰和俄罗斯的小麦、食用油和化肥的国家突然发现现在自己严重缺乏这些东西了。
第一世界国家可能只是要应对价格上涨，但饥荒会成为贫穷国家的严重问题——这些国家由于战争和制裁而面临严重的粮食供应限制。
EwesDead
The quick solution is for a government to allocate some of its defense/police budget to food. Or they could tax the wealthiest persons and companies to stabilize consumer pricing. But the "rich" never do an easy functional solution that helps the greatest amount of people.
对政府来说，快速的解决办法是将一些国防/警察预算分配给食品领域。或者，他们可以向最富有的人和公司征税，以稳定消费者价格。但是“富人”从来不会制定出一个简单的功能性解决方案来帮助最多的人。
The quick solution is for a government to allocate some of its defense/police budget to food. Or they could tax the wealthiest persons and companies to stabilize consumer pricing. But the "rich" never do an easy functional solution that helps the greatest amount of people.
对政府来说，快速的解决办法是将一些国防/警察预算分配给食品领域。或者，他们可以向最富有的人和公司征税，以稳定消费者价格。但是“富人”从来不会制定出一个简单的功能性解决方案来帮助最多的人。
很赞 1
收藏