TED演讲: 我们需要钱来进行援助 那么就来印钞吧(3)

 Secondly, inflation simply never became a threat.  第二，通货膨胀单纯来说时不会成为威胁的。

As you can see, in the United States,  正如你所见到的，在美国，
inflation for most of this period remained below average. 这个阶段大部分时间的通货膨胀都低于平均数。
It was the same elsewhere.  在别的地方也一样。
So how does all this relate to aid?  那么所有的这一切是怎么和救助这个事儿挂钩的呢？
Well, this is where Dorothy and the Mango Tree charity that supports her comes in. 这就是桃乐茜和资助她的芒果树慈善机构开始出现。
I was at one of their fundraising events earlier this year, 在今年年初的时候我在一个募捐活动上，
and I was inspired to give a one-off donation when I remembered that my firm offers to match the charitable contributions its employees make. 我当时受到了鼓舞，捐了一笔捐款,然后我想起我的公司答应会根据自己员工捐款的数额,再捐同样的数额。
So think of this:  所以这么想：
Instead of just being able to help Dorothy and four of her classmates to go through secondary school for a few years, 我不单能帮助到桃乐茜还有她的四个同学,帮助他们完成中学几年的学业，
I was able to double my contribution.  我能够让我的贡献翻倍。
Brilliant.  这真是太棒了。
So following that conversation with my daughter,  所以想着我和女儿的对话，
and seeing the absence of inflation in the face of money-printing, 看着面临钞票印刷时消失的通货膨胀，
and knowing that international aid payments were falling at just the wrong time, 以及知道国际救助款项在不恰当的时间被减少了，
this made me wonder:  这让我好奇：
Could we match but just on a much grander scale?  我们能否在规模上提高一个等级？
Let's call this scheme Print Aid.  让我们把这个计划成为印救。
And here's how it might work.  下面解释一下它的运作。
Provided it saw little inflation risk from doing so,  假设这样做基本没什么通货膨胀的风险，
the central bank would be mandated 1 to match the government's overseas aid payments up to a certain limit. 中央银行需被强制采取措施以达到政府的海外救助款项所设定的一个限度。
Governments have been aiming to get aid to 0.7 percent for years,  政府这几年来都试图让救助款项达到0.7%的数额，
so let's set the limit at half of that,  那么我们就把限制定在一半吧，
0.35 percent of their income.  就是收入的0.35%。
So it would work like this: If in a given year the government gave 0.2 percent of its income to overseas aid, 所以它会这样运作：如果在某一年政府把收入的0.2%拨给海外救助，
the central bank would simply top it up with a further 0.2 percent. 那么中央银行只要把它的款项提高多0.2％就可以了。
So far so good.  目前感觉还不错吧。
How risky 2 is this?  这样做的风险有多大？
Well, this involves the creation of money to buy goods, not assets. 它其实涉及到制造货币去购买商品，而非资产。
It sounds more inflationary already, doesn't it.  听起来有点通货膨胀了，对吧。
But there are two important mitigating 3 factors here.  但这里有两个重要的缓解因素。
The first is that by definition,  第一个，就是从定义上说，
this money printed would be spent overseas.  印制出来的钞票会被投放到海外。
So it's not obvious how it leads to inflation in the country doing the actual printing unless it leads to a currency depreciation 4 of that country.  所以印刷钞票对国内而言,不大可能会导致通货膨胀除非它导致了这个国家的货币贬值。
That is unlikely for the second reason:  这也不大可能出现，因为有第二个原因：
the scale of the money that would be printed under this scheme. 取决于在这个计划下印刷钞票的规模。
So let's think of an example where Print Aid was in place in the U.S., U.K. and Japan. 举个例子,比如印救计划在美国，英国和日本实施。
To match the aid payments made by those governments over the last four years, 为了达到政府们在过去四年里在救助款项达到的数目，
Print Aid would have generated 200 billion dollars' worth of extra aid.  印救会提供额外的两千亿美金给救助款项。
What would that look like in the context of the increase in the money stock that had already happened in those countries to save the financial system? 会出现怎样的情况？当这些国家为了拯救财政系统已提高货币储存量。
Are you read for this?  准备好听答案了吗？
You might struggle to see that at the back,  在后面你可能会看不清，
because the gap is quite small.  因为这个空缺很小。
So what we're saying here is that we took a 3.7 trillion gamble to save our financial systems,  所以我们这里说的是我们拿了3.7万亿美金孤注一掷去缓解我们的财政系统压力，
and you know what, it paid off.  结果呢，它见成效了。
There was no inflation.  没有通货膨胀。