标题:The List: Obama’s 10 Worst Ideas Posted September 2008 Both John McCain and Barack Obama have many smart policy proposals, but not all of them are ready for prime time. This week, FP looks at 10 Obama ideas that should have never seen the light of day. Next week? McCain on the hot seat. 欧巴马和马坎都有几招不错的政策，但并非全部都该端上台面。这礼拜，FP回顾欧巴马 十大不该见天日的坏主意。下礼拜，换马坎。 Renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement 重新谈判NAFTA What he said: “I will make sure that we renegotiate. … I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.” —Democratic primary debate in Cleveland, Feb. 26, 2008 欧说：「我会确保我们重新谈判...我想我们应该弄只跳脱逃款的锤子当作保险，确保 劳工和环境有落实我们协议的标准。」─022608克里福兰民主党初选辩论 Why it’s a bad idea: Trade agreements take years to negotiate, and Mexico and Canada would almost certainly seek new concessions of their own in a new round. Obama is right to argue that more economic development in Mexico will lower illegal immigration; he’s wrong to think that bashing NAFTA is the right way to address the Rust Belt’s economic woes. Happily, since the Ohio primary, Obama has backed off his harshest criticisms of the agreement. 坏在：贸易协定谈判要好几年，而墨西哥和加拿大下回合里几乎确定会致力争取 好处。欧巴马认为墨西哥经济发展能减少非法移民是正确的；但他错在认为攻击NAFTA 就是解决五大湖经济衰退的正确方法。幸好，自从俄怀俄州初选後，欧巴马对NAFTA的 批评就低调许多。 Opposing the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement 反对美国─哥伦比亚自由贸易协定 What he said: “And I’ll also oppose the Colombia Free Trade Agreement if President Bush insists on sending it to Congress because the violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor protections that we have insisted be included in these kinds of agreements.” —Speech to Philadelphia AFL-CIO, April 2, 2008 欧说：「布希坚持要把美哥自由贸易协定送到国会的话我一定反对，因为哥国内对工会 的暴力会让我们坚持列入这类条款中的劳工保障项目蒙羞。」─040208对费城AFL─CIO 演讲. Why it’s a bad idea: Although Obama citied antilabor violence, the murder rate for union members in Colombia last year was 4 per 100,000, well below the rate for the general population. The deal carries little to no cost for the United States; economists actually predict modest increases in U.S. exports. The upshot for an important ally in the war on drugs, however, is high, and consolidating Colombia’s commitment to open trade with the United States is a worthy goal. 坏在：虽然欧巴马提反劳工暴力，哥国去年的公会成员谋杀率是十万分之四，绝对低於 全民的比率。该协定几乎不花美国半毛钱；经济学家甚至预测美国出口会稍微成长。 但对联系个反毒战争盟友来说，影响就无比巨大，而把哥国开放对美贸易的承诺具体化 是个有价值的目标。 Talking Openly About Bombing Pakistan 公开谈论对巴基斯坦进行轰炸 What he said: “If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.” —Speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center, Washington, D.C., Aug. 1, 2007 欧说：如果我们接获高价值恐怖份子目标的情报，而穆沙拉夫总统按兵不动，我们 就动。」080107华盛顿特区威尔逊国际中心演讲。 Why it’s a bad idea: Engaging in military strikes in Pakistan happens to be established policy. But, as none other than Joe Biden pointed out last August, “It’s not something you talk about. … The last thing you want to do is telegraph to the folks in Pakistan that we are about to violate their sovereignty.” 坏在：在巴基斯坦进行军事攻击已经是美国国策。但就如拜登去年八月提出的，「那可 做不可说。...最做不得的事就是电告巴基斯坦人说我们要侵犯他们主权。」 Sitting Down with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad What he said: Asked if he’d be “willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea,” Obama replied: “I would.” —Democratic primary debate, Charleston, S.C., July 23, 2007 与伊朗总统座谈 欧说：当被问到他是否「愿意单独、无前提、在执政第一年内、於华盛顿或其他地方， 与伊朗、叙利亚、委内斯瑞拉、古巴、和北韩领导人会面」时，说：「我会」。 Why it’s a bad idea: Engaging rogue states can be a savvy move, and even the Bush administration has negotiated with Pyongyang and sent envoys to meetings with Iran. But sitting down with heads of state without precondition? That’s another thing entirely, especially when it comes to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. As Carnegie Endowment expert Karim Sadjadpour told the Wall Street Journal, “Only two things can rehabilitate Ahmadinejad politically: bombing Iran or major efforts to engage.” No wonder Obama’s foreign-policy team has walked back its candidate’s off-the-cuff remarks. 坏在：与流氓国家接触或许是个妙步，且连布希政府都有与平壤谈判并派遣使团赴 伊朗参加会议。但没前提就座谈？这又是另外一件事情了，特别是面对伊朗总统 艾哈迈迪。凯内基基金会专家Sadjadpour告诉华尔街日报说，「能在政治方面重振 艾哈迈迪的只有两件事：轰炸伊朗，或大动作接触。」难怪欧巴马的外交组拼命在 帮他们参选人的口误消毒。 Pushing the Patriot Employer Act 推动爱国雇主法案 What he said: “When I am president … I’ll pass the Patriot Employer Act that I’ve been fighting for ever since I ran for the Senate—we will end the tax breaks for companies who ship our jobs overseas, and we will give those breaks to companies who create good jobs with decent wages right here in America.” —Speech in Janesville, Wis., Feb. 13, 2008 欧说：「我上任後...会通过我从进入参议院以来就一直推动的爱国雇主法案。我们会 终止那些把工作移出美国的公司的减税政策，我们也会把这些减税好处提供给那些提供 美国人好工作、好薪资的公司。」021308威斯康辛Janesville演讲。 Why it’s a bad idea: British economists Willem Buiter and Anne Sibert slam the bill as, “reactionary, populist, xenophobic and just plain silly.” That ’s a bit much. A little populist pandering is hardly a threat to the global economic order—the bill offers employers a small tax credit if they meet six conditions, including the probably unworkable provision that they keep their headquarters in the United States. It’s never smart economic policy to reward companies for placing limitations on their own profitable activities, but as The Economist put it, “Obama deserves a slap on the wrist” for this one, not a full-throated indictment. 坏在：两位英国经济学家批评该法案为「反动、民粹、恐外、单纯智缺。」是有点太 超过。搞一点点民粹不致威胁国际经济秩序─该法案给能满足六项条件的雇主一点 税率优惠（其中包括大概不切实际的条款，把总部设在美国）。奖励公司自行限制自己 采取可获利的措施决不是个明智的经济政策，但就如经济学人所言，「欧巴马该打个 手心」，而不是被大力谴责。 Promoting Coal-to-Liquid Fuels 推动煤转液体燃料 What he said: “The people I meet in town hall meetings back home would rather fill their cars with fuel made from coal reserves in Southern Illinois than with fuel made from crude reserves in Saudi Arabia. We already have the technology to do this in a way that’s both clean and efficient. What we’ve been lacking is the political will.” —Statement introducing the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2006, June 7, 2006 欧说：「我在市政厅遇过的人回家後都会宁愿把自己的车装满南伊利诺州煤矿制成的 燃料，而非来自沙乌地阿拉伯的燃油。我们科技已经达到了，不仅乾净而且有效率。 我们缺乏的是政治意愿。」060706引介2006煤转燃料推动法案演说。 Why it’s a bad idea: Obama’s energy policy has much to commend it. But borrowing an idea from World War II Germany and apartheid South Africa? Bad move. Coal-to-liquid fuels produce nearly twice the greenhouse gases of ordinary petroleum, experts say, and it’s foolish to subsidize an industry that easily could go under if oil prices fall. Under withering fire from environmentalists, the Obama camp clarified his position in June 2007 as, “ [U]nless and until this technology is perfected, Senator Obama will not support the development of any coal-to-liquid fuels unless they emit at least 20% less life-cycle carbon than conventional fuels.” It’s since been dropped from campaign materials. 坏在：欧巴马能源政策很支持这个法案。但从二战德国跟种族分离政策的南非取 回来的经？败步。专家说，煤转液态燃料比普通汽油生产两倍的温室气体，且补贴 易受油价波折影响的企业就是不聪明。在环保人士的炮火轰击下，欧巴马阵营在07年 六月明确定义自己政策为「除非并且直到这个科技已臻完善前，欧巴马不会支持任何 煤转液态燃料的发展，除非他们至少比传统燃料的全生命周期还少至少20％。」但这 已经被欧巴马阵营给丢弃了。 Eliminating Income Taxes for Seniors Making Under $50,000 What he said: “I’ll make retirement more secure for America’s seniors by eliminating income taxes for any retiree making less than $50,000 per year.” —Speech on Nov. 7, 2007, in Bettendorf, Iowa 欧说：「我会让美国老年人的退休生活更有保障：取消所有年收入五万美金的退休人士 的所得税。」110707Bettendorf爱荷华演讲。 Why it’s a bad idea: Most seniors already pay no income taxes. That’s because they already get preferential treatment in the tax code. Plus, why are seniors more deserving of tax relief than struggling young families? The Tax Policy Center—run by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute— criticized the idea in a recent report, saying that because government spending on seniors is already set to balloon due to retiring baby boomers, “ it seems inappropriate to target special income tax breaks to this group.” 坏在：许多老年人已经不付所得税了。这是因为他们在税费里有特殊待遇了。另外， 为什麽老年人应该比在挣扎中的年轻家庭更配得税率优惠？税务政策中心─Brookings Institution和Urban institute主持的─在一篇最近的报导中批评这个想法， 并说因为政府花费在老年人上的财力即将要因为应付婴儿潮世代所以膨胀。瞄准某 族群的所得税优惠似乎不太适当。」 Boosting Ethanol Subsidies 增加乙醇补贴 What he said: “[Ethanol] ultimately helps our national security, because right now we’re sending billions of dollars to some of the most hostile nations on earth.” —Statement at the opening of a VeraSun Energy ethanol processing plant in Charles City, Iowa, August 2007 欧说：「乙醇会帮助我们的国家安全，因为我们现在正在把数十亿的美金送给世界上 对我们最有敌意的国家。」 Why it’s a bad idea: As economist Paul Krugman has written, corn-based ethanol is “bad for the economy, bad for consumers, bad for the planet—what ’s not to love?” World Bank economist Daniel Mitchell blames biofuels, including ethanol, for a 75 percent increase in global food prices since 2002 that has led to economic distress and rioting in such countries as Haiti, Egypt, and Somalia. There’s also little evidence that they do much to prevent global warming. A recent study published in Science demonstrated that the farmland needed to grow corn for ethanol results in deforestation on a massive scale, negating any benefit the reduction in carbon emissions might have. So why does the senator support such a wasteful and damaging subsidy, even voting for the recent farm bill’s billions in pork for ethanol producers? “[B]ecause Illinois … is a major corn producer,” he said in April. At least he’s honest. 坏在：经济学家KRUGMAN写到，玉米生产的乙醇「对经济坏，对消费者坏，对地球坏─ 爱不爱？」世界银行经济学家Daniel Mitchell认为生质油（包括乙醇）应该负责全球 粮价自2002年以来抬升75％、造成海地、埃及、和索马利亚等国的动乱负责。也很少 证据支持生质油对避免暖化有帮助的说法。最近一篇发布在科学杂志的研究显示， 为了开辟农地种植玉米生产乙醇，已经造成大规模森林消失，抵销任何可能减低碳排放 所带来的好处。所以，为什麽欧巴马要支持这种浪费又有破坏性的补贴政策甚至还 投票支持最近给乙醇业者数十亿计的补贴政策？「因为伊利诺州...是个主要玉米生产 州，」欧巴马四月说。至少他很诚实。 Taxing Oil Companies Extra 石油公司课税加倍 What he said: “I’ll make oil companies like Exxon pay a tax on their windfall profits, and we’ll use the money to help families pay for their skyrocketing energy costs and other bills.” —Speech in Raleigh, N.C., June 9, 2008 欧说：「我会让如EXXON等石油公司为他们夸张的利润付税，我们会用那笔钱来帮助 美国家庭应付高涨的能源价格以及其他帐单。」 Why it’s a bad idea: He’s attacking the symptom, not the disease. It’s certainly hard to defend oil companies making record profits while consumers are struggling to fill their tanks, but Big Oil has very little control over day-to-day gas prices, which are set by global supply and demand and, of course, OPEC. By discouraging oil companies from making big profits, such a tax could potentially discourage them from making investments in new refineries and finding new oil sources, resulting in fewer jobs and even higher prices at the pump. Jimmy Carter tried this in 1980, and it only increased U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Singling out one particular industry for punishment because it is politically unpopular doesn’t make much economic sense, either. 坏在：欧巴马在治标不是在治本。当然，当消费者忍痛把自己的油箱加满时，要为 赚进大把钞票的石油公司辩护是很困难的。但大油佬不能控制每天的油价，那是 全球共需以及OPEC定的价。这类逼石油公司不大赚一笔的税可能让石油公司不再建 新厂以及开发新油田，也就会减少工作机会，甚至让油价飙更高。卡特1980试过， 而这反而逼美国更加依赖外国油源。单纯因为政治形象而挑一个企业来惩罚在经济上 也没什麽道理。 Opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 开放战略石油库存 What he said: “We should sell 70 million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less-expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks.” —Speech in Lansing, Mich., Aug. 4, 2008 欧说：「我们应该卖七千万桶战略库存石油来买比较不贵的原油，过去曾在两个礼拜 内把油价降低。」 Why it’s a bad idea: Obama was right in July when he said that the strategic oil reserve “has to be reserved for a genuine emergency.” Selling oil from the 700 million barrel reserve would increase domestic supply and could drive down prices in the short term, but encouraging consumers to use more oil isn’ t going to fix anything. And depleting the reserve would leave the United States vulnerable to a supply disruption caused by a natural disaster or further unrest in the Middle East. Obama swapped common sense for this dangerous boondoggle in August after McCain started to hammer him on offshore drilling. So much for tough truths. 坏在：欧巴马七月说战略石油库存「应该保存起来应付真的危机」是对的。从七亿桶里 拨出一部份来用会增加国内供应并且在短期内把价格压低，但鼓励消费者用更多油 解决不了问题。耗尽库存会让美国无法应付中东遭受天然灾害或社会动荡时引发的 供应短缺。八月，马坎开始攻击他的沿岸采油政策时，欧巴马就把常识扔一旁，抓了个 危险的废柴提议。事实就是这麽硬。 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4461&page=1 新闻来源: (需有正确连结) -- --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 220.129.162.245 ※ 编辑: pursuistmi 来自: 220.129.162.245 (09/08 22:31) ※ 编辑: pursuistmi 来自: 220.129.162.245 (09/08 23:09) ※ 编辑: pursuistmi 来自: 220.129.162.245 (09/09 01:12)