首页
登录
职称英语
Pundits who want to sound judicious are fond of warning against generalizing.
Pundits who want to sound judicious are fond of warning against generalizing.
游客
2023-12-20
32
管理
问题
Pundits who want to sound judicious are fond of warning against generalizing. Each country is different, they say, and no one story fits all of Asia. This is, of course, silly. all of these economies plunged into economic crisis within a few months of each other, so they must have had something in common.
In fact, the logic of catastrophe was pretty much the same in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and South Korea. (Japan is a very different story. ) In each case investors -- mainly, but not entirely, foreign banks who had made short-term loans -- all tried to pull their money out at the same time. The result was a Combined banking and currency crisis: a banking crisis because no bank can convert all its assets into cash on short notice; a currency crisis because panicked investors were trying not only to convert long term assets into cash, but to convert baht or rupiah into dollars. In the face of the stampede, governments had no good options. If they let their currencies plunge, inflation would soar and companies that had borrowed in dollars would go bankrupt; if they tried to support their currencies by pushing up interest rates, the same firms would probably go bust from the combination of debt burden and recession. In practice, countries split the difference -- and paid a heavy price regardless.
Was the crisis a punishment for bad economic management? Like most cliches, the catchphrase "crony capitalism" has prospered because it gets at something real: excessively cozy relationships between government and business really did lead to a lot of bad investments. The still primitive financial structure of Asian business also made the economies peculiarly vulnerable to a loss of confidence. But the punishment was surely disproportionate to the crime, and many investments that look foolish in retrospect seemed sensible at the time.
Given that there were no good policy options, was the policy response mainly on the right track? There was frantic blame-shifting when everything in Asia seemed to be going wrong; now there is a race to claim credit when some things have started to go right. The International Monetary Fund points to Korea’s recovery -- and more generally to the fact that the sky didn’t fall after all -- as proof that its policy recommendations were right. Never mind that other IMF clients have done far worse, and that the economy of Malaysia- which refused IMF help, and horrified respectable opinion by imposing capital controls -- also seems to be on the mend. Malaysia’s Prime Minister, by contrast, claims full credit for any good news -- even though neighbouring economies also seem to have bottomed out.
The truth is that an observer without any ax to grind would probably conclude that none of the policies adopted either on or in defiance Of the IMF’s advice made much difference either way. Budget policies, interest rate policies, banking reform -- whatever countries tried, just about all the capital that could flee, did. And when there was no more money to run, the natural recuperative powers of the economies finally began to prevail. At best, the money doctors who purported to offer cures provided a helpful bedside manner; at worst, they were like medieval physicians who. prescribed bleeding as a remedy for all ills.
Will the patients stage a full recovery? It depends on exactly what you mean by "full". South Korea’s industrial production is already above its pre-crisis level; but in the spring of 1997 anyone who had predicted zero growth in Korean industry over the next two years would have been regarded as a reckless doomsayer. So if by recovery you mean not just a return to growth, but one that brings the region’s performance back to something like what people used to regard as the Asian norm, they have a long way to go. [br] "Pundits" in the first paragraph is closest in meaning to
选项
A、economists.
B、bankers.
C、industrialists.
D、financiers.
答案
A
解析
这是道词汇推断题。根据上下文,pundits在文中指经济学家。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3288765.html
相关试题推荐
[originaltext]6.Ms.Smithvotedagainsttheinvestmentproposalinthatdistri
[originaltext]6.Ms.Smithvotedagainsttheinvestmentproposalinthatdistri
[originaltext]6.Ms.Smithvotedagainsttheinvestmentproposalinthatdistri
[originaltext]6.Ms.Smithvotedagainsttheinvestmentproposalinthatdistri
ThefollowingareallspecificmeasurestoguardagainstinjurieswiththeEXCEP
Cooperationistheonlysafeguardwehaveagainstthedevelopmentofneurotic
Cooperationistheonlysafeguardwehaveagainstthedevelopmentofneurotic
Cooperationistheonlysafeguardwehaveagainstthedevelopmentofneurotic
1 It’sbeen40yearssincethesurgeongeneralissuedthefirstreportwarning
1 It’sbeen40yearssincethesurgeongeneralissuedthefirstreportwarning
随机试题
Ilongto______(有机会参加)volunteeractivitiesforthe2008BeijingOlympics.have
Youshouldnotfearspidersbecauseoftheirpoison.OfallthespidersinNorth
假设在一个2×2的交换经济中消费者A和B交换两种商品z和y,消费者A的效用函数
Springisbyfar___________timetovisi
患者,女,50岁,高血压,不利于控制高血压的食物是()A.猪肉 B.青菜
下列关于房地产抵押贷款的说法中,正确的有( )。A.借款人一定是债务人 B.
以下说法正确的有( )。A.现代生物技术以DNA重组技术的建立为标志 B
在义务教育阶段提高教育者们对科学教育重要性认识,必须给予一定的课时保障,这已经成
A.高层 B.中上层 C.中间层 D.较下层 E.最底层龙骨放在斗架的
英译汉:“numberandtypeofpackages”,正确的翻译为
最新回复
(
0
)