2019年经济学人 伦敦金融城能否挺过英国退欧(4)

（单词翻译）

This sounds good for the EU, but it is likely to be a pyrrhic victory. The continent’s financial system is balkanised and dominated by sluggish¹ banks. New business will be spread across several cities, fragmenting activity further. Europe’s heavy-handed regulation may prompt non-EU business to stay away. Ultimately the costs of a less efficient financial system are likely to outweigh² the extra income from capturing business from London. The annual bill for every 0.1 percentage-point increase in Eurozone firms’ cost of funding amounts to 32bn Euros, or 0.3% of GDP.

这对欧盟来说听起来不错，但很可能是一场得不偿失的胜利。欧洲大陆的金融体系四分五裂，由行动迟缓的银行主导。新业务将遍布多个城市，进一步分散业务。欧洲严厉的监管可能会促使非欧盟企业敬而远之。最终，一个效率较低的金融体系的成本可能会超过从伦敦获得业务的额外收入。欧元区企业融资成本每增加0.1个百分点，每年就会增加320亿欧元，相当于GDP的0.3%。

And what of the City? It has a chance of prospering³. Its links with America remain tight. It will have to try to keep EUrope close, too, while increasing its non-EU international business from today’s share of 25-30%, and developing new strengths in fintech and green finance. The biggest danger is that it has lost the battle of ideas at home. Many Britons, not just Mr Corbyn, resent the City’s post-crisis bail-out—no matter that British banks have since tripled their capital buffers⁴, and thus pose little threat to taxpayers⁵. Even Margaret Thatcher⁶, who oversaw⁷ Big Bang in the 1980s, disliked flash bankers. But Britons cannot ignore the ￡65bn, or 3% of GDP, of annual tax that the City pays towards hospitals and schools. For a country that is losing friends fast, having a global, sophisticated industry is a blessing⁸, not a curse.

那么金融城呢? 它有繁荣的机会。它与美国的联系依然紧密。它还必须努力保持欧洲的紧密联系，同时将其非欧盟国际业务的份额从目前的25% -30%提高到30%，并在金融科技和绿色金融领域发展新的优势。最大的危险是它已经在国内输掉了思想之战。许多英国人，不仅仅是科尔宾先生，都对伦敦金融城在金融危机后的救市计划感到不满，尽管英国的银行已经将资本缓冲增加了两倍，对纳税人构成的威胁微乎其微。就连上世纪80年代监管“金融大爆炸”的玛格丽特?撒切尔也不喜欢闪电银行家。但是英国人不能忽视每年650亿英镑的税收，也就是GDP的3%，这个城市为医院和学校支付的税收。对于一个正在迅速失去盟友的国家来说，拥有一个全球化、成熟的产业是一件好事，而不是坏事。