【翻譯練習】公司投資物質資本，忽略人力資源
Companies Spend on Equipment, Not Workers
日期：JUNE 9, 2011
作者：CATHERINE RAMPELL
來源：http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10capital.html
Companies that are looking for a good deal aren’t seeing one in new workers.
公司想要賺大錢，卻沒有注重人力資源。
Workers are getting more expensive while equipment is getting cheaper, and the combination is encouraging companies to spend on machines rather than people.
畢竟，人力成本持續上揚，設備價格卻不斷降低，使得公司寧可多投資設備而非人力。
“I want to have as few people touching our products as possible,” said Dan Mishek, managing director of Vista Technologies in Vadnais Heights, Minn. “Everything should be as automated as it can be. We just can’t afford to compete with countries like China on labor costs, especially when workers are getting even more expensive.”
遠景科技的常務董事丹‧米謝克說：「產線能夠自動化的部分就盡量升級，動用愈少人力愈好。這年頭工資成本愈來愈高，我們可比不上中國那種勞工廉價的國家。」
Vista, which makes plastic products for equipment manufacturers, spent $450,000 on new technology last year. During the same period, it hired just two new workers, whose combined annual salary and benefits are $160,000.
遠景科技專門為設備供應商製造塑膠組件，去年該公司投入45萬美金於研發新科技；同時期，公司亦有雇用二名新進員工，二者的年薪與津貼總計亦不過16萬美金。
Two years into the recovery, hiring is still painfully slow. The economy is producing as much as it was before the downturn, but with seven million fewer jobs. Since the recovery began, businesses’ spending on employees has grown 2 percent as equipment and software spending has swelled 26 percent, according to the Commerce Department. A capital rebound that sharp and a labor rebound that slow have been recorded only once before — after the 1982 recession.
2009年經濟蕭條至今已二年餘，但就業率仍低迷不振。經濟狀況逐漸恢復蕭條前的水平，但就業機會足足少了7百萬個。美國商務部之調查顯示，經濟好轉之後，企業在人力資源的投資成長了2個百分點，但設備和軟體方面的投資竟有26個百分點的大幅增長。自從1982衰退以來，美國再度面臨此種窘境──資本投資的強勢回升，卻無反應在人力成本。
With equipment prices dropping, and tax incentives to subsidize capital investments, these trends seem likely to continue.
此種人力需求與經濟成長不均衡的現象，可歸因於設備的價格下跌，以及減稅方案集中鼓勵於物質資本上的投資。
“Firms are just responding to incentives,” said Dean Maki, chief United States economist at Barclays Capital. “And capital has gotten much cheaper relative to labor.”
美國巴克萊證券的首席經濟學家登‧馬奇表示：「減稅鼓勵讓企業很有感。而且，物質資本比人力資本愈來愈便宜。」
Indeed, equipment and software prices have dipped 2.4 percent since the recovery began, thanks largely to foreign manufacturing. Labor costs, on the other hand, have risen 6.7 percent, according to the Labor Department. The rising compensation costs are driven in large part by costlier health care benefits, so those lucky workers who do have jobs do not exactly feel richer.
自經濟復甦以來，設備及軟體的價格已下跌2.4個百分點；但美國勞工部的數據卻顯示，人力成本上揚了百分之6.7。薪資看似成長，其實絕大部分是昂貴的健保給付在充場面，因此在職者先別以為享受到加薪而沾沾自喜，實質上──並沒有變得更富有。
Corporate profits, meanwhile, are at record highs, and companies are hoarding cash. Many of the companies that are considering hiring say they are scared off by the uncertain future costs of health care and other benefits. But with the blessings of their accountants, these same companies are snatching up cheap, tax-subsidized tractors, computers and other goods.
企業營收同時也創新高，只是業主先將現金留存備用。許多公司原本有意聘請新員工，卻因難以預知的健保或其他給付成本，最終裹足不前；但在會計師的巧手之下，這些公司卻有辦法購入廉價並有稅額補助的曳引機、電腦、或其他物品。
“We had an opportunity to buy equipment at a very discounted rate,” Mr. Mishek explains of his decision to make bigger investments in equipment than in workers. “Now that the economy has turned around a little bit, it made sense to upgrade.”
米謝克解釋他何以不惜砸下重金來投資設備儀器，但不願投資人力：「既然經濟有復甦跡象，又有機會以超優惠的價格購置設備儀器，何樂而不為呢？」
Hiring has some hidden costs, as well as the expenses of salary and benefits, Mr. Mishek added.
米謝克補充說明，人力雇用有其隱藏成本，薪資、補貼等方面的支出更不用說了。
“I dread the process we have to go through when we want to bring somebody on,” he said. “When we have a job posting these days, we get a flurry of résumés from people who aren’t qualified at all: people with misspellings on their résumés, who have never been in the industry and want a career move from real estate or something. It’s a huge distraction to sort through all those.”
他說：「聘請新人的流程，讓我敬謝不敏。職缺公布以後，收到的履歷表當中，卻冒出一些不合要求的求職者，有人連履歷表內容字母都拼錯；有人則是未曾有相關產業經驗，想要從不動產或其他方面轉職。篩選履歷表的過程，實在太讓人抓狂了。」
Culling the résumés takes three days. Then he must make time to interview applicants, and spend $150 for each drug test.
花了三天的時間篩選履歷表，再來撥空與求職者進行面談，而每位受雇者的藥物檢驗也花費150美元。
Once a worker is hired, that person must complete a federally mandated safety program, which Vista pays an outside contractor a flat fee of $7,000 annually to handle. Finally, Vista’s best employees spend several months training the new hire, reducing their own productivity.
聘請一名員工後，該員工須完成聯邦法律規定的安全檢查流程，而遠景科技以每年7千美元的執行費用將此工作外包出去。遠景科技還要派出優秀員工，耗時數個月來訓練新人，卻削弱了原有員工的產值。
“You don’t have to train machines,” Mr. Mishek observes.
「不如買台機器，什麼都不用訓練。」米謝克悠悠說道。
Usually economists cheer on capital spending, and have supported Congress’s tax breaks for capital investment, like bonus depreciation, which lets companies expense the full cost of purchases immediately instead of waiting several years. That is because capital and labor can be complementary: a business that buys a new truck often hires a new driver, too.
經濟學家傾向於物質資本上的投資花費，並支持國會對於資本投資的減稅方案，例如「紅利折舊」，讓公司可以馬上折舊成本，不需等待其應有年限。這麼做是因為資本與勞力的需求，可能會同時發生：當公司購置一台新卡車，也需聘雇一名新司機。
But with the rising costs of hiring, companies like Vista are finding ways to use capital to replace workers whose jobs are relatively routine.
不過隨著人力成本增加，公司也會找門路，試著以物質資本來取代性質重複的人力工作。
“If you’re doing something that can be written down in a programmatic, algorithmic manner, you’re going to be substituted for quickly,” said Claudia Goldin, an economist at Harvard.
哈佛大學的經濟學家克勞迪雅‧高汀說：「如果你的工作型態屬於機械化、規則化，那麼職位很容易就被取代了。」
To add insult to injury, much of the equipment used to replace American workers is made by workers abroad, meaning that capital spending is going overseas. Of the four pieces of equipment Vista bought last year, one was made domestically. The others came from Israel, Switzerland and Germany. (“I try to avoid buying Chinese at the workplace and at home,” Mr. Mishek said.)
殘酷的真相是，美國許多公司欲新購設備以取代勞工，但該設備卻由外國的勞工所製造，這表示資本最後仍然投資在國外。就以遠景科技而言，去年所買的四組新設備，只有一組是美國製造，另三組則分別來自以色列、瑞典、德國。(米謝克說：「不管上班還是在家，我盡量遠離中國貨。」)
Of course the shift to more automated production predates the Great Recession. And in the long run, better technology lowers prices, raises living standards and helps workers move into higher-paying jobs. This was the case with the mechanization of farming, which a century ago employed 41 percent of the American work force.
2007年開始的經濟大衰退，已有機器取代人力的自動化浪潮；而時代長久演變，科技之進展有助降低物價、提升生活水平，藍領勞工亦能躋身白領階級。此現象也能夠從農業的機械化看出，在一世紀前，百分之41的美國勞動人口從農。
“We don’t have 11 million unemployed farmers today because over time farmers and their children transitioned into different sectors,” says William C. Dunkelberg, chief economist at the National Federation of Independent Business. “We don’t usually have this kind of shock, though, that displaces a lot of workers at once.”
「現代我們並沒聽說過有110萬的農民失業，因為農民及其後代都已轉移到不同的工作領域。目前這種人力版圖大幅移動的現象，也是少見的。」全國獨立企業聯盟的首席經濟學家威廉‧C‧鄧肯伯這麼說。
Better technologies may eventually offer better job opportunities, but only if people can upgrade their skills quickly enough to qualify. That is hard to do in the short run, especially when so many displaced workers need to be retrained at once.
科技進展固然可幫助帶來更好的工作機會，但前提是勞工的工作技能需與時俱進，然而短時間並無法達成此目標，畢竟許多失業勞工必須重新訓練。
“People don’t seem to come in with the right skill sets to work in modern manufacturing,” Mr. Mishek said, complaining that job applicants were often deficient in computer, mathematics, science and accounting skills. “It seems as if technology has evolved faster than people.”
米謝克抱怨著應徵者通常缺乏電腦、數理、會計方面的能力：「有心踏入機械製造產業的人，未必具有必備的相關技能。科技似乎跑得比人還要快。」
Some economists support policies that might shift the balance away from capital spending. Andrew Sum, an economist at Northeastern University, advocates tax incentives for hiring that mirror those for capital investment. Congress passed a hiring tax credit along these lines last year, but it was not well publicized, and some said it was poorly devised. The proposal is reportedly floating around Washington once again.
有些經濟學家提出決策，期望能夠幫助資本與人力投資失衡的現象。東北大學的經濟學家安卓‧森，提倡設備購置的稅捐減免英也沿用到人力雇用方面。去年國會已通過一項人力雇用免稅額方案，但並未宣傳周知，一些企業也響起了法案設計不當的聲音。據說該法案又被退回國會重新研擬。
Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, and many other economists say the relative prices of labor and capital are not the real problem. The biggest hurdle is that companies are loath to invest at all because economic growth is so slow.
包含美國總統經濟顧問委員會之主席奥斯坦‧古爾斯比在內的許多經濟學家皆表示，人力與物質資本的價格差別並不是重點；經濟成長龜速使得企業不願投資，才是背後真正原因。
Demand needs to grow for employers to be more comfortable with all sorts of investments, human or otherwise, Mr. Dunkelberg said.
Consider the booming 1990s, he says: Then, as now, capital was getting rapidly cheaper relative to labor, and then, as now, companies were increasing spending on capital more than on labor. But companies were investing so much money to begin with that labor spending still grew a lot. With a bigger economic pie, few cared how the slices were cut.
鄧肯伯認為，經濟需求必須增長，讓雇主覺得有必要在人力或設備等方面擴大投資，才是解決之道。回顧經濟蓬勃的1990年代，當時亦如現今情形，物質資本比人力資本便宜，因此企業對於物質資本投資得比人力更多；但並不表示人力投資就此黯淡，相反地，正因企業投資了大筆金額在物質資本方面，使得人力投資連帶大幅成長。可以說，經濟大環境豐饒充裕之下，沒有人會在意投資在物質或是人力的金錢何者較多。
日期：JUNE 9, 2011
作者：CATHERINE RAMPELL
來源：http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10capital.html
Companies that are looking for a good deal aren’t seeing one in new workers.
公司想要賺大錢，卻沒有注重人力資源。
Workers are getting more expensive while equipment is getting cheaper, and the combination is encouraging companies to spend on machines rather than people.
畢竟，人力成本持續上揚，設備價格卻不斷降低，使得公司寧可多投資設備而非人力。
“I want to have as few people touching our products as possible,” said Dan Mishek, managing director of Vista Technologies in Vadnais Heights, Minn. “Everything should be as automated as it can be. We just can’t afford to compete with countries like China on labor costs, especially when workers are getting even more expensive.”
遠景科技的常務董事丹‧米謝克說：「產線能夠自動化的部分就盡量升級，動用愈少人力愈好。這年頭工資成本愈來愈高，我們可比不上中國那種勞工廉價的國家。」
Vista, which makes plastic products for equipment manufacturers, spent $450,000 on new technology last year. During the same period, it hired just two new workers, whose combined annual salary and benefits are $160,000.
遠景科技專門為設備供應商製造塑膠組件，去年該公司投入45萬美金於研發新科技；同時期，公司亦有雇用二名新進員工，二者的年薪與津貼總計亦不過16萬美金。
Two years into the recovery, hiring is still painfully slow. The economy is producing as much as it was before the downturn, but with seven million fewer jobs. Since the recovery began, businesses’ spending on employees has grown 2 percent as equipment and software spending has swelled 26 percent, according to the Commerce Department. A capital rebound that sharp and a labor rebound that slow have been recorded only once before — after the 1982 recession.
2009年經濟蕭條至今已二年餘，但就業率仍低迷不振。經濟狀況逐漸恢復蕭條前的水平，但就業機會足足少了7百萬個。美國商務部之調查顯示，經濟好轉之後，企業在人力資源的投資成長了2個百分點，但設備和軟體方面的投資竟有26個百分點的大幅增長。自從1982衰退以來，美國再度面臨此種窘境──資本投資的強勢回升，卻無反應在人力成本。
With equipment prices dropping, and tax incentives to subsidize capital investments, these trends seem likely to continue.
此種人力需求與經濟成長不均衡的現象，可歸因於設備的價格下跌，以及減稅方案集中鼓勵於物質資本上的投資。
“Firms are just responding to incentives,” said Dean Maki, chief United States economist at Barclays Capital. “And capital has gotten much cheaper relative to labor.”
美國巴克萊證券的首席經濟學家登‧馬奇表示：「減稅鼓勵讓企業很有感。而且，物質資本比人力資本愈來愈便宜。」
Indeed, equipment and software prices have dipped 2.4 percent since the recovery began, thanks largely to foreign manufacturing. Labor costs, on the other hand, have risen 6.7 percent, according to the Labor Department. The rising compensation costs are driven in large part by costlier health care benefits, so those lucky workers who do have jobs do not exactly feel richer.
自經濟復甦以來，設備及軟體的價格已下跌2.4個百分點；但美國勞工部的數據卻顯示，人力成本上揚了百分之6.7。薪資看似成長，其實絕大部分是昂貴的健保給付在充場面，因此在職者先別以為享受到加薪而沾沾自喜，實質上──並沒有變得更富有。
Corporate profits, meanwhile, are at record highs, and companies are hoarding cash. Many of the companies that are considering hiring say they are scared off by the uncertain future costs of health care and other benefits. But with the blessings of their accountants, these same companies are snatching up cheap, tax-subsidized tractors, computers and other goods.
企業營收同時也創新高，只是業主先將現金留存備用。許多公司原本有意聘請新員工，卻因難以預知的健保或其他給付成本，最終裹足不前；但在會計師的巧手之下，這些公司卻有辦法購入廉價並有稅額補助的曳引機、電腦、或其他物品。
“We had an opportunity to buy equipment at a very discounted rate,” Mr. Mishek explains of his decision to make bigger investments in equipment than in workers. “Now that the economy has turned around a little bit, it made sense to upgrade.”
米謝克解釋他何以不惜砸下重金來投資設備儀器，但不願投資人力：「既然經濟有復甦跡象，又有機會以超優惠的價格購置設備儀器，何樂而不為呢？」
Hiring has some hidden costs, as well as the expenses of salary and benefits, Mr. Mishek added.
米謝克補充說明，人力雇用有其隱藏成本，薪資、補貼等方面的支出更不用說了。
“I dread the process we have to go through when we want to bring somebody on,” he said. “When we have a job posting these days, we get a flurry of résumés from people who aren’t qualified at all: people with misspellings on their résumés, who have never been in the industry and want a career move from real estate or something. It’s a huge distraction to sort through all those.”
他說：「聘請新人的流程，讓我敬謝不敏。職缺公布以後，收到的履歷表當中，卻冒出一些不合要求的求職者，有人連履歷表內容字母都拼錯；有人則是未曾有相關產業經驗，想要從不動產或其他方面轉職。篩選履歷表的過程，實在太讓人抓狂了。」
Culling the résumés takes three days. Then he must make time to interview applicants, and spend $150 for each drug test.
花了三天的時間篩選履歷表，再來撥空與求職者進行面談，而每位受雇者的藥物檢驗也花費150美元。
Once a worker is hired, that person must complete a federally mandated safety program, which Vista pays an outside contractor a flat fee of $7,000 annually to handle. Finally, Vista’s best employees spend several months training the new hire, reducing their own productivity.
聘請一名員工後，該員工須完成聯邦法律規定的安全檢查流程，而遠景科技以每年7千美元的執行費用將此工作外包出去。遠景科技還要派出優秀員工，耗時數個月來訓練新人，卻削弱了原有員工的產值。
“You don’t have to train machines,” Mr. Mishek observes.
「不如買台機器，什麼都不用訓練。」米謝克悠悠說道。
Usually economists cheer on capital spending, and have supported Congress’s tax breaks for capital investment, like bonus depreciation, which lets companies expense the full cost of purchases immediately instead of waiting several years. That is because capital and labor can be complementary: a business that buys a new truck often hires a new driver, too.
經濟學家傾向於物質資本上的投資花費，並支持國會對於資本投資的減稅方案，例如「紅利折舊」，讓公司可以馬上折舊成本，不需等待其應有年限。這麼做是因為資本與勞力的需求，可能會同時發生：當公司購置一台新卡車，也需聘雇一名新司機。
But with the rising costs of hiring, companies like Vista are finding ways to use capital to replace workers whose jobs are relatively routine.
不過隨著人力成本增加，公司也會找門路，試著以物質資本來取代性質重複的人力工作。
“If you’re doing something that can be written down in a programmatic, algorithmic manner, you’re going to be substituted for quickly,” said Claudia Goldin, an economist at Harvard.
哈佛大學的經濟學家克勞迪雅‧高汀說：「如果你的工作型態屬於機械化、規則化，那麼職位很容易就被取代了。」
To add insult to injury, much of the equipment used to replace American workers is made by workers abroad, meaning that capital spending is going overseas. Of the four pieces of equipment Vista bought last year, one was made domestically. The others came from Israel, Switzerland and Germany. (“I try to avoid buying Chinese at the workplace and at home,” Mr. Mishek said.)
殘酷的真相是，美國許多公司欲新購設備以取代勞工，但該設備卻由外國的勞工所製造，這表示資本最後仍然投資在國外。就以遠景科技而言，去年所買的四組新設備，只有一組是美國製造，另三組則分別來自以色列、瑞典、德國。(米謝克說：「不管上班還是在家，我盡量遠離中國貨。」)
Of course the shift to more automated production predates the Great Recession. And in the long run, better technology lowers prices, raises living standards and helps workers move into higher-paying jobs. This was the case with the mechanization of farming, which a century ago employed 41 percent of the American work force.
2007年開始的經濟大衰退，已有機器取代人力的自動化浪潮；而時代長久演變，科技之進展有助降低物價、提升生活水平，藍領勞工亦能躋身白領階級。此現象也能夠從農業的機械化看出，在一世紀前，百分之41的美國勞動人口從農。
“We don’t have 11 million unemployed farmers today because over time farmers and their children transitioned into different sectors,” says William C. Dunkelberg, chief economist at the National Federation of Independent Business. “We don’t usually have this kind of shock, though, that displaces a lot of workers at once.”
「現代我們並沒聽說過有110萬的農民失業，因為農民及其後代都已轉移到不同的工作領域。目前這種人力版圖大幅移動的現象，也是少見的。」全國獨立企業聯盟的首席經濟學家威廉‧C‧鄧肯伯這麼說。
Better technologies may eventually offer better job opportunities, but only if people can upgrade their skills quickly enough to qualify. That is hard to do in the short run, especially when so many displaced workers need to be retrained at once.
科技進展固然可幫助帶來更好的工作機會，但前提是勞工的工作技能需與時俱進，然而短時間並無法達成此目標，畢竟許多失業勞工必須重新訓練。
“People don’t seem to come in with the right skill sets to work in modern manufacturing,” Mr. Mishek said, complaining that job applicants were often deficient in computer, mathematics, science and accounting skills. “It seems as if technology has evolved faster than people.”
米謝克抱怨著應徵者通常缺乏電腦、數理、會計方面的能力：「有心踏入機械製造產業的人，未必具有必備的相關技能。科技似乎跑得比人還要快。」
Some economists support policies that might shift the balance away from capital spending. Andrew Sum, an economist at Northeastern University, advocates tax incentives for hiring that mirror those for capital investment. Congress passed a hiring tax credit along these lines last year, but it was not well publicized, and some said it was poorly devised. The proposal is reportedly floating around Washington once again.
有些經濟學家提出決策，期望能夠幫助資本與人力投資失衡的現象。東北大學的經濟學家安卓‧森，提倡設備購置的稅捐減免英也沿用到人力雇用方面。去年國會已通過一項人力雇用免稅額方案，但並未宣傳周知，一些企業也響起了法案設計不當的聲音。據說該法案又被退回國會重新研擬。
Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, and many other economists say the relative prices of labor and capital are not the real problem. The biggest hurdle is that companies are loath to invest at all because economic growth is so slow.
包含美國總統經濟顧問委員會之主席奥斯坦‧古爾斯比在內的許多經濟學家皆表示，人力與物質資本的價格差別並不是重點；經濟成長龜速使得企業不願投資，才是背後真正原因。
Demand needs to grow for employers to be more comfortable with all sorts of investments, human or otherwise, Mr. Dunkelberg said.
Consider the booming 1990s, he says: Then, as now, capital was getting rapidly cheaper relative to labor, and then, as now, companies were increasing spending on capital more than on labor. But companies were investing so much money to begin with that labor spending still grew a lot. With a bigger economic pie, few cared how the slices were cut.
鄧肯伯認為，經濟需求必須增長，讓雇主覺得有必要在人力或設備等方面擴大投資，才是解決之道。回顧經濟蓬勃的1990年代，當時亦如現今情形，物質資本比人力資本便宜，因此企業對於物質資本投資得比人力更多；但並不表示人力投資就此黯淡，相反地，正因企業投資了大筆金額在物質資本方面，使得人力投資連帶大幅成長。可以說，經濟大環境豐饒充裕之下，沒有人會在意投資在物質或是人力的金錢何者較多。