2012年12月27日 星期四

Chinglish by Michael Chugani

2012-12-27

My recent columns about the government treating pedestrians badly have struck a chord with readers. The columns have stoked the anger of many readers. They are continuing to send e-mails saying they agree with me. I wrote in my last two columns that the government cares more about vehicles than pedestrians. I said vehicle drivers behave as if they have more rights than pedestrians. Drivers don't stop for pedestrians even at pedestrian crossings without traffic lights. They even use their car horns to honk at pedestrians who try to cross. In other developed societies drivers must stop for pedestrians, especially at crossings without traffic lights. I once asked the police if vehicles must stop for people at crossings without traffic lights or if pedestrians must wait for vehicles. The police spokesman gave me a gibberish reply.

        W hen something strikes a chord it means people agree with it or approve of it. For example, the government's measures to cool the property market have struck a chord with many people except property developers. The word stoke can be used in different ways. To stoke anger means to stir up or feed anger. C.Y. Leung's unclear explanations of his illegal structures stoked the anger of many people. To stoke a fire means to add coal or other fuel to a fire. When something is gibberish it means it makes no sense or is nonsensical.

        One reader noted that drivers honk for no reason. I have noticed that too. What is the point of honking if you are stuck in traffic? It is useless to honk at the vehicles in front if there is a traffic jam. They can't move even if you honk a million times. Drivers are supposed to honk only when there is a danger to pedestrians or other vehicles. But Hong Kong's drivers honk for no reason, just like on the mainland. Drivers in developed societies don't do that. It just proves that Hong Kong is not really the "world city" that the government insists we are.

        ***

        我近日一些專欄,寫到政府對行人很差,引起讀者的共鳴(struck a chord),挑起了許多讀者的怒火(stoked the anger)。他們陸續傳來電郵,對我的說法深表認同。我在上兩個專欄中提及,政府關心汽車多於行人。我說,駕車人士表現得好像他們比行人有更多權利。在沒有交通燈的斑馬線前,司機也不會停車禮讓行人,甚至會響號警示要過馬路的行人。在其他的已發展社會,司機必須停車禮讓行人,尤其在沒有交通燈的斑馬線。我曾經問過警察,在沒有交通燈的斑馬線前,汽車是否必須停車,抑或是行人讓路予汽車?警方的發言人回應時卻在亂說一通(gibberish)。

        當某事strikes a chord即是人們很同意或者很贊同,例如,政府壓抑地產市場的措施,令許多人產生共鳴(struck a chord),除了地產商。Stoke這個字可以有不同的用法,To stoke anger即是去挑起怒火。梁振英對其非法僭建的含糊解釋,就惹起了不少人的憤怒(stoked the anger)。To stoke a fire是加入炭或其他燃料去燒火。說某事是gibberish即是指它不成理或毫無意義。

        有一位讀者指出,司機們總是沒緣由地響號,我也留意得到。當你在車龍中,你響號又有何用?塞車時,響號警示前面的車輛是毫無作用的。你響號一百萬次,它們還是寸步難移。駕車人士應該只在行人或其他汽車有危險時才響號。但香港司機像內地的一樣,總是無緣無故地響號。在已發展的社會,司機並不會這樣做。這只能證明,香港並不是政府所強調的甚麼「國際都會」。

        mickchug@gmail.com

        中譯:七刻

        Michael Chugani褚簡寧

In Ireland, Carbon Taxes Pay Off - NYTimes.com by Elizabeth Rosenthal

2012-12-27

DUBLIN — Over the last three years, with its economy in tatters, Ireland embraced a novel strategy to help reduce its staggering deficit: charging households and businesses for the environmental damage they cause.

The government imposed taxes on most of the fossil fuels used by homes, offices, vehicles and farms, based on each fuel’s carbon dioxide emissions, a move that immediately drove up prices for oil, natural gas and kerosene. Household trash is weighed at the curb, and residents are billed for anything that is not being recycled.

The Irish now pay purchase taxes on new cars and yearly registration fees that rise steeply in proportion to the vehicle’s emissions.

Environmentally and economically, the new taxes have delivered results. Long one of Europe’s highest per-capita producers of greenhouse gases, with levels nearing those of the United States, Ireland has seen its emissions drop more than 15 percent since 2008.

Although much of that decline can be attributed to a recession, changes in behavior also played a major role, experts say, noting that the country’s emissions dropped 6.7 percent in 2011 even as the economy grew slightly.

“We are not saints like those Scandinavians — we were lapping up fossil fuels, buying bigger cars and homes, very American,” said Eamon Ryan, who was Ireland’s energy minister from 2007 to 2011. “We just set up a price signal that raised significant revenue and changed behavior. Now, we’re smashing through the environmental targets we set for ourselves.”

By contrast, carbon taxes are viewed as politically toxic in the United States. Republican leaders in Congress have pledged to block any proposal for such a tax, and President Obama has not advocated one, although the idea has drawn support from economists of varying ideologies.

Yet when the Irish were faced with new environmental taxes, they quickly shifted to greener fuels and cars and began recycling with fervor. Automakers like Mercedes found ways to make powerful cars with an emissions rating as low as tinier Nissans. With less trash, landfills closed. And as fossil fuels became more costly, renewable energy sources became more competitive, allowing Ireland’s wind power industry to thrive.

Even more significantly, revenue from environmental taxes has played a crucial role in helping Ireland reduce a daunting deficit by several billion euros each year.

The three-year-old carbon tax has raised nearly one billion euros ($1.3 billion) over all, including 400 million euros in 2012. That provided the Irish government with 25 percent of the 1.6 billion euros in new tax revenue it needed to narrow its budget gap this year and avert a rise in income tax rates.

The International Monetary Fund, which oversees the rescue plan, recently suggested that Ireland should “expand the well-designed carbon tax” and its automobile taxes to generate even more money.

Although first proposed by the Green Party, the environmental taxes enjoy the support of all major political parties “because it puts a lot of money on the table,” said Frank Convery, an economist at University College Dublin. The bailout plan for 2013 requires Ireland to embrace a mix of new tax revenues and spending cuts.

Not everyone is happy. The prices of basic commodities like gasoline and heating oil have risen 5 to 10 percent. This is particularly hard on the poor, although the government has provided subsidies for low-income families to better insulate homes, for example. And industries complain that the higher prices have made it harder for them to compete outside Ireland.

“Prices just keep going up, and a lot of people think it’s a scam,” said Imelda Lyons, 45, as she filled her car at a gas station here. “You call it a carbon tax, but what good is being done with it to help the environment?”

The coalition government that enacted the taxes was voted out of office last year. “Just imagine President Obama saying in the debate, ‘I’ve got this great idea, but it’s going to increase your gasoline price,’ ” said Mr. Ryan, who lost his seat in the last election and now leads the Green Party. “People didn’t exactly cheer us on.”

A recent report estimated that a modest carbon tax in the United States that increased incrementally over time could generate about $1.25 trillion in revenue from 2012 to 2022, reducing the 10-year deficit by 50 percent, based on projections from the Congressional Budget Office.

“I think most economists — on the right and the left — think a carbon tax is a good idea,” said Aparna Mathur, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative research group that held a daylong seminar on carbon taxes in November. Some economists estimate that a carbon tax could raise $400 billion annually in the United States, she said. But the issue remains a nonstarter in the American political arena. even though Gilbert Metcalf, the Obama administration’s deputy assistant Treasury secretary for environment and energy, long promoted carbon taxes as a Tufts University economist.

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative advocacy group, has even filed a Freedom of Information suit seeking the release of Treasury Department e-mails containing the word “carbon” to make sure that nothing is in the works. Like many other economists, Dr. Metcalf has argued that carbon taxation is preferable to government regulation or cap-and-trade systems because it sets a straightforward price on greenhouse gas emissions and is relatively hard to evade.

Although carbon taxes in some ways disproportionately affect the poor — who are less able to buy new, more efficient cars, for example — such taxes do heavily penalize the wealthy, who consume far more. As with “sin taxes” on cigarettes, the taxes also alleviate some of the societal costs of pollution.

For several years, the European Commission has encouraged debt-ridden members of the European Union to embrace environmental taxes, saying that its economists have concluded they have “a less detrimental macroeconomic impact” than new income taxes or corporate taxes.

“Europeans don’t like taxes either,” said Connie Hedegaard, the European commissioner for climate action. “But this is good for the environment, and also good for our competitiveness.”

Some of Europe’s strongest economies, like Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, have taxed carbon dioxide emissions since the early 1990s, and Japan and Australia have introduced them more recently.

Ireland took the plunge after its economy collapsed in 2008 as a result of loose credit policies that created a real estate bubble; in one year, tax revenues fell 25 percent. With a huge bailout in 2010 by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, Ireland’s deficit soared to 11.9 percent of its gross domestic product, or over 30 percent with all loans factored in.

The environmental taxes work in concert with austerity measures like reduced welfare payments and higher fees for health care that are expected to save 2.2 billion euros this year. The carbon tax is levied on fossil fuels when they enter the country and is then passed on to consumers at the point of purchase. The automobile sales tax, which ranges from 14 to 36 percent of a car’s market price depending on its emissions, is simply folded into the sticker price.

That sent manufacturers racing to reduce emissions. Automakers like Mercedes and Volvo began making cars with high-efficiency diesel engines that shut off rather than idle when they stop, for example. “For manufacturers it’s all, ‘How low you can get?’ ” said Donal Duggan, a brand manager at an MSL showroom near central Dublin.

Other emissions taxes on cars, including the annual car registration fee, or road tax, are billed directly to customers, potentially adding thousands to annual operating costs. Ninety percent of new car sales last year were in the two lowest-emission tiers.

The taxes on garbage had an immediate impact. In Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County in southeastern Dublin, each home’s “black bin” for garbage headed to the landfill is weighed at pickup to calculate quarterly charges. Green bins for recyclables are emptied free of charge.

“There was a big furor initially, but now everything I throw out, I think, ‘How could I recycle this?’ ” said Tara Brown, a mother of three.

Of course, new environmental taxes bring new pain. Gas, always expensive in Europe, sells here for about $8 a gallon, around 20 percent more than in 2009 because of tightening market supplies and the new tax.

Still, Dr. Convery, the economist, is encouraging the government to raise carbon tax rates for 2013, declaring, “You don’t want to waste a good crisis to do what we should be doing anyway.”

......

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/28/science/earth/in-ireland-carbon-taxes-pay-off.html?ref=elisabethrosenthal&pagewanted=print

Chinese investment means opportunity for U.S. workers - The Washington Post by John Pomfret

2012-12-27

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chinese-investment-means-opportunity-for-us-workers/2012/12/27/e1cca33e-4938-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_print.html

末日沒來,末世依然 / 論盡中港台 by 岑逸飛

27 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT

  有關「末日預言」,由來已久,層出不窮,可追溯到西元970年3月25日,一些術士的「末日預言」引起西方長達30年的恐慌。1843年北美農夫米勒(William Miller)聲稱在《聖經》發現「末日」時間——— 1843年3月21日至1844年3月21日之間某日。1891年後期聖徒運動始創人史密斯(Joseph Smith)聲稱,從「上帝」處獲悉「耶穌」將在1891年回到世界,導致「末日」的善惡大戰。1910年一名天文學家通過光譜分析,發現彗星「尾巴」包含致命氣體「氰」,故當年哈雷彗星掠過地球時,也曾引發恐慌。1982年電視福音傳道者羅伯森(Pat Robertson)在電視節目《700俱樂部》警告觀眾在1982年底,上帝將審判世界。   

 

  另外,「千禧恐懼」也曾席捲西方人心,當年篤信預言家諾查丹馬斯(Nostradamus)的《諸世紀》(Centuries)預言詩,提到1999年7月恐怖大王將從天而降,到2000年1月1日,又有很多人擔心電腦會帶來末日」,「千年蟲」令全人類驚慌。2000年5月5日,作家諾納(Richard Noone)出版《2000年5月5日,冰:終極災難》的書聲稱,南極冰層將在2000年5月5日變成3哩厚,在這一天地球將「冰冷地死亡」。到2008年秋季,牧師溫蘭(Ronald Weinland)出版《2008年:上帝的最後見證》的書,指美國會倒塌。

 

  在近一、兩年,有數不清的,不論東方或西方,古代或現代的預言,都把所有箭頭指向2012年12月21日是末日,於是開始準備防空洞、救生衣和儲備糧,而末日的形式是地震或海嘯,或各種天災,也有可能是外星人來到地球拯救人類。結果12月21日安然渡過,在此之前,有關這個末日預言的信息已在網絡泛濫,這說法又與瑪雅長曆法的最後一天聯繫,言之者鑿鑿,除了有《2012》電影外,還有網站和書籍,據說2012年上半年已有超過175本關於世界末日書籍在銷售。

 

  西方堅信「2012末日論」的人,數不在少,可能受基督信仰的影響,很多人對「末日」、「大審判」深信不疑。《新約˙聖經》的《啟示錄》,據說是耶穌門徒約翰所寫,以誇大的想像力描述末日的悲苦情景。不過在香港,相信末日的不多,雖然傳媒也有報導,但港人實事求是,只顧發財,12月21日前毫無末日氣氛,無人在超市搶購,把末日視作開玩笑,或商業炒作。反而在內地,湖北、四川、福建、陜西、雲南等地,皆有人在公共場合散布末日論,藉此斂財。四川民眾更相信地球會連續黑暗三天三夜,瘋狂搶購白蠟燭和火柴,造成蠟燭脫銷。

 

  雖然歷來的末日預言都已被一一戳破,無一成真,但末日沒來,不表示末日永不會出現。大科學家霍金也說,末日必來,卻在二百年後。然而二百年太久,如今末日沒來,末世依然,有如佛學說的末法時代,佛法衰落,社會動蕩不安,道德淪喪,而對末日的恐懼,成為自然環境惡化的反映,也是人類對科技充滿懷疑的表現。末世的末日,有如一顆定時炸彈,只不知會在何時爆炸,雖然末日在12月21日沒有到來,說不定在後天就會到來,人不是上帝,誰知道答案呢﹖

 

  這次的末日未兌現,但末日的預言不滅,因為它的存在,等於在時刻提醒世人,人與人的關係,人與自然的關係,都已是千瘡百孔,需要我們認真改善。
__