http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/09/economist-explains-5

Photo

Specifically, the protests articulate opposition to new election rules in the special administrative region, effectively giving Beijing “the right to screen candidates for the post of Hong Kong’s top official,” the reporters write. “Starting in 2017, they would allow residents to vote directly for the leader of the city’s government, the chief executive, but a nominating committee dominated by pro-Beijing loyalists would be used to restrict how many and which candidates could enter the contest.”“Thousands of Hong Kong university students abandoned classes Monday to rally against Chinese government limits on voting rights,” report Chris Buckley and Alan Wong for The New York Times, “a bellwether demonstration of the city’s appetite for turning smoldering discontent into street level opposition.”

Hong Kongers are especially resistant to such stringent oversight. Since the city was returned to China in 1997, following more than 150 years of British colonial rule, it has “enjoyed considerable legal autonomy under the ‘one country, two systems’ formula, in which Hong Kong residents retained rights not available elsewhere in China,” The Times reports. Hong Kong’s constitutional document reads, “The socialist system and policies shall not be practiced in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and the previous capitalist system and way of life shall remain unchanged for 50 years.”

In an op-ed written for The Financial Times (registration required), C. Y. Leung, the chief executive of the S.A.R., attempts to paint a picture of a better Hong Kong under Chinese rule. “For the first time, all Hong Kong’s permanent residents, including those who are foreign nationals, are being offered the chance to vote directly for their next leader,” he writes. “The 28 British governors who ruled Hong Kong for a total of 155 years before 1997 were dispatched by the British government without any input at all from the Hong Kong people — or the British people, for that matter.”

Since the transfer of sovereignty, Hong Kong’s chief executives have been selected by a special election committee. And during those years, Hong Kong, “with the full support of Beijing,” has been “working towards achieving universal suffrage.” Beijing has, at long last, offered Hong Kongers the opportunity to select their own leader, and this, Mr. Leung insists, is not a privilege to be scorned. “The question that the Hong Kong people and our legislators need to address now is whether we embrace this opportunity offered by Beijing for major democratic progress, universal suffrage in 2017, or would rather opt for stagnation by retaining the election committee. Do we want to take one step forward or two steps back?”

But pro-Beijing rhetoric, like that of Mr. Leung’s, is intentionally misleading, write Kin-Ming Kwong and Chiew Ping Yew for The Diplomat. “The chief executive hails the election of the city’s political chief by universal suffrage in 2017 as ‘major democratic progress,’ asserting that a rejection of the political reform will be ‘two steps back’ for Hong Kong. But make no mistake about it: to call Beijing’s restrictive framework ‘political reform’ would be a misnomer.”

“Under Beijing’s conservative framework rolled out on August 31 this year, a candidate would have to clear a far higher hurdle to stand in the 2017 chief executive election,” they report. “According to the decision by China’s rubber-stamp legislature, the National People’s Congress, a candidate running for office has to be endorsed by more than half of the members in the 1,200 nominating committee, to be modeled after the existing election committee made up of mostly Beijing loyalists. This high nomination threshold effectively rules out any possibility that a democrat or a candidate not approved by Beijing may have in contesting the 2017 election, ensuring that the five million eligible voters in Hong Kong would only get to choose among two to three pre-vetted candidates.”

The debate over electoral policy in Hong Kong, however, has implications beyond the tiny, densely populated island city. As Evan Osnos writes for The New Yorker, the crisis will “likely grow,” determining not only Hong Kong’s political future but also “which political ethic will prevail across China in the years ahead: globalism or nationalism, two fundamentally different conceptions of how China will relate to the rest of the world.”

At Al Jazeera, Kevin Holden wonders whether tremors emanating from this tension will inflame historical wounds. “China’s decision to allow the people of Hong Kong to have tightly controlled elections is triggering the formation of a broad-based democracy movement that in many ways resembles the one that was crushed a generation ago at Tiananmen Square,” he says. “Beijing has already begun official denunciations — branding the pacifist protesters as would-be rebels — even as the People’s Liberation Army periodically moves its armored personnel carriers through the streets of Hong Kong.”

This is, perhaps, exactly what mainland officials want, says Stephen Vines, writing for The South China Morning Post. “Beijing’s proposals are designed to foster confrontation and show that the central authorities will not blink when it comes to maintaining tight control over the Special Administrative Region,” he claims.

Similarly, Beijing has cleverly shifted the debate in such a way that frames the expectation for total, unfettered democracy as unrealistic, even childish and impudent. “The usual suspects, who nurture intense dislike for the democratic movement but pretend to occupy the middle ground, have emerged with glee to berate true believers in universal suffrage for not accepting that something is better than nothing,” Mr. Vines explains.

And it is doubtful party officials will stop there. “Against this background, we can understand why Beijing is looking for confrontation to bring Hong Kong people under control,” he says. “Anyone naive enough to imagine that this will be limited to imposing a phony form of democracy clearly knows nothing about how dictators work.”

bellwether - 전조

smolder-그을다, 울적하다, 연기피우다

stringent - 엄중한, 긴박한

oversight- 실수, 간과, 감독

for that matter - 그문제에 관해서

sovereignty-통치권, 자주권

at long last-오랜 시간이 흐른 후[마침내]

misnomer-부적절한 명칭

rubber-stamp-(법률・계획 등을) 잘 살펴보지도 않고 인가하다

vet-점검하다, 심사하다

implications 결과 영향

tremors - 미진

emanating - 발하다

denunciations - 맹렬한 비난

glee - 신남

berate - 질책하다

phony - 가짜의

ONE of the most notable demographic trends of the last two decades has been the delayed entry of young people into adulthood. According to a large-scale national study conducted since the late 1970s, it has taken longer for each successive generation to finish school, establish financial independence, marry and have children. Today’s 25-year-olds, compared with their parents’ generation at the same age, are twice as likely to still be students, only half as likely to be married and 50 percent more likely to be receiving financial assistance from their parents.

People tend to react to this trend in one of two ways, either castigating today’s young people for their idleness or acknowledging delayed adulthood as a rational, if regrettable, response to a variety of social changes, like poor job prospects. Either way, postponing the settled, responsible patterns of adulthood is seen as a bad thing.

This is too pessimistic. Prolonged adolescence, in the right circumstances, is actually a good thing, for it fosters novelty-seeking and the acquisition of new skills.

Studies reveal adolescence to be a period of heightened “plasticity” during which the brain is highly influenced by experience. As a result, adolescence is both a time of opportunity and vulnerability, a time when much is learned, especially about the social world, but when exposure to stressful events can be particularly devastating. As we leave adolescence, a series of neurochemical changes make the brain increasingly less plastic and less sensitive to environmental influences. Once we reach adulthood, existing brain circuits can be tweaked, but they can’t be overhauled.

You might assume that this is a strictly biological phenomenon. But whether the timing of the change from adolescence to adulthood is genetically preprogrammed from birth or set by experience (or some combination of the two) is not known. Many studies find a marked decline in novelty-seeking as we move through our 20s, which may be a cause of this neurochemical shift, not just a consequence. If this is true — that a decline in novelty-seeking helps cause the brain to harden — it raises intriguing questions about whether the window of adolescent brain plasticity can be kept open a little longer by deliberate exposure to stimulating experiences that signal the brain that it isn’t quite ready for the fixity of adulthood.

Evolution no doubt placed a biological upper limit on how long the brain can retain the malleability of adolescence. But people who can prolong adolescent brain plasticity for even a short time enjoy intellectual advantages over their more fixed counterparts. Studies have found that those with higher I.Q.s, for example, enjoy a longer stretch of time during which new synapses continue to proliferate and their intellectual development remains especially sensitive to experience. It’s important to be exposed to novelty and challenge when the brain is plastic not only because this is how we acquire and strengthen skills, but also because this is how the brain enhances its ability to profit from future enriching experiences.

With this in mind, the lengthy passage into adulthood that characterizes the early 20s for so many people today starts to look less regrettable. Indeed, those who can prolong adolescence actually have an advantage, as long as their environment gives them continued stimulation and increasing challenges.

What do I mean by stimulation and challenges? The most obvious example is higher education, which has been shown to stimulate brain development in ways that simply getting older does not. College attendance pays neural as well as economic dividends.

Naturally, it is possible for people to go to college without exposing themselves to challenge, or, conversely, to surround themselves with novel and intellectually demanding experiences in the workplace. But generally, this is more difficult to accomplish on the job than in school, especially in entry-level positions, which typically have a learning curve that hits a plateau early on.

Alas, something similar is true of marriage. For many, after its initial novelty has worn off, marriage fosters a lifestyle that is more routine and predictable than being single does. Husbands and wives both report a sharp drop in marital satisfaction during the first few years after their wedding, in part because life becomes repetitive. A longer period of dating, with all the unpredictability and change that come with a cast of new partners, may be better for your brain than marriage.

If brain plasticity is maintained by staying engaged in new, demanding and cognitively stimulating activity, and if entering into the repetitive and less exciting roles of worker and spouse helps close the window of plasticity, delaying adulthood is not only O.K.; it can be a boon.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/opinion/sunday/the-case-for-delayed-adulthood.html?ref=international

A stage of her own

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/30/losing-our-touch/?_php=true&_type=blogs&ref=international&_r=0

Are we losing our senses? In our increasingly virtual world, are we losing touch with the sense of touch itself? And if so, so what?

I recently had occasion to pose these questions to students in a college class I teach on eros — “from Plato to today.” Not surprisingly, the topic of physical contact and sex came up, and the conversation turned very much to “today.” A number of the students said that they regularly messaged online before having “real contact” with partners, perhaps using online dating and mating services like Match.com, OkCupid, SpeedDate.com and Tinder. They shared messaging acronyms that signaled their level of willingness to have sex, and under what conditions. They admitted to enjoying the relative anonymity of the one-off “hook up,” whose consummation required no preliminary close-quarters courtship rites or flirtation ceremonies, no culinary seduction, no caress, nothing — apart from the eventual “blind rut,” as James Joyce put it — requiring the presence of a functioning, sensitive body.

We noted the rather obvious paradox: The ostensible immediacy of sexual contact was in fact mediated digitally. And it was also noted that what is often thought of as a “materialist” culture was arguably the most “immaterialist” culture imaginable — vicarious, by proxy, and often voyeuristic.

Photo

Is today’s virtual dater and mater something like an updated version of Plato’s Gyges, who could see everything at a distance but was touched by nothing? Are we perhaps entering an age of “excarnation,” where we obsess about the body in increasingly disembodied ways? For if incarnation is the image become flesh, excarnation is flesh become image. Incarnation invests flesh; excarnation divests it.

In perhaps the first great works of human psychology, the “De Anima,” Aristotle pronounced touch the most universal of the senses. Even when we are asleep we are susceptible to changes in temperature and noise. Our bodies are always “on.” And touch is the most intelligent sense, Aristotle explained, because it is the most sensitive. When we touch someone or something we are exposed to what we touch. We are responsive to others because we are constantly in touch with them.

“Touch knows differences,” Aristotle insisted. It is the source of our most basic power to discriminate. The thin-skinned person is sensitive and intelligent; the thick-skinned, coarse and ignorant. Think of Odysseus and the Cyclops, Jacob and Esau. The power of touch. Even the Buddha, when challenged by Mara to reveal his authority, simply touches the ground. Our first intelligence is sensory refinement. And this primal sensibility is also what places us at risk in the world, exposing us to adventure and discovery.

Aristotle was challenging the dominant prejudice of his time, one he himself embraced in earlier works. The Platonic doctrine of the Academy held that sight was the highest sense, because it is the most distant and mediated; hence most theoretical, holding things at bay, mastering meaning from above. Touch, by contrast, was deemed the lowest sense because it is ostensibly immediate and thus subject to intrusions and pressures from the material world. Against this, Aristotle made his radical counterclaim that touch did indeed have a medium, namely “flesh.” And he insisted that flesh was not just some material organ but a complex mediating membrane that accounts for our primary sensings and evaluations.

Tactility is not blind immediacy — not merely sensorial but cognitive, too. Savoring is wisdom; in Latin, wisdom is “sapientia,” from “sapere,” to taste. These carnal senses make us human by keeping us in touch with things, by responding to people’s pain — as when the disguised Odysseus (whose name can be translated as “bearer of pain,”), returning to Ithaca, is recognized by his nursemaid, Eurycleia, at the touch of his childhood scar.

But Aristotle did not win this battle of ideas. The Platonists prevailed and the Western universe became a system governed by “the soul’s eye.” Sight came to dominate the hierarchy of the senses, and was quickly deemed the appropriate ally of theoretical ideas. Western philosophy thus sprang from a dualism between the intellectual senses, crowned by sight, and the lower “animal” senses, stigmatized by touch. And Western theology — though heralding the Christian message of Incarnation (“word made flesh”) — all too often confirmed the injurious dichotomy with its anti-carnal doctrines; prompting Nietzsche’s verdict that Christianity was “Platonism for the people” and “gave Eros poison to drink.” Thus opto-centrism prevailed for over 2,000 years, culminating in our contemporary culture of digital simulation and spectacle. The eye continues to rule in what Roland Barthes once called our “civilization of the image.” The world is no longer our oyster, but our screen.

For all the fascination with bodies, our current technology is arguably exacerbating our carnal alienation. While offering us enormous freedoms of fantasy and encounter, digital eros may also be removing us further from the flesh.

Pornography, for example, is now an industry worth tens of billions of dollars worldwide. Seen by some as a progressive sign of post-60s sexual liberation, pornography is, paradoxically, a twin of Puritanism. Both display an alienation from flesh — one replacing it with the virtuous, the other with the virtual. Each is out of touch with the body.

THIS movement toward privatization and virtuality is explored in Spike Jonze’s recent movie “Her,” where a man falls in love with his operating system, which names itself Samantha. He can think of nothing else and becomes insanely jealous when he discovers that his virtual lover, Samantha, is also flirting with thousands of other subscribers. Eventually, Samantha feels so bad for him that she decides to supplement her digital persona with a real body by sending a surrogate lover. But the plan fails miserably — while the man touches the embodied lover he hears the virtual signals of Samantha in his ears and cannot bridge the gap. The split between digital absence and carnal presence is unbearable. Something is missing: love in the flesh.

The move toward excarnation is apparent in what is becoming more and more a fleshless society. In medicine, “bedside manner” and hand on pulse has ceded to the anonymous technologies of imaging in diagnosis and treatment. In war, hand-to-hand combat has been replaced by “targeted killing” via remote-controlled drones. If contemporary warfare renders us invulnerable to those who cannot touch us, can we make peace without a hand to shake? (Think of Mandela-de Klerk or Begin-Sadat).

Moreover, certain cyber engineers now envisage implanting transmission codes in brains so that we will not have to move a finger — or come into contact with another human being — to get what we want. The touch screen replaces touch itself. The cosmos shrinks to a private monitor; each viewer a disembodied self unto itself.

Full humanity requires the ability to sense and be sensed in turn: the power, as Shakespeare said, to “feel what wretches feel” — or, one might also add, what artists, cooks, musicians and lovers feel. We need to find our way in a tactile world again. We need to return from head to foot, from brain to fingertip, from iCloud to earth. To close the distance, so that eros is more about proximity than proxy. So that soul becomes flesh, where it belongs. Such a move, I submit, would radically alter our “sense” of sex in our digital civilization. It would enhance the role of empathy, vulnerability and sensitivity in the art of carnal love, and ideally, in all of human relations. Because to love or be loved truly is to be able to say, “I have been touched.”

Richard Kearney is a philosophy professor at Boston College whose books include “The Wake of Imagination” and the forthcoming “Carnal Hermeneutics.”

anonymity  익명성

rut 발정기, 바퀴자국, 판에 박힌 생할

ostensible  표면적으로만의

immediacy  직접성, 신속성

vicarious 대리의

by proxy 대리인으로

proximity  가까움

voyeuristic 관음증의 

excarnation 근육제거

refinement 개선

primal  원시의 , 태고의

Tactility  감촉성, 촉감

immediacy  직접성 신속성

Savoring  향휴하기

carnal  육욕의 ,성욕의

nursemaid  보모

dualism  이원론

crowned 왕관을 쓴

stigmatize 오명을 씌우다 낙인찍다

culminate 절정에 달하다

envisage 예상하다

wretch 가엾은 사람, 악마같은 인간

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/europes-migration-crisis.html?ref=international&_r=0

Unusually calm seas in the Mediterranean and stagnant European economies are contributing to a perfect storm over migration.

With the euro zone’s economy sputtering, countries simply cannot cope with a surge of migrants and asylum seekers. Yet the European Union is dragging its feet on forging a more unified approach to migration that would distribute the financial and social costs of coping with refugees more fairly. Last month, the United Nations said the rising death toll of migrants desperately trying to reach Europe required urgent action.

Part of the problem is the European Union’s Dublin Regulation, which makes the country on which an asylum seeker first sets foot responsible for processing that person’s claim. Southern European countries are on the front lines, forced to deal with a disproportionate number of migrants arriving from North Africa.

Another problem is a treaty between Britain and France that allows British border guards to check passports in France. With Britain a prime destination for many migrants, Calais, the French port city, has found itself overwhelmed with new arrivals, mostly from Sudan and Eritrea.

Violent turmoil in Libya, a major departure point for migrants attempting to reach Europe across the Mediterranean, is causing panic, and traffickers are overloading boats. On Friday, 19 migrants were rescued from a boat that sank off the coast of Libya and had been carrying 270 people.

Meanwhile, Spain is blaming Morocco for a surge of some 1,000 migrants that made it across the Strait of Gibraltar on calm seas within a single 48-hour period last month. Morocco is reeling from its role as a staging ground for people attempting to reach Europe, many by climbing the razor-wire topped fences that surround Spain’s North African territories of Ceuta and Melilla.

Italy is at the breaking point. More than 100,000 people have arrived in Italy from North Africa since the beginning of this year. Italy says it has rescued 4,000 migrants over one weekend in August alone.

Only an end to terror and conflict in Syria, Iraq and Libya and a significant improvement in African living standards would stem the flow of desperate people from Africa and the Middle East who are reaching Europe. That, unfortunately, is not likely to happen in the immediate future. Europe has a crisis on its hands that is feeding the rise of populist anti-immigration parties and ugly xenophobia across the Continent.

The European Union needs to reform a migration policy that clearly is not working. Besides more and faster search-and-rescue operations at sea, Europe must provide legal avenues to safety, lest more migrants lose their lives on deadly journeys.

sputter 펑펑 하는 소리를 내다. 식식거리며 말하다

drag one's feet 꾸물거리다

traffickers  악덕상인, 불법거래 상인

Strait  해협

reel 휘청거리다, 크게 동요하다

jockey 기수, 자리를 다투다

whiff  잠깐 끼치는 냄새, 약간의 조짐

flaccidity  연약, 무기력

conviction  유죄 판결, 강한 신념

slavishly  노예같이

pounce 덥치다

disembodied 누구 것인지 알수없는 곳에서 나오는

enterprise 기업, 사업, 진취성, 기획력

beatify  시복하다

of stripes  ... 종류의

the Ascension 예수의 승천, 승진

shores  (해안을 끼고 있는)국가, 해안

Korea’s largest-ever police man-hunt

stony  돌이 많은, 돌처럼 차가운

brook (부정문) 용납하다,  개울

fare  진척되다

vernacular 자국어

infra dig (구식 비격식) 품위[위신]를 떨어뜨리는

connotes 함축하다

ferment 발효시키다, (정치 사회적)동요

secularisation 세속화

incipient 막 시작된 

the world is your oyster  세상에 못할 것이 없다. 기회가 열려있다.

hymn 찬송가

hotbed (범죄 폭력의) 온상

tenacity 고집, 끈기

studded with ~가 많은

the literati (격식) (문학을 즐기는) 지식인들

http://www.economist.com/news/business/21613356-dutch-farmers-add-sustainability-their-enviable-productivity-polder-and-wiser

Polder 네덜란드 간척지

rolled out  출시하다

zoom past 옆으로 휭 지나가다

Reclaimed land  매립지

monoculture  단일 재배, 단일민족사회

degradation  비하, 수모, 저하

carpetbombing  융단폭격

manure  거름, 거름을 주다

go all out for something ~에 전력투구하다

pesticides 살충제, 농약

only way forward  앞으로 나갈수있는 유일한 길이다.

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21613263-after-bad-couple-centuries-china-itching-regain-its-place-world-how-should?spc=scode&spv=xm&ah=9d7f7ab945510a56fa6d37c30b6f1709

take hold 장악하다

cusp 끝, 사이

 stealing a march 앞질러 행동하다

plundering  약탈하다

upend  위아래를 거꾸로 하다

transactional  업무적인

piracy 표절, 해적질

afforestation 숲가꾸기

ravages 유린, 참화

grievance 불만(사항)

spate  빈발

belligerence 호전성, 교전

reefs  암초

oil rig (석유, 천연가스)굴착 장치

rig 조작하다, 설치하다

in the face of something ~에도 불구하고, ~하는 결과 앞에서

 disaster relief.  재난구조

ground on 오래끌다

nonsensical  터무니없는

Manichean 마니교

imagery 형상화

constraints 제한, 통제

writ  영장

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/opinion/choking-the-oceans-with-plastic.html?ref=international

bolstered  강화하다

description of something/everything 어떤 종류의, 온갖 종류의

gyres 나선형 소용돌이

extrapolated 추론하다

deleterious 해로운

biodegrade 박테리아에 의해 분해되다

vagrant 부랑자

legion 군단, 많은 수

sieve 체, 체로 치다

oil slick 기름이 떠다니는 지역

sea urchin 성게

purport 주장하다

Biodegradable 생분해성의

degradable 분해할수있는

ordinances 법령 조례

Why does Easter move around so much?

왜 부활절 기간은 자꾸 변할까?

THIS year Easter falls on March 31st for adherents to the various branches of Western Christianity, and on May 5th for Eastern Christianity. In both cases the date of Easter can vary by more than a month, falling between March 22nd and April 25th for the Western church, and between April 4th and May 8th for the Eastern church. This in turn determines the dates of public holidays, school holidays and the timings of school terms in many countries. Why does Easter move around so much?

이번 년 부활절은 서양 기독교의 종파 지지자들에게 3월 31일에 해당하고, 동방정교는 5월 5일에 해당한다. 양쪽의 경우에도 부활절 날짜는 한 달 이상 차이가 날 수도 있어서 서양 기독교는 3월 22에서 4월 25일, 동방 정교는 4월 4일에서 5월 8일 사이이다. 이는 결국 많은 나라에서 공휴일과, 학교 휴일, 학기 시작 시간을 결정한다. 왜 부활절 기간은 자꾸 변할까?

According to the Bible, Jesus held the Last Supper with his disciples on the night of the Jewish festival of Passover, died the next day (Good Friday) and rose again on the third day (the following Sunday). The beginning of Passover is determined by the first full moon after the vernal equinox, which can occur on any day of the week. To ensure that Easter occurs on a Sunday, the Council of Nicaea therefore ruled in 325AD that Easter would be celebrated on the Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox. But there’s a twist: if the full moon falls on a Sunday, then Passover begins on a Sunday, so Easter is then delayed by a week to ensure that it still occurs after Passover. To confuse matters further, the council fixed the date of the vernal equinox at March 21st, the date on which it occurred in 325AD (though it now occurs on March 20th), and introduced a set of tables to define when the full moon occurs that do not quite align with the actual astronomical full moon (which means that, in practice, Easter can actually occur before Passover).

성서에 따르면, 예수는 유대인의 명절인 유월절 날 밤 그의 제자들과 최후의 만찬을 가졌고, 다음날(성금요일) 돌아가셨다가 3번째가 되는 날(그 다음 일요일)에 부활했다. 유월절의 시작은 춘분 후 첫 번째 보름달로 결정되는데, 보름달은 주중의 언제든지 생길 수 있다. 그래서 부활절이 일요일로 되도록 만들기 위해, 니케아 공의회는 325AD에 부활절은 첫 번째 보름달 또는 춘분 직후 일요일에 기념하도록 정했다. 그러나 예상치 못한 전개가 있었다. 만약 보름달이 일요일에 해당하면. 유월절은 일요일에 시작하고, 그러면 부활절은 유월절 후에 여전히 일어나야 하니 한 주 미뤄지는 것이다. 문제를 더 복잡하게 만든 것은 공의회가 325AD에 일어난 춘분 날짜를 3월 21일로 고정시켜 버리고(지금은 3월 20일이다), 언제 보름달이 뜨는지 규정하는 명판을 도입했는데, 이 달력은 실제 천문학적 보름달과 상당히 불일치한다(이 말은 실제로 부활절은 유월절 전에 일어난다는 뜻이다).

The earliest possible date for Easter occurs when the notional full moon falls on March 21st itself, in a year in which March 21st falls on a Saturday. Easter is then celebrated on Sunday March 22nd, a rare event that last happened in 1818 and will next take place in 2285. The latest possible date for Easter occurs when there is a full moon on March 20th, so that the first full moon after March 21st falls a lunar month or 29 days later, on April 18th. If April 18th falls on a Sunday, then the special Sunday rule applies, and Easter is celebrated the following Sunday, or April 25th. This last happened in 1943, and will next happen in 2038. There is therefore a 35-day window in which Easter can fall, depending on the timing of the full moon relative to March 21st. Eastern Christianity applies the same basic rule but uses the older Julian calendar, which is currently 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar, giving a different range of possible dates. This can pose problems.

가장 빠르면서 가능한 부활절 날짜는 개념상 보름달이 3월 21일에 뜨고, 그 해 3월 21일이 토요일에 해당할 때이다. 그러면 부활절은 3월 22일 일요일에 기념하게 되는데, 이런 드문 일은 가장 최근엔 1818년 일어났고, 다음번은 2285년에 일어날 것이다. 가장 늦으면서 가능한 부활절 날짜는 보름달이 3월 20일에 뜨고, 그러면 3월 21일 이후 첫 번째 보름달이 음력에 따라 29일 후인 4월 18일에 뜬다. 만약 4월 18일이 일요일이라면, ‘슈퍼 선데이’가 적용돼 부활절은 다음 일요일인 4월 25일에 기념하게 된다. 이것은 마지막으로 1943년에 일어났고 다음번은 2038년에 일어날 것이다. 그러므로 부활절이 일어날 수 기간은 35일 사이(window)이고, 3월 21일과 관련된 보름달이 뜨는 시간에 달려있다. 동방정교는 같은 기본 법칙을 적용하지만, 그레고리안력보다 13일 뒤쳐진 더 오래된 율리우스력을 사용하기 때문에 부활절이 가능한 날짜들이 다르다. 이것이 문제를 일으킬 수 있다.

There have been various proposals to change the way the date of Easter is calculated. At a meeting held in Aleppo in 1997, representatives of several churches proposed that a new system be adopted from 2001, relying on actual astronomical observations rather than tables to define the dates of the vernal equinox and the full moon. This would have ensured that Easter occurred on the same day for both branches of the church. But the proposal was not adopted. In 1928 Britain’s parliament passed a law, which has not been implemented, that would define Easter as the Sunday after the second Saturday in April. Another proposal would define Easter as the second Sunday in April. Several churches, including the Catholic church, say they are open to the idea of setting the date of Easter in this way, so that its date varies by no more than a week. But until there is widespread agreement, its date will continue to jump around within a five-week window.

부활절 날짜를 계산하는 방법을 바꾸자는데 많은 제안이 있었다. 1997년 알레포(시리아 서북부도시)에서 열린 회의에서 교회 대표자들은 춘분과 보름달 날짜를 정의한 명판보단 실제 천문학적 관찰에 의존해 2001년부터 새 시스템을 도입해야한다고 제안했다. 그러면 양쪽 교회 모두 같은 날짜에 부활절을 가질 수 있다. 그러나 이 제안은 받아들여지지 않았다. 1928년 영국 의회는 부활절은 4월 두 번째 토요일 직후 일요일로 정하는 법을 통과시켰지만 시행되지는 않았다. 다른 제안은 부활절을 4월 두 번째 일요일로 지정하는 것이었다. 카톨릭 교회를 포함한 몇몇 교회는 부활절 날짜가 1주일 이상 차이가 나지 않는 이 방법으로 부활절 날짜를 정하는 생각에 열려있다고 말한다. 그러나 광범위한 동의가 있기 전까지 부활절 날짜는 5주 기간 내에서 계속 움직일 것이다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/03/economist-explains-why-easter-moves-around

falls on : (날짜가) 해당하다 ex) Christmas falls on a Monday this year.

vernal(spring) equinox : 춘분

twist : 예상치 못한 전개

align with : 나란히 만들다, 일치하다

window : 기간

pose problems : 문제를 일으키다

Why is South Africa included in the BRICS?

왜 남아공은 브릭스에 포함될까?

BRAZIL, Russia, India, China and South Africa recently concluded the fifth annual meeting of the countries known collectively as the BRICs. Or should that be the BRICS? The confusion arises from the fact that South Africa has sneaked into the group, which claims to represent the world’s emerging markets and act as a counterweight to the G8 and G20, which are dominated by rich-world economies.

BRICs로 묶여서 알려진 브라질, 러시아, 인도, 중국, 남아공이 최근 5번째 연례미팅 끝냈다. 아니면 BRICS가 맞는걸까? 이 혼란은 남아공이 자신들은 세계 이머징 마켓을 대표하고 선진국들이 장악한 G8과 G20의 평형추 역할을 하겠다고 주장하며 슬그머니 이 그룹에 들어가면서 일어났다.

The BRIC countries were the constituent members of an acronym coined by Jim O’Neill, then of Goldman Sachs, in 2001. Mr O’Neill was looking for a way to convey the fact that much of the world’s economic growth would soon come from Brazil, Russia, India and China. There was much debate about whether this grouping made sense: at the time Brazil’s growth seemed too sluggish to warrant inclusion; now Russia looks like it doesn’t deserve to be placed with the others. China has a much higher economic growth rate than the rest. Even so, the label proved so catchy that the foreign ministers of the BRIC countries decided to hold a summit in New York in 2006. What began as a hook for an investment bank's research note became a real political institution.

BRIC는 2001년 당시 골드만삭스의 짐 오닐이 그 국가들의 두문자를 따 만들었다. 짐 오닐은 세계경제성장의 대부분이 곧 브라질,러시아, 인도, 중국에서 이루어질 것이라는 사실을 전달할 방법을 찾고 있었다. 이 그룹화가 말이 되냐 안되냐에 관해선 많은 논쟁이 있었다. 그때 브라질의 경제성장은 너무 부진해서 그룹에 포함되는걸 보장할 수도 없어보였다. 지금 러시아는 다른 나라들과 같이 있을 자격이 없어 보인다. 중국은 나머지보다 훨씬 높은 경제성장비율을 기록했다. 그렇기는 하지만 이 이름표는 아주 외우기 쉽고 재밌어서 브릭스 국가의 외무부가 2006년 뉴욕에서 정상회담을 열기로 결정했다. 투자은행의 리서치 노트의 미끼로 시작된 것이 진짜 정치적 기구가 된 것이다.

There was just one problem with the BRICs: no African countries were included. This was a little embarrassing. Overlooking Africa suggested that the continent was an economic irrelevance, good only for providing raw materials to the rest. It also cast doubt on the group’s claim to speak for the emerging world. Two African countries might have been candidates, Nigeria and South Africa. But only one would keep the acronym intact. And so, in 2010, the club of BRICs became the BRICS.

BRICs에는 딱 한기지 문제점이 있다. 아프리카 국가들이 포함되지 않았던 것이다. 이 때문에 약간 난처해졌다. 간과된 아프리카 국가들은 아프리카 대륙은 economic irrelevance고 원자재를 세계에 제공하는 역할만 한다고 토로했다. 또한 이머징 마켓을 대표한다는 그룹의 주장에 의심의 눈초리를 던졌다. 나이지리아와 남아공, 아프리카 국가 두 개가 후보였을 것이다. 그러나 오직 하나만 두문자를 온전하게 계속 유지할 수 있었다. 그래서 2010년에 BRICs 클럽이 BRICS가 되었던 것이다.

The strange etymology of the BRICS has real-world consequences. Though the inter-governmental meetings have not amounted tomuch yet, these countries do have ambitions to set up a joint investment bank. It is easier to reach agreements in small groups than in big ones. China and Brazil struck a currency-swap deal to facilitate trade at this year's meeting. South Africa has thus gained some real political advantage—at least until someone invents a better acronym.

BRICS의 강한 어원은 진짜 세계에서 중요한 결과를 초래했다. 이 정부간 회의는 아직 많은 것에 다다르진 못했지만 이 나라들은 공동 투자은행을 세울 야망을 가지고 있다. 큰 그룹보단 작은 그룹에서 합의에 다다르는 것이 더 쉬울 것이다. 중국과 브라질은 이번 해 회의에서 무역통상의 편의를 위한 통화스왑을 체결했다. 남아공은 진짜 정치적 이득을 얻고 있는데 적어도 사람들이 더 나은 두문자어에 투자하기 전까지 말이다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/03/economist-explains-why-south-africa-brics

counterweight : 평형추

sluggish : 부진한, 느린

Overlook : 간과한

etymology : 어원, 어원학

amounted to : ~에 다다르다.

How does China censor the internet?

어떻게 중국은 인터넷을 검열하는가?

THE first e-mail sent from China, on September 14th 1987, was optimistic: "Across the Great Wall we can reach every corner in the world." Few of China's 560m internet users now have such reach, however, because China tightly controls its people's use of the internet. The "Freedom on the Net 2012" report, issued by Freedom House, an American organisation that tracks global trends in political freedom, ranked China as the third most restrictive country in the world when it comes to internet access, after Iran and Cuba (though this ranking excludes those places, such as North Korea, where ordinary people are not allowed to use the internet at all). How does China censor the internet?

1987년 9월 14일 중국에서 최초로 보내진 이메일은 긍정적이었다. “만리장성을 넘어 우리는

전 세계 어디든 닿을 수 있다.“ 던 중국은 이제 560만 인터넷 사용자 중 극히 일부만 그럴 수 있다. 중국당국이 인민들의 인터넷 사용에 강력한 규제를 하고 있기 때문이다. 정치적 자유도의 세계적 추세를 조사하는 미국 기관 프리덤 하우스에서 발간한 ”2012 인터넷 자유도 조사“ 보고서는 인터넷 접근에 관해선 중국을 이란, 쿠바(이 순위는 북한처럼 일반인들의 인터넷 사용이 아예 안 되는 나라들은 배제했다)에 이어 전 세계에서 3번째로 규제가 강한 나라로 평가했다. 왜 중국은 인터넷을 검열할까?

The Chinese central government has two main ways of controlling what its citizens see on the web: the Great Firewall, as it is called by foreigners, which is a system of limiting access to foreign websites which started in the late 1990s, and the Golden Shield, a system for domestic surveillance set up in 1998 by the Ministry of Public Security. Separate government departments, along with local and provincial administrations, also have their own monitoring systems. China began by blocking a list of foreign websites, including Voice of America, human-rights organisations and some foreign newspapers. But its filters have since become more sophisticated and can now selectively block specific pages within foreign websites, rather than making the entire site inaccessible. They can also block particular terms when they are used in search queries or instant messages. Google is not blocked entirely; instead, users who search for banned keywords are blocked from Google for 90 seconds, though other websites remain available. China's many internet companies are regularly issued with lists of restricted keywords, and often censor blog posts and other content pre-emptively to avoid trouble with the authorities. In all there are thought to be around 100,000 people, employed both by the state and by private companies, policing China's internet around the clock. Since 2005 the state has also paid people, known as the "50 Cent Party", to post pro-government messages and steer online conversations away from sensitive topics.

중국중앙정부는 인민들이 웹에서 보는 것을 규제하는 2가지 주요 방법을 가지고 있다. 그 중 하나는 만리장성 방화벽이다. 외국인들이 그렇게 부르는 이 시스템은 1990년 후반부터 해외웹사이트를 접근을 제한하기 시작했다. 다른 하나는 황금 방패인데 이 시스템은 1998년 공안국에 의해 만들어진 국내 감시용이다.지방, 주행정부, 분리된 정부 조직들 또한 각자의 모니터링 시스템을 가지고 있다. 중국은 VOA, 인권단체,해외언론사를 포함한 해외 웹사이트들을 막으면서 감시를 시작했다. 그러나 이후로 감시망은 더 정교해지고, 전체 웹사이트에 접근을 차단하기보단 지금은 선별적으로 외국 웹사이트 내에서 특정 페이지만 막을 수 있게 되었다. 중국은 검색사이트나 채팅에서 사용되는 특정 용어들도 막을 수 있다. 구글 전체가 막히진 않지만 대신에 금기 키워드를 검색하는 유저들은 90초 동안 다른 사이트들은 이용 가능해도 구글은 막힌다. 중국의 많은 인터넷 회사들은 정기적으로 제한 검색어 리스트를 발간하고, 당국과 트러블을 피하기 위해 미리 선수를 쳐서 블로그 글이나 다른 콘텐츠를 검열하기도 한다. 공기업이나 사기업에 고용된 총100,000 명 정도가 24시간 내내 중국 인터넷 치안 감시 활동을 한다고 생각된다. 2005년 이후 정부는 “50 Cent Party"라 알려진 사람들에게 돈을 주고 친정부적인 메시지를 올리고 민감한 주제에 대해서는 온라인 논쟁을 피하도록 몰고 가라고 시켰다.

China's criteria for censoring the internet are slightly more subtle than foreigners often assume. In essence it applies the rules that have prevailed since the Tiananmen Square crackdown of 1989: do not jeopardise social stability, do not organise and do not threaten the party. Accordingly, criticism of mid-ranking officials is tolerated, particularly if it is in keeping with the government's anti-corruption drive. But attacks on the senior leadership are swiftly removed (prompting Chinese internet users to refer to senior figures using nicknames or coded language, in an effort to stay ahead of the censors). The most brutal restrictions are applied to any post that calls for offline protests or demonstrations—even for pro-government causes. The censorship system's main goal is to prevent the internet from being used to co-ordinate or organise real-world political activity. In extreme cases, internet access may be cut off altogether, as happened for ten months in 2009, after riots in Xinjiang, a remote north-western region.

인터넷 검열에 관한 중국의 기준은 외국인들이 생각하는 것보다 약간 미묘하다. 본질적으로 중국은 1989년 천안문사태 이후 만연한 법을 적용 시킨다; 사회 안정을 위협하지마라, 당을 만들지 말고, 공산당을 위협하지마라. 따라서 중간실무자들을 향한 비판, 특히 정부의 반부패개혁과 발맞추는 비판이라면 참을 수 있다. 하지만 고위 리더쉽을 공격하는 것은 신속히 제거되어진다. (그래서 중국 인터넷 유저들은 검열보다 한 발 앞서서 높은 분을 별명이나 암호화된 언어를 사용하며 부른다.) 거장 잔인한 제한은 오프라인 시위나 데모를 요청하는 글에 적용 된다-심지어 친정부적 이유일지라도. 중국 검열 시스템의 주요 목적은 인터넷이 진짜 세계 정치 활동을 조직하거나 구성하는데 사용되는 것을 막는 것이다. 극단적인 예로, 북서부 지역 신장에서 폭동이 일어난 후로 2009년 10개월 동안 그랬던 것처럼, 인터넷 접근은 모두 차단되어질지도 모른다.

In short, China is having it both ways: it is allowing its citizens to benefit from the social and commercial aspects of the internet, while placing strict limits on its use for political activism. Other authoritarian governments consider China's approach a model to be emulated. There is no doubt that microblogs such as Sina Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, have given the public a new voice with which to demand more accountability from officials on issues such as corruption, food safety and air pollution. But so far the government has managed to prevent the internet being used to campaign for broader political change. Indeed, by providing people with an outlet to vent their concerns and giving the illusion of public debate, the internet may even be delaying the radical changes that China needs.

줄여서 중국은 양 쪽을 다 가지고 있다. 인민들이 인터넷을 정치적 활등으로 사용하는 것을 엄격히 제한을 두는 동시에 사회적 커뮤니케이션 측면에서 인터넷으로 혜택을 받는 것을 허용한다. 그래서 다른 독재 정부들은 중국의 접근법을 모방 모델로 생각한다. 중국판 트위터 Weibo같은 마이크로블로그가 대중들이 부패, 식품 안전, 대기 오염 같은 이슈에 대해 공무원에게 더 많은 책임을 요구하는 새로운 목소리를 주었다는데는 의심할 여지가 없다. 그러나 지금까지 중국 정부는 인터넷이 더 큰 정치적 변화 운동에 사용되는 것을 막는 것에 힘을 기울이고 있다. 사실은 사람들에게 그들의 걱정을 배출해낼 창구를 제공하고, 대중 논쟁의 환상을 제공함으로써 인터넷은 중국이 요구하는 급진적 변화를 더 늦추고 있는 것일지도 모른다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/04/economist-explains-how-china-censors-internet

pre-emptively : 미리 선수를 치는

In all : 모두 합쳐, 총

around the clock :24시간 내내

have/want it both ways : (결합시킬 수 없는) 양쪽을 다 가지다/원하다

How does Colorado's marijuana market work?

콜로라도 마리화나 시장은 어떻게 작동되는가?

ON JANUARY 1st, 420 days after the citizens of Colorado voted to legalise marijuana, around 37 pot shops across the state opened their doors to all-comers. Stoners in Denver and other cities braved freezing temperatures and two-hour queues to be part of this historic moment, for Colorado has become the first jurisdiction anywhere in the world to oversee a legal, regulated market for recreational marijuana (20 states plus Washington, DC, allow patients with doctors' recommendations to buy the stuff). Some customers were turned away, some shops have been forced temporarily to close while they replenish stocks, but "Green Wednesday", as it was inevitably dubbed, was generally considered a big success. How exactly does Colorado's marijuana market function?

콜로라도 시민들이 마리화나 합법화 투표를 하고 420일 후인 1월 1일, 37개의 마리화나 가게가 주 전역에 문을 열어 손님을 맞이했다. 덴버와 다른 도시 약쟁이들은 추운 날씨 속에서도 2시간이 넘는 줄을 기다리며 역사적 순간의 일부가 되었다. 콜로라도는 전세계에서 레크레이션용 마리화의 합법적 규제 시장을 관장하도록 첫 번째 판결을 받은 주가 되었다. (워싱턴 dc와 20개 주에서는 의사의 추천이 있어야 살 수 있다) 몇몇 손님은 돌려보내졌고, 몇몇 가게는 재고를 채울 때 잠깐 문을 닫았다. 그러나 빼도 박도 못하는 별명이 붙은 “그린 수요일”은 대게 큰 성공으로 간주되었다. 정확하게 어떻게 콜로라도의 마리화나 시장은 작용하는가?

Amendment 64, the measure approved by 55% of voters in November 2012, set certain parameters for Colorado's marijuana regime, including maximum tax rates and the rights of cities and counties to exclude pot shops from their jurisdictions. But the details were worked out by officials and legislators over the course of 2013. Unlike many states (including Washington, which has also legalised marijuana but not yet licensed recreational outlets)Colorado's medical-marijuana system is well regulated; not only did that make full legalisation an easier sell to voters, it provided a foundation for the recreational industry. Until October only licensed medical outlets "in good standing" can serve recreational customers, which is why lots of the shops that opened on January 1st have names like Citi-Med and Medicine Man. Colorado's system of "vertical integration", under which retailers must cultivate most of the stuff they sell themselves, will also remain in place until October; this makes monitoring easier for the state, even if one irritated observer likens it to a supermarket owning apple orchards.

2012년 11월 55%의 투표자가 찬성한 정책인 수정헌법 64조는 콜로라도 마리화나 제도에 관한 최대세금비율과 다른 도시나 나라처럼 자신의 관할구역에서 대마초 가게를 차단할 권리를 포함한 한도를 설정했다. 그러나 세부사항은 2013년 동안 공무원과 입법가에 의해서 해결되었다. 다른 주들과 다르게(워싱턴도 마리화나를 합법화 했지만 아직 레크레이션용 매장을 허가하진 않았다) 콜로라도의 의료용 마리화나 시스템은 잘 규제되고 있다; 투표자들이 더 쉽게 사도록 완전 합법화 했을 뿐만 아니라 휴양산업의 토대를 제공하기도 했다. 10월까진 자격을 유지한 허가받은 의료매장만 레크레이션 목적의 손님에게도 팔 수 있다. 이것이 1월 1일에 문을 여는 많은 가게들이 Citi-Med 와 Medicine Man 같은 이름을 가진 이유다. 자신의 물건은 판매자 스스로 재배해야만 한다는 “수직적 통합”은 10월까지 지속될 것이다; 짜증난 옵저버가 이것은 사과과수원을 소유한 슈퍼마켓이라고 비유했지만 이는 콜로라도가 감시하는 걸 쉽게 만든다.

One challenge is to set prices at what Mark Kleiman, an analyst, calls the "Goldilocks point": too low and you encourage excessive consumption and out-of-state exports; too high and you leave room for illicit dealers. The market has not settled in yet, but prices for recreational marijuana, currently around $250-$300 for an ounce of good weed, will be significantly higher than the medical stuff, thanks to hefty taxes: a 15% excise tax levied on "average market rate" and a special 10% sales tax (the state's general 2.9% sales tax will also apply). Only those aged over 21 may buy, possess and use marijuana in Colorado; they may consume it only on private property with the consent of the property-owner, and they may not transfer it across state lines. Residents may purchase up to an ounce at a time; out-of-staters are limited to a quarter-ounce, and, if buying weed rather than edibles, face the extra challenge of finding somewhere to smoke it: Amsterdam-style "coffee shops" are banned. Locals can grow up to six plants at home, and give away (but not sell) the proceeds. (The full rulebook extends to 136 pages.)

하나의 도전 과제는 애널리스트 Mark Kleiman이 말한 “Goldilocks point” 가격을 정하는 것이다; 너무 낮아서 과소비나 외부 유출을 조장하지도, 너무 높아서 불법 딜러를 찾을 여지도 있는 가격. 시장은 아직 자리를 잡지 못했으나 현재 질 좋은 것이 1온스 당 약 $250~300인 레크레이션용 마리화나의 가격은 무거운 세금 때문에 상당히 오를 것이다; 15%의 소비세가 평균 시장 요금에 부과되고, 10% 특별 판매세(콜로라도 주의 일번적인 2.9% 판매세 또한 적용될 것이다) 부과될 것이다. 21살 이상은 콜로라도에서 마리화나를 사거나 소지하거나 사용할 수 있다. 개인 사유지에서만 사유지 주인의 동의 하에 사용할 수 있을 것이고, 주 국경을 넘어 가져가진 못할 것이다. 주민들은 1번에 1온스까지만 구매할 수 있고, 다른 주 사람들은1/4로 제한되며, 만약 식용보다는 weed로 산다면 피는 장소를 찾는 어려움에 직면할 것이다. 암스테르담 스타일 “커피샵”은 금지된다. 현지인들은 집에서 6개까지 기를 수 있고, 이익금을 기부할 수도(파는건 금지) 있다. (규약집은 136 페이지에 걸쳐있다)

Implementing all this will be hard enough. But Colorado's officials must also keep the federal government happy. Marijuana remains illegal under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, and the feds have been more than willing tocrack down on some medical-marijuana operators in recent years. In August James Cole, the deputy attorney-general, issued a memo suggesting that the federal government will allow the experiments in Colorado and Washington to proceed so long as they do not impede eight "enforcement priorities", including the diversion of marijuana to minors and to other states. But that is not a foregone conclusion: Colorado-sourced medical marijuana has been turning up in neighbouring states. The American public is beginning to reject prohibition and its attendant injustices. If Colorado and Washington manage not to screw things up, more states will surely follow them in legalising—including California, probably in 2016. But if it all goes wrong, as it may, the whole thing could go up in smoke.

이 모든걸 수행하는 것은 힘들 것이다. 그러나 콜로라도 공무원들은 연방 정부 또한 기쁘게 만들어야 한다. 마리화나는1970 미국 약물관리법 아래 불법으로 남아있고 연방정부는 최근 의료목적 마리화나 판매자들을 더욱 엄중히 단속하려는 의지를 보였다. 8월에 James Cole 법무차관은 연방정부가 콜로라도와 워싱턴에서 eight “enforcement priorities”를 방해하지 않는 한 미성년자와 다른 주들에게 기분전환용 마리화나 같은 이 실험을 계속 진행하도록 허락하는 제안서를 발표했다.그러나 이것은 기정된 결론이 아니다. 콜로라도에서 기른 의료용 마리화나는 이웃 주에서 나타나고 있다. 미국 대중은 금지법과 수반되는 불평등을 거부하기 시작하고 있다. 만약 콜로라도와 워싱턴이 일을 망치지 않고 잘 다룬다면 더 많은 주들이 기꺼이 합법화를 따를 것이다(아마 2016년에 합법화할 캘리포니아를 포함해). 그러나 만약 모든 것이 잘못된다면, 모든 것은 연기 속에 사라질 것이다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-1

turned away : 돌려보내다

parameters : 한도

crack down : 엄중히 단속하다

the deputy attorney-general : 법무차관

outlets : 배출수단, 전문매장

apple orchards : 사과과수원

leave room for : ~할 여지가 있다

hefty : heavy, big, strong

excise tax : 소비세

proceeds : 이익금

rulebook : 규약집

Why Thai politics is broken

왜 태국 정치는 고장났는가

AFTER more than three months of anti-government protests in Bangkok, which are increasingly being scarred by violence, the government has imposed a state of emergency in Thailand's capital and surrounding provinces. This may make it hard to hold the snap election the government had called for February 2nd. In any event, the main opposition party will boycott it. So it will not end Thailand’s political confrontation. The government’s opponents now openly campaign for a temporary interruption to Thai democracy so that an appointed council can make reforms to “save” it. But in the recent past other undemocratic solutions—a military coup in 2006 and a judicial one in 2008—failed to provide a durable solution. Why has the political system broken down?

점점 폭력으로 얼룩진 방콕 반정부시위가 3개월 이상 지속된 후에야 태국 정부는 수도와 주변지역에 비상상태를 선포했다. 이는 정부가 2월 2일에 요청한 불시 선거를 실시하는걸 어렵게 만들 것이다. 어쨋든 야당은 선거를 보이코트를 할 것이고, 태국 정치 대립은 끝나지 않을 것이다. 태국정부 반대자들은 지금 임명된 위원회가 민주주의를 “구하기 위한” 개혁을 할 수 있도록 공개적으로 태국 민주주의에 대한 일시적 중단을 찬성하는 운동을 하고 있다. 그러나 최근 몇 년 동안 2006년 군사 쿠데타와 2008년 사법부 쿠데타같은 비민주적인 해결책들은 항구적인 해결책을 제시하지 못했다. 왜 태국 정치 시스템은 고장난걸까?

The two sides would answer this question differently. For the government’s opponents, Thai democracy has been hijacked by Thaksin Shinawatra, a tycoon and former prime minister now in self-imposed exile, having been sentenced to jail in Thailand for corruption. But parties loyal to him keep on winning elections—in 2001 and three times since. The latest incarnation is led by his sister, Yingluck. Before Mr Thaksin’s emergence, Thai government alternated between fractious, corrupt coalitions and fractious, corrupt military dictatorships (the army has made 18 coup attempts since the end of absolute monarchy in 1932). Thanks to a new democratic constitution introduced in 1997, however, Thaksinite parties can win elections even without coalition partners, thanks to votes from the populous north and north-east of the country. Critics accuse the Thaksins of massive corruption and of bankrupting the country with populist policies. For Mr Thaksin’s supporters, however, the problem is that he has threatened the interests of the old Thai establishment, represented by the civil service, the army, the judiciary and the monarchy. They portray the protests as an anti-democratic backlash from a privileged class under threat.

양 쪽은 질문에 대한 대답을 다르게 할 것이다. 반정부자에게 태국 민주주의는 정재계 거물이자 부패 혐의로 태국에서 징역형을 선고받고 현재 자진 망명 중인 전 총리 탁신 친나왓에게 장악되어 왔다. 그러나 그에게 충성을 바치는 정당은 계속 선거에서 이기고 있다(2001년 이래로 3번). 가장 최근 그의 화신은 여동생 잉락 친나왓이다. 탁신의 출현 전에 태국 정부는 말썽 부리고, 부패한 연립정부와 말썽 부리고 부패한 군사 독재 사이를 오갔다 (군대는 전제군주국이 끝난 1932년 이래 18번의 쿠데타 시도를 했다).그러나 1997년 새로운 민주법안이 도입되고, 인구가 많은 북부와 북동부 사람들의 표 덕분에 탁신 사람들의 정당은 연정 파트너 없이도 선거에서 이겼다. 비평가들은 탁신을 대규모 부패와 표퓰리즘 정책으로 인한 태국 파산의 죄목으로 비난한다. 그러나 탁신 지지자들에게는 탁신이 관료, 군대, 사법부, 왕정으로 대표되는 오래된 태국 기득권층의 이익을 위협한 것이 문제라 생각한다. 그들은 반정부시위를 위협 아래있는 특권층의 반민주주의적 반발로 묘사한다.

Both explanations have some merit. Thaksinite governments have tended to rule in their voters’ interests, not the whole country’s; and their opponents are not just from a well-heeled elite. Thai society is split. But not quite down the middle: Thaksin loyalists do win elections. Thai politics has broken down because the compact on which democracy is based—that losers will accept the result until the next election—no longer applies. Large, influential sections of Thai society find rule by the Thaksin family simply intolerable. They will use almost any tactic to unseat it, including accusing it of disloyalty to the much-revered king, Bhumibol Adulyadej. That the king is 86 and frail, and his presumed successor, the crown prince, is unpopular, and seen as perhaps susceptible to Mr Thaksin’s influence, fuels the sense of panic in the opposition.

양 쪽 해석 둘 다 가치가 있다. 탁신 정부는 전체가 아니라 자신들에게 투표한 유권자들의 이익을 위해서만 통치하는 경향이 있고,탁신의 반대자들은 부유한 엘리트 출신이 아니다. 태국 사회는 갈라졌다.그러나 완전히 가운데까진 아니다;  탁신 지지자들은 선거에서 잘 이긴다. 태국 정치에서 민주주의에 근간이 되는 계약-패배자는 다음 선거까지 결과를 받아들인다-이 더 이상 적용되지 않기 때문에 고장난 것이다. 태국 사회의 거대하고, 영향력 있는 집단들은 탁신가문의 정치를 그야말로 견딜 수 없다고 여긴다. 이들은 탁신가를 자리에서 몰아내기위해 무척이나 존경받는 왕 푸미폰 아둔야뎃에 불충성하다는 죄목으로 고발 하는 등의 온갖 전략을 다 쓸 것이다. 86세의 왕은 노쇠하고, 아마 그의 뒤를 이을 황태자는 인기가 없어 아마 탁신의 영향력에 취약할 것으로 보인다는 사실은 반대쪽의 공포감을 부채질한다.

The election, if it takes place, will result in a landslide for Miss Yingluck, but change nothing. The opposition will hope she can be overthrown by a coup, or by legal action (an anti-corruption commission is investigating her). But a government run by Mr Thaksin’s opponents, such as the one in power from 2008 to 2011, will be illegitimate and unstable. And the longer the to-and-fro continues, the more fundamental will appear the divisions in Thailand, which are not just social, but also cultural and even ethnic and linguistic, between fairer-skinned southerners, many with some Chinese ancestry, and northerners, who speak a version of Thai closer to Lao. So the protests threaten not just peace and stability, but the very integrity of Thailand.

만약 선거가 일어난다면, 결과는 잉락의 압승일 것이고 아무것도 변하지 않는다. 반대파는 그녀가 쿠데타나 합법적 선거(반부패위원회가 그녀를 조사 중에 있다)로 실각하길 바랄 것이다. 그러나 탁신의 반대파가 이끄는 정부는 2008-2011년에 했던 것처럼 불법이고 불안정 할 것이다. 그리고 동요가 길어지면 길어질수록, 핵심은 분열로 나타날 것이다. 이는 단순한 사회적 분열이 아니라 중국계 흰 피부의 남방인들과 라오스어에 가까운 태국어를 구사하는 북방인들 사이의 문화적, 심지어 민족적, 언어적 분열이 될 것이다. 그래서 이번 시위는 단순히 평화와 안정만을 위협하는 것이 아니라 바로 태국의 통합을 위협한다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/01/economist-explains-13

hold the snap election : 불시선거를 실시하다

In any event : 아무튼

undemocratic : 비민주적인

tycoon : 거물

self-imposed exile : 자진 망명

coalition : 연정, 연합

fractious : 말썽을 부리는

absolute monarchy : 전제군주국

populous : 인구가 많은

establishment : 사회 기득권, 지배층, 기관, 시설, 설립, 확립

backlash : 반발

well-heeled : 부유한

frail : (노인의)노쇠한, 허약한

crown prince : 황태자

sense of panic : 공포감

landslide for : (선거)압승

overthrow :실각하다, 전복하다

to-and-fro : 앞뒤로 움직임, 동요하는

왜 다른 나라들이 더 잘 가르칠까? : 해외에서 학생들이 더 잘하는 3가지 이유

Millions of laid-off American factory workers were the first to realize that they were competing against job seekers around the globe with comparable skills but far smaller paychecks. But a similar fate also awaits workers who aspire to high-skilled, high-paying jobs in engineering and technical fields unless this country learns to prepare them to compete for the challenging work that the new global economy requires.

해고된 미국 공장 노동자 수만 명은 자신들이 비슷한 능력을 가졌음에도 훨씬 더 적은 봉급을 받는 전 세계 구직자들과 경쟁하고 있다는 것을 최초로 깨달은 이들이었다. 그러나 유사한 운명이 공학과 기술 분야의 숙련된 고임금 일자리를 열망하는 노동자들을 기다리고 있다. 만약 이 나라가 글로벌 경제가 요구하는 도전적인 일을 위해 경쟁하도록 준비하는 법을 배우지 못한다면 말이다.

The American work force has some of the weakest mathematical and problem-solving skills in the developed world. In a recent survey by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a global policy organization, adults in the United States scored far below average and better than only two of 12 other developed comparison countries, Italy and Spain. Worse still, the United States is losing ground in worker training to countries in Europe and Asia whose schools are not just superior to ours but getting steadily better. The lessons from those high-performing countries can no longer be ignored by the United States if it hopes to remain competitive.

미국 노동력은 선진국 중 수리력과 문제해결능력에서 약한 그룹에 속한다. 세계정책기관인OECD의 최근 조사에 따르면 미국 성인은 평균보다 훨씬 아래 점수를 받았고, 다른 12개의 비교국들 가운데 겨우 이탈리아와 스페인보다 나은 수준이었다. 더 최악은 미국은 노동자 교육 분야에서 유럽과 아시아 국가들에게 약세를 보이는데, 이들 학교는 우리보다 뛰어날 뿐만 아니라 꾸준히 좋아지고 있다. 고성장국들로부터 배운 가르침은 미국이 경쟁력있는 국가로 남아있길 바란다면 더 이상 무시되어선 안 된다.

Finland: Teacher Training(핀란드 : 교사 양성)

Though it dropped several rankings in last year’s tests, Finland has for years been in the highest global ranks in literacy and mathematical skills. The reason dates to the postwar period, when Finns first began to consider creating comprehensive schools that would provide a quality, high-level education for poor and wealthy alike. These schools stand out in several ways, providing daily hot meals; health and dental services; psychological counseling; and an array of services for families and children in need. None of the services are means tested. Moreover, all high school students must take one of the most rigorous required curriculums in the world, including physics, chemistry, biology, philosophy, music and at least two foreign languages.

작년 테스트에서 몇 순위가 떨어졌음에도 핀란드는 몇 년 동안 문자해독력과 수리력에서 가장 높은 국제 랭킹을 차지해왔다. 그 이유는 전후시기로 거슬러 올라간다. 그 당시 핀란드인들은 처음으로 질 좋은 고급 교육을 가난한 자와 부자에게 똑같이 제공하는 종합학교를 세우는 것을 생각하기 시작했다. 이 학교들은 몇가지 면에서 두드러졌는데. 매일 따뜻한 음식, 의료와 치과 서비스, 심리 상담, 도움이 필요한 가족과 아동에게 다양한 서비스를 제공했다. 이 서비스들 중 어떤 것도 자산 결과에 따라 지급되는 것이 아니었다. 게다가 모든 고등학교 학생들은 물리, 화학, 생물학, 철학, 음악, 최소 2개의 외국어 수업이 포함된 세상에서 가장 엄격한 필수 커리큘럼 중 하나를 의무적으로 들어야 한다.

But the most important effort has been in the training of teachers, where the country leads most of the world, including the United States, thanks to a national decision made in 1979. The country decided to move preparation out of teachers’ colleges and into the universities, where it became more rigorous. By professionalizing the teacher corps and raising its value in society, the Finns have made teaching the country’s most popular occupation for the young. These programs recruit from the top quarter of the graduating high school class, demonstrating that such training has aprestige lacking in the United States. In 2010, for example, 6,600 applicants competed for 660 available primary school preparation slots in the eight Finnish universities that educate teachers.

그러나 가장 중요한 노력은 교사 양성에서 이루어졌는데, 1979년 했던 국가적 결정 덕분에 핀란드가 미국을 포함한 다른 나라들보다 선두를 달리는 분야다. 핀란드는 교사 양성을 교대에서 빼 더 엄격해진 종합대로 옮기기로 결정했다. 핀란드인들은 교사집단을 전문화시키고, 사회에서 그 가치를 향상시킴으로써 교직을 그 나라 젊은이들에게 가장 인기있는 직업이 되게 만들었다. 이 프로그램은 고등학교 졸업반의 상위25%에서 선발했는데, 이런 교사 양성은 미국의 위신이 서지 않음을 보여준다. 2010년에 예를 들면, 6600명의 지원자는 교육대가 있는 8개의 대학에서 660개의 초등학교 교사 양성과정 자리를 두고 경쟁했다.

The teacher training system in this country is abysmal by comparison. A recent report by the National Council on Teacher Quality called teacher preparation programs “an industry of mediocrity,” rating only 10 percent of more than 1,200 of them as high quality. Most have low or no academic standards for entry. Admission requirements for teaching programs at the State University of New York were raised in September, but only a handful of other states have taken similar steps.

그에 비해 미국의 교사 양성 시스템은 최악이다. 전미교사질협회의 최근 발표는 미국 교사 양성 프로그램을 “an industry of mediocrity”라 부르며, 1200개 이상의 프로그램 중 10%만이 우수하다고 평가했다. 대부분은 입학을 위한 학업 기준이 낮거나 아예 없었다. 뉴욕주립대 교사프로그램을 위한 입학허가요건은 9월에 세워졌는데, 소수의 다른 주립대들만이 유사한 조취를 취하고 있다.

Finnish teachers are not drawn to the profession by money; they earn only slightly more than the national average salary. But their salaries go up by about a third in the first 15 years, several percentage points higher than those of their American counterparts. Finland also requires stronger academic credentials for its junior high and high school teachers and rewards them with higher salaries.

핀란드 교사들은 돈 때문에 그 직업에 끌리지 않는다. 교사들은 국가 평균 수입보다 아주 약간 높은 수준을 번다. 그러나 그들의 연봉은 15년이 지나면 약 1/3쯤 상승하는데, 미국 교사의 연봉보다 몇퍼센트 더 높은 수준이다. 판란드는 또한 중고등학교 교사들에게 뛰어난 학력증명서를 요구하고 높은 봉급으로 보상해준다.

Canada: School funding(캐나다 : 학교 재정 지원)

Canada also has a more rigorous and selective teacher preparation system than the United States, but the most striking difference between the countries is how they pay for their schools.

캐나다 미국보다 역시 엄격하고 까다로운 교사 양성 시스템을 갖추고 있지만 가장 눈에 뛰는 차이점은 어떻게 학교에 돈을 주는가이다.

American school districts rely far too heavily on property taxes, which means districts in wealthy areas bring in more money than those in poor ones. State tax money to make up the gap usually falls far short of the need in districts where poverty and other challenges are greatest.

미국 학군은 아주 심하게 재산세에 의존한다. 부유한 지역의 학군은 가난한 지역의 학군들보다 더 많은 돈을 가져온다는 말이다. 이 차이를 채우려는 주세는 대게 빈곤과 다른 도전과제들이 많은 학군의 요구에 훨씬 미치지 못한다.

Americans tend to see such inequalities as the natural order of things. Canadians do not. In recent decades, for example, three of Canada’s largest and best-performing provinces — Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario — have each addressed the inequity issue by moving to province-level funding formulas. As a recent report by the Center for American Progress notes, these formulas allow the provinces to determine how much money each district will receive, based on each district’s size and needs. The systems even out the tax base and help ensure that resources are distributed equitably, not clustered in wealthy districts.

미국인들은 이런 불평등을 만물의 자연질서라고 보는 경향이 있지만 캐나다인들은 그렇지 않다. 예를 들어 최근 수십년간 캐나다에서 가장 크고 최우수 주들은-알버타, 브리티쉬 컬럼비아, 온타리오- 주 단위 재정지원 방식으로 옮김으로써 불평등 문제에 대해 고심했다. 미국진보센터의 최근 리포트가 언급하듯, 이 방식은 주들이 학군의 크기와 필요를 토대로 얼마의 금액을 각 학군이 받을 것인지 결정할 수 있도록 한다.세금 기반과 지원에서 벗어난 이 시스템은 자원이 동등하게 분배되고, 부유한 지역에만 모이지 않도록 보장한다.

These were not boutique experiments. The Ontario system has more than two million public school students — more than in 45 American states and the District of Columbia. But the contrast to the American system could not be more clear. Ontario, for example, strives to eliminate or at least minimize the funding inequality that would otherwise exist between poor and wealthy districts. In most American states, however, the wealthiest, highest-spending districts spend about twice as much per pupil as the lowest-spending districts, according to a federal advisory commission report. In some states, including California, the ratio is more than three to one.

이것들은 비싼 실험이 아니었다. 온타리오 시스템의 공립학교 학생 수는 2만 명 이상이다. 미국 주 45개와DC에 있는 숫자보다 많다. 그러나 미국의 시스템과는 정반대 시스템은 이보다 더 명확할 수 없다. 예를 들어 온타리오는 재정 불평들을 제거하거나 적어도 최소화하기 위해 애쓰고 있다. 그렇지 않으면 가난한 지역과 부자 지역이 존재하기 때문이다. 그러나 연방자문위원회에 따르면 대부분 미국 주들은 가장 부유하고, 가장 돈을 많이 쓰는 지역이 가장 돈을 덜 쓰는 지역에 비해 학생 당 약 2배 이상의 돈을 쓰고 있다.캘리포니아를 포함한 몇몇 주는 비율이 3:1 이상이다.

This has left 40 percent of American public school students in districts of “concentrated student poverty,” the commission’s report said.

위원회의 발표에 따르면 이것이 “학생빈곤집중” 지역에 있는 공립학교 학생들 40%가 떠난 이유였다.

Shanghai: Fighting Elitism

상하이: 투지 넘치는 엘리트의식

China’s educational system was largely destroyed during Mao Zedong’s “cultural revolution,” which devalued intellectual pursuits and demonized academics. Since shortly after Mao’s death in 1976, the country has been rebuilding its education system at lightning speed, led by Shanghai, the nation’s largest and most internationalized city. Shanghai, of course, has powerful tools at its disposal, including the might of the authoritarian state and the nation’s centuries-oldreverence for scholarship and education. It has had little difficulty advancing a potent succession of reforms that allowed it to achieve universal enrollment rapidly. The real proof is that its students were first in the world in math, science and literacy on last year’s international exams.

중국의 교육 시스템은 지적 추구는 평가 절하되고 학문은 악마 취급 받았던 모택동의 문화혁명 시기 동안에 거의 파괴되었다. 1976년 모택동의 사망 직후부터 중국은 가장 크고 국제화된 도시인 상하이의 주도로 교육시스템을 번개 같은 속도로 다시 세우고 있다. 당연히 상하이는 권위주의국가의 권력과 수세기 동안 지속된 학자와 교육에 대한 숭배를 포함한 강력한 무기를 마음대로 사용할 수 있다. 중국이 universal enrollment를 빠르게 성취하도록 만든 강력한 개혁의 연속을 해나가는데는 거의 어려움이 없었다. 이것의 실제 증거는 중국학생들은 작년 국제학업성취테스트에서 수학, 과학, 문자해독력에서 세계 1위를 차지한 것이다.

One of its strengths is that the city has mainly moved away from an elitist system in which greater resources and elite instructors were given to favored schools, and toward a more egalitarian,neighborhood attendance system in which students of diverse backgrounds and abilities are educated under the same roof. The city has focused on bringing the once-shunned children of migrant workers into the school system. In the words of the O.E.C.D, Shanghai has embraced the notion that migrant children are also “our children” — meaning that city’s future depends in part on them and that they, too, should be included in the educational process. Shanghai has taken several approaches to repairing the disparity between strong schools and weak ones, as measured by infrastructure and educational quality. Some poor schools were closed, reorganized, or merged with higher-level schools. Money was transferred to poor, rural schools to construct new buildings or update old ones. Teachers were transferred from cities to rural areas and vice versa. Stronger urban schools were paired with rural schools with the aim of improving teaching methods. And under a more recent strategy, strong schools took over the administration of weak ones. The Chinese are betting that the ethos, management style and teaching used in the strong schools will be transferable.

중국 교육시스템의 강점 중 하나는 상하이가 더 많은 지원과 엘리트 강사들을 특정 학교에 주던 엘리트주의 시스템에서 입장을 바꿔 다양한 배경과 능력을 가진 학생들이 같은 지붕아래서 교육을 받는 평등주의자 방향인 지역참여시스템으로 나아간 것이다. 상하이는 한때 위축된 이민자 자녀들을 학교 시스템으로 데려오는데 집중해오고 있다. OECD의 말에 따르면 상하이는 이주민 자녀들 역시 “우리 아이들”이다(상하이의 미래는 부분적으로 그들에게 달려있고, 그들도 교육 과정 속에 포함되어야 한다). 라는 생각을 껴안았다.상해는 인프라와 교육 질적인 면에서 강한 학교와 약한 학교 사이의 격차를 바로잡기 위한 접근을 했다.몇몇 가난한 학교들은 문을 닫고, 개조하고, 더 높은 레벨의 학교들과 통합되었다. 돈은 가난한 농촌지역 학교들이 새 건물을 짓거나 보수하는데 흘러갔다. 교사들은 도시에서 농촌지역, 혹은 반대로 옮겨갔다. 강한 도시지역 학교들은 교수법 향상을 목적으로 농촌 학교들과 짝을 이뤘다. 그리고 더 최근 전략 아래 강한 학교는 약한 학교의 행정을 인수했다. 중국인은 강한 학교에서 사용하는 기풍, 경영스타일, 가르침이 전달되는데 배팅하고 있다.

America’s stature as an economic power is being threatened by societies above us and below us on the achievement scale. Wealthy nations with high-performing schools are consolidating their advantages and working hard to improve. At the same time, less-wealthy countries like Chile, Brazil, Indonesia and Peru, have made what the O.E.C.D. describes as “impressive gains catching up from very low levels of performance.” In other words, if things remain as they are, countries that lag behind us will one day overtake us.

경제력으로서의 미국의 위상은 성취도 등급에서 미국의 위아래에 있는 사회들로부터 위협을 받고 있다. 좋은 결과를 내는 학교들이 있는 부유한 나라들은 그들의 이점을 굳히고 있고, 개선시키기 위해 노력하고 있다. 동시에 칠레, 브라질, 인도네시아, 페루같이 덜 부유한 나라들은 OECD가 묘사한 “아주 낮은 레벨의 성과부터 따라잡는 인상적인 소득”을 해냈다. 다른 말로 만약 상황이 그대로라면, 우리보다 뒤쳐진 나라들도 언젠가 우리를 추월할 것이다.

The United States can either learn from its competitors abroad — and finally summon the will to make necessary policy changes — or fall further and further behind. The good news is that this country has an impressive history of school improvement, as reflected in the early-20th-century compulsory school movement and the postwar expansion, which broadened access to college. Similar levels of focus and effort will be needed to move forward again.

미국은 해외 경쟁자들로부터 배울 수도 있고(마침내 중요한 정치적 변화를 만들려는 의지를 가질 수도 있다), 점점 더 뒤쳐질 수도 있다. 좋은 소식은 미국은 20세기 초기 의무 학교 운동과 대학으로의 접근을 넓힌 전후 확장을 돌아보면, 인상적인 학교 개선 역사를 가지고 있다는 것이다. 그때와 비슷한 레벨의 집중과 노력이 미국이 앞으로 나아가는데 다시금 필요하다.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/opinion/why-students-do-better-overseas.html?_r=0

losing ground : 기반을 내주다, 건강이 나빠지다,

means tested : 자산조사 결과에 따라 지급되는

corps : ~단, 군단

prestige lacking ; 위신이 서지 않음

slots : 자리, 틈, 구멍, 넣다

abysmal : 최악의, 최저의

by comparison ; 그에 비해

credentials : 자격, 자격증

falls short of : ~에 미치지 못하다.

the natural order of things : 만물의 자연질서

address : 고심하다

demonize : 악마 취급하다.

shortly after : 직후에

authoritarian state : 권위국가

centuries-old : 수세기 동안 지속된

reverence : 숭배

once-shunned : 한때 위축된

disparity : 격차

ethos : 기풍

overtake : 추월하다

enrollment : 재적자수(미), 등록, 입대

stature : 지명도, 위상, 키

fall further and further behind : 점점 더 뒤떨어지다

“WE WILL eliminate the penny,” declared Jim Flaherty, Canada’s finance minister, in his budget speech last March. In May 2012 Canada duly stopped minting one-cent coins, which have been in circulation since 1858, when Canada established its own currency. On February 4th the Royal Canadian Mint stopped distributing them, spelling the end for its least valuable coin. Why has Canada killed off the penny?

“우리는 페니를 없앨 것 입니다.” Jim Flaherty 캐나다 재무부 장관은 지난 3월 시정연설에서 선언했다. 2012년 5월 캐나다는 적절한 절차에 따라 1858년부터 캐나다가 자국통화를 발행한 이후로 유통되던 1센트 동전 주조를 멈췄으며, 2월 5일에는 캐나다연방조폐국이 1센트 동전 유통을 멈추며 캐나다의 가장 적은 가치를 가진 동전의 종말을 가져왔다. 왜 캐나다는 페니를 없앴을까?

It is not the first country to have done away with its smallest unit of currency: in the past few decades Britain, France, Israel and Spain, among others, have done the same. Some countries, including Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden have gone further, successively phasing out several of their smallest coins. Now Canada hasjoined the club. Canadians using cash must round to the new smallest denomination (in this case, five cents), as happened in other countries following the elimination of small coins, though pennies will technically remain legal tender. Online and card payments will continue to be billed to the exact cent.

캐나다가 가장 작은 통화 단위를 없애버린 첫 번째 나라는 아니다. 수십 년 전엔 특히 영국, 프랑스, 이스라엘, 스페인도 그랬다. 호주, 덴마크, 뉴질랜드, 노르웨이, 스웨덴을 포함한 나라들은 더 나아가 연속해서 단계적으로 작은 동전들을 폐지했다. 지금 캐나다는 같은 신세가 된 것이다. 다른 나라들이 작은 동전들을 제거하고 후속조치로 했던 것처럼 현금을 사용하는 캐나다인들은 새롭게 가장 작은 화폐 액면단위로 올려야 한다(이 경우는 5센트로). 하지만 페니는 엄밀하게 법정 통화로 남아있을 것이다. 온라인과 카드 결제는 앞으로도 정확한 cent 단위로 청구될 것이다.

The Canadian penny has been eliminated because it is a waste of both money and time. Inflation has reduced its purchasing power by 95% since it was first minted domestically in 1908: back then a cent could buy goods that would cost C$0.20 today, in other words. Once a small coin can no longer be used to buy individual items, but is used only to make change, it becomes more trouble than it is worth. Canadian pennies cost 1.6 Canadian cents to manufacture, and the government expects to save C$11m a year by eliminating them. But that sum, equivalent to 0.0006% of GDP, is small change. The real reason to eliminate pennies is that their feeble purchasing power means dealing with the coins, and making change to the nearest cent, is a uneconomic waste of time for consumers, retailers and small businesses. People instinctively recognise this, which is why pennies pile up in drawers, in jars and on bedside tables. The mint then has to issue more of them. “Pennies take up too much space on our dressers at home,” said Mr Flaherty. “We will, therefore, stop making them.”

캐나다 페니는 돈과 시간 낭비라는 지적 때문에 사라졌다. 인플레이션은 페니의 구매력을 95% 감소시켰는데 그 이유는 패니가 처음 국내에서 제조된 것은 1908년이었기 때문이다. 즉, 그 당시 1센트로 오늘날 C$0.20에 해당하는 금액의 물건을 살 수 있었다. 작은 동전은 더 이상 하나의 물품을 살 수 없게 되자 거스름돈을 줄 때만 사용되었고 그 가치보단 더 문제가 되기 시작했다. 캐나다 페니를 제조하는데는 1.6 캐나다 센트가 필요하다. 그래서 정부는 페니를 없앰으로써 매년C$11m를 아낄 수 있다고 예상한다. 그러나 GDP의 0.0006%에 해당하는 그 액수는 아주 미미하다. 페니를 없애는 진짜 이유는 

동전 거래와 센트 단위로 잔돈을 바꾸는 페니의 아주 약한 구매력은 소비자, 소매업자, 소규모사업자를 위한 비경제적인 시간 낭비이기 때문이다. 사람들은 본능적으로 이것을 안다. 이것이 왜 페니가 서랍, 유리병, 침대 테이블 위 같은데 쌓이는지 말해준다. 그러면 조폐국은 더 많은 페니를 발행해야만 한다. Flaherty는 “페니는 우리 집 화장대 공간 차지를 너무 많이 한다. 그러므로 우리는 페니 만들기를 멈출 것이다.” 말했다.

The same arguments apply to the United States penny, which costs 2.4 cents to make. But eliminating it would result in greater use of the five-cent coin, the nickel, which costs 11.2 cents to produce. So the American penny survives, at leastfor the time being. In Canada, meanwhile, coin collectors can buy a commemorative roll of 50 pennies from the last million minted for C$9.95, or 20 cents for each coin. Those last pennies, at least, have earned their keep.

같은 논쟁은 미국 페니에도 적용된다. 미국 1 페니 주조에는 2.4 cents가 든다. 그러나 이것을 없애면 더 많은 5센트 동전,니켈의 사용하는 결과가 나타나는데 니켈 생산에는 11.2 센트가 든다. 그래서 미국 페니는 살아남았고, 적어도 당분간은 지속될 것이다. 그동안에 캐나다에선 동전 수집가들은 마지막 백만개 주조된 기념 페니 50 묶음을 C$9.95, 혹은 개 당 20센트 씩 을 살 수 있다. 적어도 이 마지막 페니들은 제 밥값을 하고 있다.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2013/02/economist-explains-why-canada-killed-penny

budget speech : 시정연설

duly : 적절한 절차에 따라

among others : 그중에서도, 특히

phasing out : 단계적 폐지하다.

joined the club : 같은 신세가 되다

legal tender : 법정통화

sum : 액수, 총합, 간단한 계산

means : 돈, 재력

dressers : 화장대

for the time being : 당분간

earn their keep : 제 밥값을 하다.