Anonymous
Anonymous asked in 社會與文化語言 · 2 decades ago

翻譯,英翻中,勿用軟體直接翻~~~

One consequence of such subsidies is to create surplus production. That surplus is then sold on world markets, where the extra supply depresses prices, making it much harder for producers in the developing world to sell their output at a profit. For example, EU subsidies to sugar beet producers amount to more than $4000 an acre. With a minimum price guarantee that exceeds their costs of production, EU farmers plant more sugar beet than the EU market can absorb. The surplus, some 6 million tons per year, is dumped on the world market, where it depresses world prices. Estimates suggest that if the EU stopped dumping its surplus production on world markets, sugar prices would increase by 20 percent. That would make a big difference for developing nations such as South Africa, which exports roughly half of its 2.6 million tons of annual sugar production. With a 20 percent rise in world prices, the South African economy would reap about $40 million more from sugar exports.

American subsidies to cotton farmers have a similar effect. Brazilian officials contend that by creating surplus production in the United States that is then dumped on the world market, U.S. cotton subsidies have depressed world prices for cotton by more than 50 percent since the mid-1990s. Low cotton prices cost Brazil some $640 million in lost export revenue from cotton by some $1 billion in 2001. According to the charitable organization Oxfam, the U.S. government spends about three times as much on cotton subsidies as it does on foreign aid for all of Africa. In 2001, the African nation of Mali lost about $43 million in export revenues due to plunging cotton prices, significantly more than the $37 million in foreign aid it received from the United States that year.

4 Answers

Rating
  • Anonymous
    2 decades ago
    Favorite Answer

    這樣的補貼的一個結果將建立過剩生產。 那個過剩然後被在世界市場上出售,在那裡額外的供應壓下價格, 使在發展中的世界的生產者賺錢出售他們的生產難得多。 例如,對糖紅菜頭生產者的歐盟補貼總計達超過每英畝4000 美元。 有一個最小價格保證那超過他們的生產成本,歐盟農場主植物比歐盟市場能吸收的更多的糖紅菜頭。 過剩,大約每年600萬公頓,被欺騙世界市場,在那裡它壓下世界價格。 估計建議那個那些歐盟由世界市場開出的生產過剩丟下停止,價格糖增加百分之20 將。 那將對于開發中國家(例如南非,退場門粗略它的260萬公頓每年糖生產的一半)來說產生大的影響。 有一20百分之加薪在世界價格內,南非經濟將大約4000萬更多元從糖退場門那裡得到。

    棉花農場主的美國補貼有一種相似的效應。 巴西官員鬥爭以創造過剩生產在那時欺騙世界市場的美國, 美國棉花補貼從20世紀90年代中期起有棉花的沮喪的世界價格超過百分之50。 低的棉花價格在2001年以大約10億美元從棉花花費巴西價值為大約6.4億美元的丟失的退場門收入。 根據慈善團契Oxfam,美國政府花費對3 倍非常在棉花補貼上, 天氣在國外援助適合所有非洲上做當時。 在2001年, 由於猛跌棉花價格,馬利的非洲國家丟失大約價值為4300萬美元的退場門收入, 相當多于價值為3700萬美元的國外援助它從美國收到那年。

  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    到下面的網址看看吧

    ▶▶http://qaz331.pixnet.net/blog

  • 2 decades ago

    最佳解答是這個??不會吧???

  • 2 decades ago

    過多的援助即造成過剩的物資,而這些物資還是會回到市場上,價格下跌,進而影響到製造商的利潤.比方說,歐盟對甜菜廠商的援助超過每英畝四千美元.為了確保最低利潤,歐盟的農人所種植的甜菜超過歐盟市場所能吸收的產量.這些過剩的產品,約每年六百萬噸,則傾銷到全球各地的市場,而影響到市場價格.據估計,如果歐盟停止傾銷,糖價會上揚約20%.這對開發中國家,如每年出口約130萬噸糖的南非來說,有著極大的影響.全球市場糖價上揚20%,南非將從中獲利約四千萬美金.

    同樣的情況亦發生在美洲的棉花農上.巴西官員聲稱,美國棉花產量過剩,並傾銷到全球市場,自1990年代中期,全球棉花價格下跌一半.低價棉花使巴西政府損失約六億四千萬美金的棉花出口稅收,到了2001年,損失達到約十億美元.根據Oxfam慈善組織統計,美國政府在棉花上的補助金額是對非洲外援金額的三倍.2001年,非洲國家馬利因棉花價格遽跌而損失四千三百萬美金的出口稅收,超過美國對該國每年三千七百萬美元的外援.

    我覺得翻的怪怪的,不太順.參考看看吧.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.