What Government Should Do · 政府应该做什么
The laissez-faire argument
- Some argued that laissez-faire policies and competition promoted economic growth in the long run, and they opposed government intervention during economic downturns.
- Some argued — the CED reports a position rather than endorsing it, as it did with Manifest Destiny in 5.2.
- In the long run and during economic downturns are the two halves: a claim about time, and a policy about crises.
自由放任的论证
- 一些人主张,自由放任政策与竞争在长期中促进经济增长,他们反对在经济下行期间进行政府干预。
- 一些人主张——CED 报告的是一种立场,而不是为它背书,正如它在 5.2 中对昭昭天命所做的那样。
- 在长期中与在经济下行期间是两半:一项关于时间的主张,以及一项关于危机的政策。
Select both · 两者 halves of the laissez-faire position. · 选择自由放任立场的两个方面。
A claim about time, and a policy about crises. · 一个关于时间的说法，以及一项关于危机的政策。
The awkward fact beside it
- 6.2 recorded government subsidies for transportation and communication systems, and 6.6 recorded pro-growth government policies.
- So the same period contains an argument for non-intervention and a record of substantial state support.
- Noticing that gap is the single most useful analytical move in this subtopic.
与之并列的尴尬事实
- 6.2 记录了政府对交通与通讯系统的补贴,而 6.6 记录了促增长的政府政策。
- 因此同一时期既包含一项主张不干预的论证,也包含一份关于大量国家支持的记录。
- 注意到这道落差,是本小节中最有用的单一分析动作。
'Some argued' shows the CED is... · ‘有些人认为’表明CED正在……
As it did with Manifest Destiny in 5.2. · 正如 5.2 中对天定命运的做法一样。
Policymakers looked outward too
- Foreign policymakers increasingly looked outside U.S. borders in an effort to gain greater influence and control over markets and natural resources in the Pacific Rim, Asia, and Latin America.
- This is 6.6's business sentence with foreign policymakers substituted, and the CED writes them in parallel on purpose.
- So government was not absent from the economy; it was active where it mattered to the largest firms.
政策制定者也向外张望
- 外交政策制定者日益把目光投向美国国界之外,力图在环太平洋地区、亚洲与拉丁美洲获得对市场与自然资源更大的影响与控制。
- 这是 6.6 那句关于企业的话,把主语换成了外交政策制定者,而 CED 有意把它们写成平行的。
- 因此政府并没有从经济中缺席;它在对最大的那些企业最要紧的地方是活跃的。
The doctrine, the record, or the outward turn? · 是教义、记录，还是外在转向？
Sort each element of government's economic role. · 对政府经济角色的每个要素进行排序。
Select both · 两者 records of state support from earlier subtopics. · 选择早期子主题中州支持的两个记录。
A doctrine and a record, side by side. · 一个教义和一个记录，并列呈现。
The same period contains an argument for non-intervention and a record of substantial state support. 6.2's government subsidies and 6.6's pro-growth government policies sit beside 6.12's laissez-faire argument — describing that distinction is the most useful move available here.
同一时期既包含一项主张不干预的论证,也包含一份关于大量国家支持的记录。6.2 的政府补贴与 6.6 的促增长的政府政策,与 6.12 的自由放任论证并列——描述这处区分,是这里可用的最有用的动作。
The CED writes the business sentence and the foreign-policy sentence in parallel. · CED用平行的方式写出了商业句子和外交政策句子。
Business and state looking in the same direction. · 商业与国家朝着同一方向前进。
Continuity and change in government's role
- The objective is continuities and changes in the role of the government in the U.S. economy.
- Continuity: the boundary question 3.9 opened is still being argued, now over regulation and downturns.
- Change: the government now subsidises infrastructure and pursues markets abroad — a larger role than 4.8's internal improvements.
政府角色的延续与变化
- 这一目标是政府在美国经济中角色的延续与变化。
- 延续:3.9 所打开的那个界限问题仍在被争论,如今是围绕监管与经济下行。
- 变化:政府如今补贴基础设施并在海外追逐市场——这是比 4.8 的内部改良更大的角色。
The most useful move is to describe the ____ between the doctrine and the record. · 最有用的做法是描述教义与记录之间的____。
Not a contradiction to expose. · 并非矛盾，无需揭露。
Writing about a doctrine and a record
- State the doctrine as the CED does — some argued — then set the record beside it.
- The strongest sentence: laissez-faire was argued for private production and against relief, while subsidy and diplomacy served the largest firms.
- That is not a contradiction to expose but a distinction to describe, and the CED's parallel sentences invite it.
书写一套学说与一份记录
- 像 CED 那样陈述这套学说——一些人主张——然后把那份记录放在它旁边。
- 最有力的一句话是:自由放任被用于私人生产,并用于反对救济,而补贴与外交则服务于最大的那些企业。
- 这不是一个需要揭穿的矛盾,而是一处需要描述的区分,而 CED 的平行句式正是在邀请这样做。
A government can decline to help a family through a bad winter and, in the same session, grant land and credit to build a railway. Both decisions can be defended on principle; only one of them is described as intervention.
一个政府可以拒绝帮助一个家庭熬过一个糟糕的冬天,却在同一届会期里为修建一条铁路划拨土地与信贷。两个决定都可以在原则上得到辩护;而其中只有一个被称为干预。
Some argued that laissez-faire policies and competition promoted economic growth in the long run, and they opposed government intervention during economic downturns, while foreign policymakers increasingly looked outside U.S. borders in an effort to gain greater influence and control over markets and natural resources in the Pacific Rim, Asia, and Latin America. Beside these sit 6.2's government subsidies and 6.6's pro-growth government policies — a doctrine and a record, and the distinction between them is the analysis.
一些人主张自由放任政策与竞争在长期中促进经济增长,并反对在经济下行期间进行政府干预,而外交政策制定者日益把目光投向美国国界之外,力图在环太平洋地区、亚洲与拉丁美洲获得对市场与自然资源更大的影响与控制。与它们并列的,是 6.2 的政府补贴与 6.6 的促增长的政府政策——一套学说与一份记录,而两者之间的区分正是分析所在。