Question

急求英语高手帮忙翻译，不要用网上翻译机

Another rise in interest rates will no doubt be followed by further complaints that monetary policy is a blunt instrument and suggestions there must be a better way.

That monetary policy is a blunt instrument is an economic cliche, but what does it mean? Presumably a blunt instrument is one that bludgeons the economy indiscriminately.

Yet the loudest complaints about monetary policy come from those who appear to think monetary policy is designed to single out households struggling to pay a mortgage. It does hit them, but it also hits all other overcommitted borrowers.

As a blunt instrument it doesn't discriminate between households and businesses or between rich households and poor, although it is inevitable that the most financially vulnerable, those how have taken on the highest risk, are early victims.

The most highly indebted households are the wealthier ones, and while they are better able to cope with rate rises, higher interest rates still affect them. This is particularly so when the global credit squeeze is ratcheting up the impact of domestic monetary policy, leading to company failures, plunging share prices and a rationing of credit.

A complaint from ordinary Australians is that they are not hte ones causing inflation, but with domestic demand running at more than 5 per cent, and a lot of it consumption spending, it doesn't wash.

The obvious but important point is that inflation is a national problem, and unless the pain of bringing it back under control is widespread, monetary policy won't work.

Attempts to shelter particular groups in the community are understandable on political and equity grounds, but if they are extensive they will ultimately lead to even tighter monetary policy. The same point applies to frequent complaints that monetary policy does nothing to slow down the mining boom states of Quennsland and Wester Australia but depresses economic activity in the south-eastern states.

There has been a divergence between the states in economic performance, but in a study in May 1996 the Reserve Bank concluded that the divergence in the growth performance of the states was not unusually large. Much larger divergences have occurred in the past, notably during the terms of trade boom of the 1970s.

A big difference betwwen the '70s terms of trade boom and the present one is that the Australian dollar is now a floating currency, its value determined by markets. In the '70s politicians set the exchange rate (and ran monetary policy).

Answer 1

上升另一项，利息也会毫无疑问，其次是进一步投诉，指的货币政策是一种生硬的手段和建议，必须有一个更好的办法。

货币政策是一种生硬的手段是一个经济陈腔滥调，但是什么意思？假设一种生硬的手段是一个bludgeons经济不分青红皂白地。

然而，最响的投诉的货币政策，来自那些谁似乎认为，货币政策的目的是要挑出家庭挣扎支付按揭。它击中他们，但它也安打所有其他overcommitted借款人。

作为一种生硬的手段，它不歧视之间的家庭和企业或贫富之间的家庭和穷人，虽然这是无可避免的，最有经济困难的，那些是如何采取的风险最高，是年初的受害者。

负债最重的住户是较富裕，而它们能够更好地应付利率上升，较高的利息仍然是影响他们。特别是当全球信贷紧缩是棘轮了影响国内的货币政策，导致公司的失败，令股票价格和配给信贷。

投诉，从普通的澳大利亚人是他们不想hte那些造成通货膨胀，但与国内需求的运行在5 ％以上，并有很多，它的消费开支，这并不洗手。

很明显，但重要的一点是，通货膨胀是一个全国性的问题，除非痛苦，使回下控制很普遍，货币政策将是行不通的。

企图住房特定群体在社会上是可以理解的政治和公平的理由，但如果是广泛的，他们最终会导致，甚至紧缩货币政策。同一点，适用于频繁的投诉，指货币政策并没有拖慢矿业繁荣的国家quennsland和西部澳大利亚，但抑制经济活动在东南部的国家。

有一个分歧，各国在经济表现，但在一项研究，在1996年5月，储备银行得出结论认为，分歧的生长性能的国家不是非常大。大得多的分歧都发生在过去，特别是在贸易条件的蓬勃发展20世纪70年代。

一个大的差异betwwen七十年代的贸易条件的繁荣和本一的是，澳元兑美元现在是一个浮动的货币，其价值取决于市场。在七十年代的政客定汇率（冉和货币政策） 。

希望满意！