U19 Globalization and Its Impact
全球化及其影响
The Big Squeeze
Reading Comprehension
(包括“答案与题解”)
Notes
课文参考译文
练习
●Cloze
●Reading Passages(包括“疑难长句翻译与注解”)
●Translation
●Writing(包括“审题指导”)
The Big Squeeze
Fifteen years after U.S. and European multinationals started shipping large numbers of manufacturing jobs overseas, experts are saying that the “second wave” of offshoring is at hand—and it promises to be bigger and more disruptive to the U.S. and European job markets than the first. In the years ahead, sizable numbers of skilled, reasonably well-educated middle-income workers in service-sector jobs long considered safe from foreign trade—accounting, law, financial and risk management, health care and information technology, to name a few—could be facing layoffs or serious wage pressure as developing nations perform increasingly sophisticated offshore work.
For Europe and the United States, that’s a troubling scenario at a time when there is already plenty of economic insecurity. The EU unemployment rate is 9 percent. U.S. job growth has been weak in the last few years, and real wages are falling at the fastest rate in 14 years. According to a recent report by McKinsey, many Western workers in crucial “skill-intensive industries will feel substantial pressure from low-cost countries for the first time.” And that competition will lead big firms in those sectors to buy products from developing nations, or even move plants abroad. The industries include auto parts, fabricated metals, machinery, pharmaceuticals and telecom equipment, which together account for nearly half of the manufacturing consumption in America. By 2015, notes McKinsey, those key “second-wave” industries will account for fully half of all U.S. imports from low-cost countries.
To be sure, China’s manufacturing might is still concentrated on the low end of the technology scale. And India’s fast-growing outsourcing industry which employs 1 million people and accounts for about $5 billion in exports remains dependent on call centers, telemarketing, data entry, billing and low-end software development. But both nations are poised to make great leaps forward over the next decade or two. China is obsessed with acquiring advanced manufacturing technology—including telecom and chip-making equipment—and often makes tech acquisition a part of negotiations with foreign investors. India has a deep pool of scientists, software engineers, chemists, accountants, lawyers and physicians who are steadily moving India’s IT-related outsourcing industry up the value-added chain.
Economists don’t believe that the next phase of offshoring will cause massive unemployment. But intense global competition could erode incomes and, hence, standards of living. Wages are not now tracking productivity gains. Europe faces an arguably more serious dilemma. If its companies start offshoring more, unemployment could rise—and with it the impulse to enact self-defeating protectionist laws. If it doesn’t offshore more aggressively, the Continent will lose global competitiveness and become something of a long-term loser itself.
No one can say with any authority just how much the West’s competitiveness might weaken over time. But there are suggestions that the technological edge that the U.S. and European companies have enjoyed might gradually disappear. According to the Washington-based Economic Policy Institute, the U.S. software industry lost 16 percent of its jobs in the three years from March 2001 to March 2004. That, in turn, may have dampened the enrollment of U.S. students in computer and engineering programs. As an official at the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers, a union group, asks: why major in computer science when technology jobs are headed offshore?
Europe and America must develop better strategies to compensate the workers who lose in the global trade game—and crucially, boost education and training efforts so that their workers acquire the “skill premium” they’ll need to get or stay ahead. Given the speed with which globalization is unfolding, there’s little time to lose.
1. The“second wave” of offshoring is characterized by .
［A］ the sale of large numbers of manufactured goods to other countries
［B］ the flow of more job opportunities in skill areas to developing nations
［C］ the reduced ability of workers in advanced countries to keep their jobs
［D］ the rise of China and India as two strong competitors in IT industry
2. The U.S. firms will have to buy products from developing nations because .
［A］ they cannot produce them all by themselves
［B］ the prices of the products are lower due to low cost
［C］ most big firms have already moved their plants abroad
［D］ the U.S. firms are finding themselves in big trouble
3. According to the author, China is becoming a serious threat to Europe and America as .
［A］ it is acquiring more sophisticated technology
［B］ it floods the latter with technologically low-end products
［C］ it makes great leaps in developing communications equipment
［D］ it absorbs great amounts of overseas investment
4. Heightened competitiveness will result in .
［A］ intensified confrontation between nations
［B］ massive unemployment in Europe and America
［C］ low share of European products in the world market
［D］lower wages relative to productivity
5. In face of the challenges from ongoing globalization, the author suggests that more attention be given to .
［A］ the welfare of laid-off workers
［B］ the enactment of protectionist laws
［C］ education and worker-training programs
［D］ the“second wave” of offshoring
答案与题解
1.［B］意为：技术领域内更多就业机会流向发展中国家。
［A］ 意为：大量成品被卖往其他国家。
［C］ 意为：发达国家工人保留自己工作岗位的能力下降。
［D］ 意为：中国和印度作为IT产业内两个强劲的竞争者的兴起。
2.［B］ 意为：产品的价格由于低成本而更低。
第二段第三句提到发展中国家是低成本国家（low-cost countries），该段最后一句也提到美国从低成本国家进口产品。
［A］ 意为：他们自身不能生产所有这些产品。
［C］ 意为：多数大公司已经把工厂移到国外。
［D］ 意为：美国公司发现自己陷入巨大困境。
3.［A］ 意为：它逐渐获得更先进的技术。
第三段提到，现在中国的生产能力主要集中在低端技术产品（也即技术含量不高的产品）上，但是在未来一二十年中，中国和印度都将产生飞跃发展。中国特别关心新技术的获得，经常把获取新技术作为同外来投资者谈判的一部分（条件）。下一段提到激烈的国际竞争使发达国家可能产生失业等问题。可见，作者的意思是：随着中国获得更先进的技术，其国际竞争力必然增强，从而给发达国家带来就业等方面的威胁。
［B］ 意为：它把低端技术产品倾销到后者。
［C］ 意为：它在开发通信设备方面产生巨大飞跃。
［D］ 意为：它吸收大量海外投资。
4.［D］ 意为：相对于生产率而言更低的工资。
第四段第二、三句提到，激烈的国际竞争可能导致工人工资和生活水平的降低，现在，工资（的提高）已经赶不上生产率的提高。注意：这里并没有说工资不提高，而是指工资提高的幅度没有跟生产率提高的幅度成正比。
［A］ 意为：国家间加剧的对抗。
［B］ 意为：欧洲和美国大规模的失业。
［C］ 意为：欧洲产品在国际市场上的低份额。
5.［C］ 意为：教育和工人培训项目。
作者在最后一段就欧美在全球化中面临的问题提出了解决方法，提到更重要的事情是努力发展教育和工人的培训。
［A］ 意为：失业工人的福利。
［B］ 意为：（贸易）保护法的制定。
［D］ 意为：转往国外的“第二次浪潮”。
Notes
1.be at hand：近在手边；即将到来。
2.outsourcing industry：外包产业（指商业上原来自行制造的部件改为国际采购或制造的产业）。
3.call center,telemarketing,data entry,billing and low-end software development：呼叫中心，电话营销，数据录入，广告，低端软件开发。
4.be obsessed with：使着迷于……。
5.a deep pool：一大批（deep 形容数量很大）。
6.value-added chain：增值链。
7.Wages are not now tracking productivity gains. 工资现在不跟着生产率增加了。
8.the technological edge：技术优势。edge 在文中是“优势”的意思。
9.in turn：这里表示转折，作“因而”讲。
10.skill premium：技术溢价（因为技术高而得到的额外补偿）。
课文参考译文
全球化
在美国和欧洲的跨国公司开始把大量生产岗位转往国外15年之后，专家们一直在说， 转往国外的“第二次浪潮”即将出现，而且这次浪潮有可能比第一次浪潮大，对美国和欧洲就业市场的破坏作用可能更剧烈。在今后若干年中，在服务部门就业、数量可观、技术熟练且受过相当好的教育的中等收入的工人（这些职业长期以来被认为是不受外贸影响的安全职业，如会计、法律、金融和风险管理、保健和信息技术等），可能随着发展中国家承担越来越复杂的国外工作而面临被解雇的危险或受到严重的薪水压力。
对欧洲和美国来说，在已经出现许多经济不安全因素的时刻，上述情况令人担忧。欧盟的失业率目前是9%。美国就业增长在过去几年中一直是缓慢的，而且在14年中，实际工资一直在以最快的速度下降。据麦肯锡最近的一份报告说，在关键的“技术密集型产业的西方国家许多工人将第一次感受到低成本国家带来的巨大的压力。”这种竞争将导致那些部门的大公司从发展中国家购买产品，甚或把工厂转往国外。这些产业包括汽车零件、金属制品、机器、药品和电信设备，这些合在一起占美国工业制成品消费量的将近一半。麦肯锡报告指出，到2015年，那些关键的“第二次浪潮”产业将占美国从低成本国家进口的所有物资的整整一半。
毫无疑问，中国的制造能力仍集中在技术天平的低端。而印度快速发展的外包产业（这个产业雇用了100万人，出口额约为50亿美元）仍依靠呼叫中心、电话营销、数据录入、广告和低端软件开发。但是，中印两国都准备在今后一二十年中大跃进。中国特别关心获得先进的生产技术（包括电信和芯片制造设备），而且时常把获得技术作为与外国投资商谈判的部分内容。印度网罗了大批科学家、软件工程师、化学家、会计师、律师和医生，他们逐步把印度与信息技术有关的外包产业升级到增值链。
经济学家不相信转往国外的下一个阶段会引起大规模的失业。但是全球的激烈竞争可能损害（工人的）收入，从而损害生活水平。工资现在不跟着生产率增加了。欧洲面临的大概是更严重的进退两难处境。如果欧洲的公司开始更多地转往国外，那么失业就可能增加，而且随之而来的就是制定违背自身利益的保护主义法律的冲动。如果欧洲大陆的公司不更积极地转往国外，它就会在全球失去竞争力，它自己就会变成某种长期的失败者。
没有人能权威地说究竟西方的多少竞争力可能随着时间的推移而受到削弱。但是有人认为美国和欧洲的公司所享有的技术优势可能逐渐消失。据华盛顿经济政策研究所说，美国的软件产业在从2001年3月到2004年3月的3年期间削减了16%的工作岗位，因而可能已经减少了美国学习计算机和工程程序的大学生的就业机会。正如在华盛顿技术工人联盟（一个工会组织）任职的一位官员所问的那样：在技术职业转向国外的时候为什么还要主修计算机学科呢？
欧洲和美国必须制定较好的战略来补偿在全球贸易竞争中失败的工人，而且至关重要的一点是增强在教育和培训方面的努力，从而使他们的工人获得他们将需要的“技能溢价”来占据领先地位。鉴于全球化的展开速度，已经不能浪费时间了。
