2021年商務(wù)英語中級(jí)翻譯模擬試題（6）

環(huán)球網(wǎng)校提供 免費(fèi)預(yù)約短信提醒服務(wù)，以短信的方式提前告知各位考生2021年11月BEC商務(wù)英語考試報(bào)名、考試時(shí)間等信息，以防您錯(cuò)過！編輯推薦：2021年商務(wù)英語中級(jí)翻譯模擬試題匯總。

A quick fix

Nov 1st 2008

From The Economist print edition

The IMF's new scheme to help emerging economies weather financial trumoil

Reuters

“EXCEPTIONAL times call for an exceptional response” said Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF's boss, of a new short-term lending facility for emerging economies facing temporary liquidity problems in capital markets. Under the “short-term liquidity facility” (SLF), approved on Wednesday October 29th, qualifying countries will be eligible for a loan at short notice of up to 500% of their IMF quota, the maximum amount a country is obliged to provide to the IMF. The three-month loans will come with a minimum of conditions relating to economic policy; they are also intended to be made available with a rapidity not usually associated with the organisation.

All this is music to the ears of those, including many within the IMF, who have been arguing that the Fund needs to match its lending to changing global circumstances. The new facility goes some way towards adressing an obvious shortcoming in the IMF’s arsenal of lending instruments. Until now, the Fund had nothing it could deploy aimed at countries facing a temporary shortage of liquidity in spite of sound macroeconomic fundamentals. Yet this situation had become much more likely, even without a paralysing credit crisis, because of increasing global financial interdependence.

A country lacking short-term liquidity would be loth to approach the IMF for a loan under the “stand-by arrangement” (SBA), the mainstay of the IMF’s crisis lending. The SBA carries a stigma, because requesting such a loan is assumed to reflect badly on the recipient’s economic management. But the new loan facility will only be available those countries that the IMF deem to be in sound macroeconomic health. If anything, qualification should serve to reassure outsiders that the country’s policies are essentially sound, and that the difficulties it faces are temporary and a result of factors beyond its control. By this method, the IMF has also precluded the need for the type of onerous conditions which usually accompany loans under the SBA.

The second feature of the SBA that makes it less well suited to dealing with temporary liquidity crises is that funding is usually released in phased tranches. In a liquidity crisis brought on by a collapse in confidence a large loan, quickly administered, is the best method for restoring confidence in a short period of time—exactly how the new loans should work.

Most will cheer the IMF for introducing flexible loanmaking without onerous conditionality but concerns remain. Some economists fear that the funds available for the IMF to dole out, which in September stood at $255 billion, may not be enough if several emerging markets come under stress at the same time. Deutsche Bank estimates that a single large emerging market may face a financing gap of up to $90 billion, depending on roll-over rates for credit lines, liquidation of foreign positions in bond and equity markets, and domestic capital flight.

Under these circumstances, the IMF’s pockets, which seemed enviously deep just a short while ago, might not be deep enough. Simon Johnson, a former IMF chief economist, reckons that it may need upto $1 trillion. The IMF acknowledges the problem and says it is prepared to “work with others to generate additional resources to make sure that countries have the money they need to restore confidence and maintain stability”.

Just as important, it remains to be seen how difficult it will be to qualify for a loan under the SLF. It is unclear how strictly the IMF will set the criteria for certifying that a country’s economic management is sound. As a result there may be a number of vulnerable countries that do not qualify for the scheme. As with any programme of this kind, the devil is in the details. The question, then is whether the IMF’s new facility is as good in practice as it seems to be in theory.

“非常時(shí)刻需要非常的應(yīng)對(duì)措施”——國際貨幣基金組織(IMF)的老板說道，該應(yīng)對(duì)是指為暫時(shí)面對(duì)資本市場流動(dòng)性問題的新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體提供一個(gè)新的短期貸款工具。10月29日的周三批準(zhǔn)的“短期流動(dòng)性貸款工具”(SLF)使得有資格的國家可以在短期內(nèi)能夠籌到高達(dá)他們IMF配額5倍的貸款，這也是一個(gè)國家被要求提供給IMF的最大數(shù)額。該項(xiàng)為期三個(gè)月的貸款將僅有最少的與經(jīng)濟(jì)政策有關(guān)的附帶條款;它們的撥付也將快于該組織以往的慣例。

這些措施與對(duì)于包括IMF組織內(nèi)部在內(nèi)的很多希望該基金根據(jù)全球變化來配比其貸款的人想法不謀而合。新的工具某種程度上克服了IMF借款工具武器庫的一個(gè)明顯弱點(diǎn)。該基金直到現(xiàn)在才可以將目標(biāo)集中在那些有著良好的宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)基本面但面對(duì)短暫的流動(dòng)性缺乏的國家。但是由于全球金融不斷加強(qiáng)的相互依賴使得就算沒有癱瘓性的信用危機(jī)，這種情況發(fā)生的可能性也更大了。

一個(gè)缺乏短期流動(dòng)性的國家可能不愿意找到IMF要求根據(jù)“備用信貸協(xié)議”(SBA)——IMF危機(jī)貸款的中流砥柱——貸款給它。備用信貸協(xié)議(SBA)帶有個(gè)一個(gè)恥辱的烙印，因?yàn)橐筮@樣一種貸款會(huì)被認(rèn)為反映了貸款接受國經(jīng)濟(jì)管理的不善。但新的貸款工具只會(huì)撥付給那些IMF認(rèn)為處在良好經(jīng)濟(jì)健康狀況中的國家。如果說還有什么區(qū)別的話，就是能夠貸到這樣的款能夠起到安撫外界的人的作用，表明該國家的政策本質(zhì)上是良好的，而且該國家面對(duì)的困難是暫時(shí)的、是超出其控制的因素造成的。IMF也通過該方法排除了通常在SBA協(xié)議下附帶很多條款的必要。

SBA協(xié)議的另外一個(gè)使得其不那么適合處理暫時(shí)流動(dòng)性危機(jī)的特點(diǎn)是資金是分階段撥付的。在信心崩潰導(dǎo)致的流動(dòng)性危機(jī)中，快速審批通過的大額貸款才是短期內(nèi)重振信心的最佳方法——新的貸款正是如此。

大部分人對(duì)IMF引入如此具有靈活性的貸款而不附帶很多條件表示高興，但對(duì)此的疑慮仍然存在。一些經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家擔(dān)心如果一些新興市場在同一時(shí)間里也面臨壓力時(shí)，IMF少量發(fā)放資金(九月份數(shù)額為2,550億美金)只是杯水車薪而已。德意志銀行估計(jì)某一個(gè)大的新興市場可能面對(duì)的是高達(dá)900億美金的融資鴻溝，這取決于貸款最高限額的滾動(dòng)利率，債券和資本市場中外國頭寸的流動(dòng)性和國內(nèi)資本的流動(dòng)。

在這些種情況下，IMF的腰包雖然之前看來還深得令人羨慕，但可能也不夠深了。IMF的前首席經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家認(rèn)為IMF可能需要高達(dá)10,000億美金才行。IMF表示知曉了這個(gè)問題并且說它已經(jīng)準(zhǔn)備”與其他組織一道來生成更多的資源保證國家有他們需要的資金來重振信心保持穩(wěn)定”。

如其重要性一樣，有資格獲得短期流動(dòng)性貸款工具(SLF)的困難程度也有目共睹。IMF如何設(shè)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)證明一個(gè)國家的經(jīng)濟(jì)管理是良好的仍然不清楚。所以可能存在許多得不到貸款但已岌岌可危的國家。正如任何其他此類項(xiàng)目一樣，魔鬼存在于細(xì)節(jié)之中。那么問題就是IMF的新工具在實(shí)際應(yīng)用中是否如其理論看上去的那樣好。

以上就是環(huán)球網(wǎng)校小編為您帶來的“2021年商務(wù)英語中級(jí)翻譯模擬試題（6）”的全部內(nèi)容，需要商務(wù)英語考點(diǎn)、模擬練習(xí)等資料的考生，可點(diǎn)擊“免費(fèi)下載”按鈕，進(jìn)行免費(fèi)下載，更多BEC商務(wù)英語備考資料持續(xù)更新中！