用户登录 手机浏览更多好看哦
手机二维码
英国网友评论:调查显示美国公司不愿离开中国
发布时间:2021-03-23 08:13:00   浏览:
译文背景
近日,针对200多家在中国开展业务的公司的一项调查显示,70%以上的在华美资企业没有计划将制造业务迁出中国,尽管因为港疆等问题,双方关系完全没有缓和的迹象。下面看看英国人是如何看待,美国公司不愿离开中国此事的:
译文内容
Hello
n reply to earl grey
Great summary, It's also worth noting that China is "more politically stable" than the US, As a disclaimer, I'm not s
aying this is a bad thing for the people, but for companies, the US have an election every 4 years, and it's quite common
for a Republican president to reverse what a Democratic president has planned /done, and vice versa. With China, since Xi
is pretty much president for life, and CCP rarely reverts its own policies, as a business, you know what to expect from Ch
Sta bility and relative high return hence stays in China
这里同样值得关注的是,与美国相比中国在“政治上更加稳定”。作为一份免责声明,我这里并不在说美国的政治环境对民众来说是件坏事,但是对于公司来说,美国每4年举行一次选举,然后来自共和党的总统推翻前任民主党总统的已经落实的事情,反之亦然。而在中国,…他们很少会推翻自己制定的政策,作为一家企业而言,你很清楚你能从中国得到什么,政策坏境的稳定性和相对较高的投资回报率是这些企业留在中国的原因。
 
In reply to Hello
think an election every 4 years leads to greater long term stability Presidencies for life are liable to end up with c
tastrophic disruptions at their end and the end may come much sooner than anticipated The one party state has served Chi
na well in the stages of it's economic development since Deng but as the economy and society grows more sophisticated peo
ple will want to have a voice. They will need the safety valve of outlets for differences of opinion and ways of resolving
them other than by brutal repression
我认为每四年举行一次的选举可以带来更长期的稳定。终身制的总统在其仼期结束时可能会带来灾难性的,乱,而且这种结束可能会比其预期的要早得多。改革开放以来,一党制为中国各阶段的经济发展提供了很好的服务,但是随着经济和社会的继续发展,人们会越来越希望能够发声。他们需要给不同的意见发声的安全窗口,以解决问题,而不是通过...(放你们白皮的屁!)
 
 
n reply to I Observer
Unfortunately, Western democracies have become largely dysfunctional In a world controlled by the West, 4 year electio
cles worked. Now with the nation state fighting for its survival, it has become a liability. Elections have become less
bout real issues(education, healthcare, communities, caring for each other, business growth) and more about pandering to
the emotions of the electorate by demonizing others. The United States currently has one of the most disfunctional electo
al systems in the Western world. Any sane business would choose China today--at least you know what you're signing up for
不幸的是,西方民主国家在很大程度上早已失去了你听说的这一功能。在仍受西方控制的世界范围内,这种4年一次的选举仍是有效运行着的。但是如今,随着美国正为生存而战,四年一次的选举民主制度已经成为了一种负担。选举不再是为了解决真正存在的问题(教育、医疗保健、社区问题、人文关怀、商业发展),而是为了更多地通过妖魔化他人来迎合选民的情绪。美国目前的制度是西方世界效果最差的选举制度之一。任何一个理智的企业都会选择今天的中国——至少你知道你要签署的是一份怎样的协议。
 
y In reply to earl grey
Now compare that to India or any other country being thrown around as a replacement for CN. India has huge social conflic
ts,a growing threat of fundamentalist movements (at times encouraged by the government), problems in various areas includ
ing Kashmir, underdeveloped infrastructure, and hard to overcome economic problems. Failed response to Coronavirus shows
ndia s vulnera bility.
Apply chains if decoupled should return back to the US. Changing from China to India does not make sense except for some
ndian American tech CEOs who feel they owe it to India to give business there.
我们现在可以拿印度或者其他什么国家作为中国的替代国去进行比较。印度国内存在着巨大的社会冲突,还有不断增长的原教旨主义运动的威肋,(该威胁,有时甚至是受到政府的鼓励的),其在包括克什米尔地区在内的很多领域都存在问题,还有其落后的基础设施,以及难以克服的经济困难。尤其是印度对新冠病毒失败的应对表明了印度的脆弱性,美国要和中国脱钩,那么其在华的供应链应该回流到美国,如果从中国转移到印度的话,那么这种转变除了对那些认为应该把生意交给印度的美国印度裔美国科技公司首席执行官们有用之外,没有任何意义。
 
 
trump creates straw men as enemies, so that he may later claim to have defeated them. We have had Muslim purples, Mexican
caravans of people from South Africa, North Korean missiles,"immigrants"and more recently the Chinese. It would appea
owers lap It up.
前任的特眀普立了个假想敌人做靶子,这样他就可以继续声称他已经击败他们了。我们现在已经有了穆斯林,墨西哥人,南非的商人,朝鮮的导弹,“移民″,最近又加上了中囯人。显然特眀普的粉丝们看起来很喜欢这种把戏。
 
 
:kAdjustedReturn
ply In reply to ConnDublin
here was a period during which Fox News was breathlessly reporting every night the terrifying progress of a dreaded"Ca
avan"coming up from somewhere. Guatemala, I think Havent heard much lately
As you say, new scares for this election
之前有一段时间,福克斯新闻侮天网上的报道都咋咋呼呼的,说什么有一个可怕的“车队”从一个什么地方过来了。我想应该是从危地马拉吧。然后最近这几天就再也没听过类似的消息了。就像你说的那样,这些不过是为了这次选举制造的一次新的恐慌罢了。
 
 
WantMyCity Back
In reply to Conn Dublin
can show you tons of video and statements from hysterical DN C politicians screaming about NK missiles. And the pundits
that claim Trump is going to start a nuclear war to distract from the Mueller probe.
rump meets Kim, Mueller probe flops, no more nuclear tests, and now the pundits claim that Trump sucks up to dictators
我可以给你展示大量民主党政客们有关朝鮮核导弹歇斯底理的视频和声明。那些所谓的权威人士宣称特眀普要通过发动核战争转移大众对穆勒调查的注意力。
按下来发生的事情就是,特朗普与金正恩见了面,而穆勒调查扑街了,(朝鲜)停止了核试验,如今这个权威人士又改口声称特朗普在巴结独裁者。对民主党人却是另一副嘴脸。
 
 
RiskAdjustedReturn
In reply to WantMy CityBack
rump first said he fell in love with Kim, then he declared victory, then he went away and left Kim alone to proceed
我记得,特明普开始说他爱上金了,然后他对外宣布与金的会面很成功,然后就离开了,留下金..
 
reply In reply to RiskAdjustedReturn
You make Trump sounds like a knut
你的话把特眀普塑造成了一个花花公子
 
reply In reply to Conn Dublin
Agree, though the (sad)saving grace is that he is too incompetent to even defeat the straw men he picks as enemies. Just
to name a few
Trade with China: no structural deal, deficit flat between 2016 and 2019(down in 2020 H1 only due to coronavirus)E
North Korea: num ber of missile test up 5o% between 2016 and 2019
Iran nuclear: Iran back to enriching Uranium at non-civilian grade
Mexican wall: no noticeable construction, zero funding by Mexico
And let's not talk about "draining the swamp" there has never been an administration with so many felons
同意你的说法,可悲的是,特眀普实在是太无能了,以至于连用来立靶子的稻草人式敌人都战胜不了。就举几个例子吧。
与中国的贸易,没有达成结构性的协议,2016年至2019年之间的贸易赤字是基本持平的(到了2020年赤字因为新冠病毒而下降)。
与朝鲜,2016年到2019,朝鲜的导弹实验次数增加了50%。
伊朗核问题:伊朗恢复了非民用的铀浓缩材料的使用。
墨西哥墙:没有建成显著的建筑,墨西哥分文未岀。
 
 
Risk asiustedreturn
re never read anything that would indicate that Trump understood global business
Pretty good at defaulting and suing I suppos
我从来没读到过任何关于特朗普懂全球商业这样的消息。
我猜,他很擅长违约和起诉。
 
GKlester
lieve acceptable returns on risk capital, are arguably the most consistently successful companies in the world. There isaac
S multinational companies hiring the best talent from around the world and operating where it makes economic sense to
reason that they don't wish to"decouple, to use a low grade phrase. That is because it is brainless economic policy
美国的跨国公司从全世界吸收最优秀的人才,为了获得可观的风险投资回报,他们在最具经济效益的地方进行商业运营,可以说美国的这些跨国公司是全世界最成功的公司。这就是他们么不愿意使用“脱钩”这样低级的话语的原因。简单来说,所谓“脱钩”完全是一个没有脑子的经济政策
 
Some clown think they can talk and force people to listen. Nope, we do business our own ways.
一些小丑们认为他们可以迫使被人听他们的话。不,我们要用自己的方式做生意。
 
francon
A rather superficial a rticle. For sure, US businesses which produce in China to serve the Chinese market are not likely
to leave. But it's another story when those US businesses produce in China to serve the US and /or other markets. There ha
been a slow but constant trickle of news about US businesses moving some production to countries such as vietnam or Indi
a Apple for example has opened an iPhone manufacturing facility in India. Furthermore, location decisions aren t not fas
decisions. It isn't mostly about closing facilities in China and moving them elsewhere. It is rather about deciding to
ate new facilities outside China it will take at least a decade to see whether us businesses move out of china
这是一篇相当肤浅的文章。诚然,那些在中国设厂生产并服务于中国市场的美国企业不太可能离开中国。但是对那些在中国生产产品并销售到美国或者其他市场的美国企业而言,就另当别论了。虽然美国企业将其部分产业转移到印度或越南等其他囯家的进程一直缓慢,但也是在持续不断的。比如,苹果公司就在印度开设了一家生产iphone的制造工厂。此外,对企业而言,并不会很快的做出一个转移工厂的决定。这并不意味着关闭在其在中国的工厂,然后把这些工厂搬到別处去,而是要在中国以外的地区建立新的工厂。我们至少需要十年的时间才会看到美国企业是否会真的离开中国。
 
 
ply to Francois P
Movement out of China for low value production for export(import)began over a decade ago due to rising wages in China
That is much different than goods produced for consumption in China by multi-national companies. For most China is thei
rand largest market and quite profitable.
早在十多年前,由于中国国内工资的不断上涨,早就有企业开始将低价值的产品生产搬离中国。这与跨国公司在中国生产,在中国境外消费岀售的情况大不相同,对大多数来说,中国是他们的第二大销售市场,并且他们在中国获颇丰。
 
Stephen doyle
f a Democratic Administration ever attempted to direct and mandate private companies and industry in such a manner Repub
cans would label them as industrial policy socialists
如果是民主党执政的政府试图用这样一种方式来指导或要求私营公司和工厂,那么共和党人就会给他们贴上工业政策社会主义者的标签
 
Stan of stanistan
ly In reply to Stephen Doyle
Agreed. Drumpf and his enablers constantly practice what Dr Freud called"projection. Although they have no intention
to regard the USA as an economic sovereign(in the same sense that it's a political sovereign), Republicans will continue
同意你的说法。过去特眀普和他的支持者们一直在实践弗洛伊德博士所受的“投射效应”。尽管他们并没有把美囯当成一个拥有经济主权的国家(即一个政治主权国家),这些共和党人仍将继续污蔑民主党人是邪恶者。
 
 
 
 

上一篇:英国网友讨论中欧投资协定终于达成
下一篇:德国等多国网民评论中美阿拉斯加激烈交锋

最新译文