[英中] 你找不到工作的三個理由

看板Translation作者時間11年前 (2013/06/02 16:27), 編輯推噓0(0021)
留言21則, 2人參與, 最新討論串1/2 (看更多)
3 Reasons You Can't Find a Job Why is it so hard for young people to find jobs these days? Three broad reasons come to mind. 1. Inappropriate skill sets, 2. Government regulations, and 3. Uncertainty. 為什麼年輕人近期那麼難找到工作?此時心中浮現三個主要的原因。一.所學不符市場, 二.政府法令,還有三.不確定性。 Youth unemployment may partially be the result of a mismatch between the skills young adults possess and the skills employers require of their workers. Younger individuals already have less experience and training. But even people with college degrees may find that they do not possess the appropriate skills for the jobs employers are looking to fill. Government can subsidize education and send more people to school through loans and grants, but this does not guarantee future employment. 部分的青年失業者可能要歸因於他們所學與雇主所需不符。年輕人本已較無經驗和缺乏訓 練,就算擁有大學學歷,還是可能發現本身技能不被雇主需要。政府可以補助教育和經由 貸款和獎助學金把更多人送進學校,但這並不保證他們未來的就業。 Second, government regulations and taxes may also be part of the problem. Things like minimum wage laws, overtime pay mandates, payroll taxes, health care regulations and unemployment insurance all make it more costly to employ labor. When it is more costly for firms to hire workers, employer hire fewer workers. Some of these costs may not be immediately obvious. Take, for example, laws that make it more difficult for firms to hire and fire workers as they see fit. 第二,政府法令和稅金可能也是問題之一。最低薪資、強制加班費、薪資稅、健保條例和 失業保險,都提高公司雇用的成本。部分成本可能沒有辦法立即看出。舉例來說, 就是讓公司在想要雇用和解雇員工時更加困難的法律。 Why could this cause more unemployment? Compare it to dating. Imagine that any blind date you went on had to result in marriage. Would you ever go on a blind date? I doubt it. The same goes for a company that's interested in hiring more workers but worries about not being able to fire a new employee if they're not working out. They won't want to take chances. So firms are particularly reluctant to hire young workers who lack experience and do not have an employment record to prove that they're reliable. 為什麼這會造成更多的失業呢? 把它比喻成約會來看,想像在相親後都要跟你的對象結婚 ,這樣你還會想去嗎?我想不會吧。這對想招募更多員工的公司來說,也是一樣的。它們擔 心招募來的人不符期待,但又沒辦法解雇他們,所以不想冒這個險。因此公司特別不願意 錄取那些缺乏經驗,也沒有就業記錄來證明自己是能夠勝任的人。 Finally, there are many reasons for employers to feel uncertain about the future. For example, we're experiencing a slow economic recovery after a major financial crisis. Further, consider something like health care reform. The recent health care bill is very long and there is much debate and unanswered questions about what its ultimate impacts on the cost of labor may be. All this creates uncertainty, which makes employers more cautious in hiring workers. 最後,還有許多原因使雇主對未來感到不確定。例如,我們的經濟正從大規模的金融危機 中緩慢復甦。再者,考慮到醫療照護重整之類的事情。近期的醫療照護法案相當的龐大, 且最終對於勞動成本的潛在衝擊尚有許多爭論和未解問題。所有的因素皆造成不確定性, 使得雇主在雇用員工時更為謹慎。 These three reasons, mismatch of skills, regulation, and uncertainty, are three potential reasons why many young people are having a hard time finding work right now. Each of these three reasons has one factor in common: government. Interventions haven't helped things and they have likely made things worse. The unemployed would be better served if government stepped out of the picture and allowed economic growth and a free market to create to more job and prosperity. 學非所需、法律規定和不確定性是現今年輕人這麼難找到工作的三個潛在理由。每一個都 有一個共通點-政府。目前政府的干預尚未有任何幫助,反而讓情況更糟。如果政府停止 干預市場,拚經濟成長和回歸市場機制來創造更多工作與繁榮,失業的情形可能會有所改 善。 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 來源: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRb2wBVuX28
*請問health care是指美國的健保還是美國整體的醫療制度?有點不確定。 *請問"step out of the picture"是什麼意思? 我查了一些例句發現這是跟上下文有關的,好像沒有特定的意思,那在這裡的picture指 的是什麼呢? 麻煩各位了,有錯請指教,謝謝。 -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.165.120.92

06/03 06:54, , 1F
1. 你其實可以從context看出端倪。這部份是針對"公司(僱
06/03 06:54, 1F

06/03 06:54, , 2F
用員工)"上頭(government regulations要求公司需要做的)
06/03 06:54, 2F

06/03 06:54, , 3F
。比如有一定人數的員工時必須提供health care(由公司資助
06/03 06:54, 3F

06/03 06:57, , 4F
的健康保險。這是由"非政府"的保險公司提供的)(現在美國
06/03 06:57, 4F

06/03 06:58, , 5F
新的"Obamacare"是另外的(也不是你的link要講的)。當然
06/03 06:58, 5F

06/03 06:58, , 6F
不能只是"有"就行,health care的內容不能過份的對員工造
06/03 06:58, 6F

06/03 06:58, , 7F
成不利(也因此有"regulations"來規範)
06/03 06:58, 7F

06/03 07:10, , 9F
-> 3 ...
06/03 07:10, 9F

06/03 07:10, , 10F
你可以對照她前頭說的"Interventions" --> 基本上就是要
06/03 07:10, 10F

06/03 07:10, , 11F
government退出/不要介入 (退出/介入"什麼"?<--- 想想
06/03 07:10, 11F

06/03 07:11, , 12F
你為何懂我在講什麼,這裡我用的"什麼"就是個大概的涵蓋詞
06/03 07:11, 12F

06/03 07:11, , 13F
,實際所指的你可以從"context"推導出/知道。而這個大概/
06/03 07:11, 13F

06/03 07:11, , 14F
整體狀況/ 所講/指的"東西" --> picture 發揮一下想像力,
06/03 07:11, 14F

06/03 07:11, , 15F
應該不難聯想)
06/03 07:11, 15F

06/03 07:15, , 16F
也因此"真正所指"的也確實是需要context才能確定(比如字
06/03 07:15, 16F

06/03 07:16, , 17F
典例句後頭的括弧內容不是都一樣,因為個別例子(因為是取
06/03 07:16, 17F

06/03 07:17, , 18F
自一般情況例子,所以不需要太多文字內容的"contexts")
06/03 07:17, 18F

06/03 07:18, , 19F
但是那基本的字義("a general situation")都在
06/03 07:18, 19F

06/03 21:21, , 20F
謝謝:D 解釋得很清楚 還有健保法案的健保和公司幫員工保
06/03 21:21, 20F

06/03 21:22, , 21F
的健保不是同一個東西 後來又找了資料才懂...
06/03 21:22, 21F
※ 編輯: Minilogo 來自: 36.229.88.99 (06/03 21:33)
文章代碼(AID): #1Hgm7tX8 (Translation)
文章代碼(AID): #1Hgm7tX8 (Translation)