24. “A powerful business leader has far more opportunity to influence the course of a community or a nation than does any government official.”
“一個有力的企業(yè)領導比一個政府官員有更多的機會影響一個社團或國家的方針。”
1. 每一個政府官員都很難自己做出決策。每一個政令的頒布表面上仿佛是由一個人宣布的，其實背后的程序過程都是十分繁雜的。seperation of the three powers(the legislative, executive and judicial powers) In this work he argued that the three powers a state has are the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial and that for a state to remain democratic, these powers must be separated and there must be checks and balances to prevent a single group from acquiring control over two or more of them.
任何一個政府官員做出決定都可能受到上司甚至是同事的限制，即使是總統(tǒng)，其實也僅僅是他的領導班子共同商議做出結論，更何況三權分立在保護了民主的同時本身也限制了每個個人甚至是每個group的決策權利以及對國家和社區(qū)的影響。
2. 而企業(yè)領導往往會有更大的決策權，而他們的決策也更容易被貫徹。在一個經(jīng)濟為中心的國家相應的他們的對社區(qū)和國家的影響力也就更大。
3. 誠然在一個以政治為中心的國家里，企業(yè)領導對社區(qū)和國家產(chǎn)生影響的機會會較少，但經(jīng)濟是政治的基礎，離開經(jīng)濟政治是毫無影響力可言的。此外由于上面所說過的原因政府官員對社區(qū)和國家的影響同樣不會很大。
goverment order procedure process complex complicated intricate higher-up subordinate superior
restict restriction confine constrain curb administration collective the seperation of the three powers: the legislative the executive and the judicial decision-making carry out implement perform politics-centered economy-centered influence effect impact historical influential abound
on balance=with all things considered admittedly opportunity commerce commercial check-and-balance system 制約平衡制度 scandal illuminate illumination luminous lumination technic technical technology technician technological entity equity seems to pale next to...
Yet the impact seems to pale next to those of our modern captains of industry.
by virture of for the sake of on the account of
1. Admittedly, 領導人的作用有時不象企業(yè)家一樣apparent. 因為國家的發(fā)展，人們的生活，與企業(yè)closely related. 比如GATES，領導了信息產(chǎn)業(yè)革命；Rockefeller，控制國家的石油命脈took control of American oil supply。企業(yè)家通過影響企業(yè)的行為，從而直觀上影響人course of a community.
2. 但是，企業(yè)的一切影響is based on its existence, which is permitted by the government. 政府制定各種policy來允許企業(yè)的存在，企業(yè)家的一切行為需要被政府允許才能產(chǎn)生作用。
3. Moreover, 影響一個國家，需要強大的power, which can be only generated from absolutely authority. 這樣的絕對權力是企業(yè)不具備的。Yet even a cursory review of the history reveals substantial evidence that it is the government leader rather than the business leader that can make the pivotal decision when the nation is in crisis. 比如，在經(jīng)濟recession，企業(yè)的力量無法使經(jīng)濟好轉，revive the economy of the whole nation, 只有政府運用行政措施，制定positive policy to stimulate the companies and thus the economy of the whole nation. 比如Roosevelt. Bill Clinton. financial policy
View 1: Unlike business leader, government power is likely to subject to many more restraints. Our check-and-balance system, the legislation influence and the voting power are all factors that temper the power of government official to the course of a community or a nation. Moreover, powerful business leaders all too often seem to hold the actual legislative and judicial power by their financial supporting of official activities such as governmental elections.
View2: While take more thorough consideration, the government official is likely to have more direct and broad influence on a community and a nation.
Evidence: various approach to influence other than financial approach
In addition the governmental official have the abilities to regulate commerce,
Historical examples of both influential public officials and influential business leaders abound. However, the power of the modern-era business leader is quite different from that of the government official. On balance, the CEO seems to be better positioned to influence the course of community and of nations.
Admittedly the opportunities for the legislator to regulate commerce or of the jurist to dictate rules of equity are official and immediate. No private individual can hold that brand of influence. Yet official power is tempered by our check-and-balance system (制約平衡制度) of government and, in the case of legislators, by the voting power of the electorate. Our business leaders are not so constrained, so, their opportunities far exceed those of any public official. Moreover, powerful business leaders all too often seem to hold de facto legislative and judicial power by way of their direct influence over public officials, as the Clinton Administration’s fund-raising scandal of 1997 illuminated all too well.
The industrial and technological eras have bred such moguls of capitalism as Pullman, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Gates, who by the nature of their industries and their business savvy, not by force of law, have transformed our economy, the nature of work, and our very day-to-day (adj. 日常的, 逐日的) existence. Of course, many modern-day public servants have made the most of their opportunities—for example, the crime-busting (bust: to break or smash especially with force;) mayor Rudolph Giuliani and the new-dealing President Franklin Roosevelt. Yet their impact seems to pale next to those of our modern captains of industry.
In sum, modem business leaders by virtue of the far-reaching impact of their industries and of their freedom from external constraints, have supplanted lawmakers as the great opportunists of the world and prime movers of society.
“一個有力的企業(yè)領導比一個政府官員有更多的機會影響一個社團或國家的方針。”
1. 每一個政府官員都很難自己做出決策。每一個政令的頒布表面上仿佛是由一個人宣布的，其實背后的程序過程都是十分繁雜的。seperation of the three powers(the legislative, executive and judicial powers) In this work he argued that the three powers a state has are the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial and that for a state to remain democratic, these powers must be separated and there must be checks and balances to prevent a single group from acquiring control over two or more of them.
任何一個政府官員做出決定都可能受到上司甚至是同事的限制，即使是總統(tǒng)，其實也僅僅是他的領導班子共同商議做出結論，更何況三權分立在保護了民主的同時本身也限制了每個個人甚至是每個group的決策權利以及對國家和社區(qū)的影響。
2. 而企業(yè)領導往往會有更大的決策權，而他們的決策也更容易被貫徹。在一個經(jīng)濟為中心的國家相應的他們的對社區(qū)和國家的影響力也就更大。
3. 誠然在一個以政治為中心的國家里，企業(yè)領導對社區(qū)和國家產(chǎn)生影響的機會會較少，但經(jīng)濟是政治的基礎，離開經(jīng)濟政治是毫無影響力可言的。此外由于上面所說過的原因政府官員對社區(qū)和國家的影響同樣不會很大。
goverment order procedure process complex complicated intricate higher-up subordinate superior
restict restriction confine constrain curb administration collective the seperation of the three powers: the legislative the executive and the judicial decision-making carry out implement perform politics-centered economy-centered influence effect impact historical influential abound
on balance=with all things considered admittedly opportunity commerce commercial check-and-balance system 制約平衡制度 scandal illuminate illumination luminous lumination technic technical technology technician technological entity equity seems to pale next to...
Yet the impact seems to pale next to those of our modern captains of industry.
by virture of for the sake of on the account of
1. Admittedly, 領導人的作用有時不象企業(yè)家一樣apparent. 因為國家的發(fā)展，人們的生活，與企業(yè)closely related. 比如GATES，領導了信息產(chǎn)業(yè)革命；Rockefeller，控制國家的石油命脈took control of American oil supply。企業(yè)家通過影響企業(yè)的行為，從而直觀上影響人course of a community.
2. 但是，企業(yè)的一切影響is based on its existence, which is permitted by the government. 政府制定各種policy來允許企業(yè)的存在，企業(yè)家的一切行為需要被政府允許才能產(chǎn)生作用。
3. Moreover, 影響一個國家，需要強大的power, which can be only generated from absolutely authority. 這樣的絕對權力是企業(yè)不具備的。Yet even a cursory review of the history reveals substantial evidence that it is the government leader rather than the business leader that can make the pivotal decision when the nation is in crisis. 比如，在經(jīng)濟recession，企業(yè)的力量無法使經(jīng)濟好轉，revive the economy of the whole nation, 只有政府運用行政措施，制定positive policy to stimulate the companies and thus the economy of the whole nation. 比如Roosevelt. Bill Clinton. financial policy
View 1: Unlike business leader, government power is likely to subject to many more restraints. Our check-and-balance system, the legislation influence and the voting power are all factors that temper the power of government official to the course of a community or a nation. Moreover, powerful business leaders all too often seem to hold the actual legislative and judicial power by their financial supporting of official activities such as governmental elections.
View2: While take more thorough consideration, the government official is likely to have more direct and broad influence on a community and a nation.
Evidence: various approach to influence other than financial approach
In addition the governmental official have the abilities to regulate commerce,
Historical examples of both influential public officials and influential business leaders abound. However, the power of the modern-era business leader is quite different from that of the government official. On balance, the CEO seems to be better positioned to influence the course of community and of nations.
Admittedly the opportunities for the legislator to regulate commerce or of the jurist to dictate rules of equity are official and immediate. No private individual can hold that brand of influence. Yet official power is tempered by our check-and-balance system (制約平衡制度) of government and, in the case of legislators, by the voting power of the electorate. Our business leaders are not so constrained, so, their opportunities far exceed those of any public official. Moreover, powerful business leaders all too often seem to hold de facto legislative and judicial power by way of their direct influence over public officials, as the Clinton Administration’s fund-raising scandal of 1997 illuminated all too well.
The industrial and technological eras have bred such moguls of capitalism as Pullman, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Gates, who by the nature of their industries and their business savvy, not by force of law, have transformed our economy, the nature of work, and our very day-to-day (adj. 日常的, 逐日的) existence. Of course, many modern-day public servants have made the most of their opportunities—for example, the crime-busting (bust: to break or smash especially with force;) mayor Rudolph Giuliani and the new-dealing President Franklin Roosevelt. Yet their impact seems to pale next to those of our modern captains of industry.
In sum, modem business leaders by virtue of the far-reaching impact of their industries and of their freedom from external constraints, have supplanted lawmakers as the great opportunists of the world and prime movers of society.