评论
打印
We were shocked. We had assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren't being delivered.
我们震惊了。我们假设几百万儿童正在死亡线上挣扎，然而他们是可以挽救的，那么世界理应将运送药物来拯救他们作为头等大事。但是事实并非如此。由于没有实施干预政策，那些价格还不到一美元的救命的药剂，并没有送到他们的手中。
If you believe that every life has equal value, it's revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to ourselves: "This can't be true. But if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our giving."
如果你相信生命都是平等的，那么当你发现某些生命被认为值得挽救，而另一些生命则不然，你会感到无法接受。我们对自己说：“事情不可能是这样的。如果这是真的，那么它理应是我们努力的头等大事。”
So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We asked: "How could the world let these children die?"
所以，我们用在座的任何人都会想到的方式开始工作。我们问：“这个世界怎么可以眼睁睁看着这些孩子死去？”
The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the lives of these children, and governments did not subsidize it. So the children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in the market and no voice in the system.
答案很简单，也很无情。在市场经济中，拯救这些儿童是一项没有利润的工作，政府也不会提供补助。这些儿童之所以会死亡，是因为他们的父母在经济上没有实力，在这种政治体制中没有发言权。
But you and I have both.
但是，你们和我在经济上有实力，在政治上也有发言权。
We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a more creative capitalism – if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who are suffering from the great inequities. We can also press governments around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the values of the people who pay the taxes.
如果我们能够设计出一种更有创新性的资本主义制度——如果我们可以改变市场，让更多的人可以获得利润，或者至少可以维持生活，这就可以帮助那些正在极端不平等的状况中受苦的人们，那么，我们就可以让市场更好地为穷人服务。我们还可以向全世界的政府施压，要求他们将纳税人的钱花到更体现纳税人价值的地方。
