【財經選文】
就在中國擔憂恐爆發第二波疫情之時，美國正積極拚復工，然而在經濟與健康安全天平上，如何能在擺盪中不至於失足真的是考驗人類智慧。
這篇華爾街日報英文版評論探討最近在美國討論熱烈的議題，到底政府能否或該不該以法律來控制？到底經濟重要還是健康安全重要？有沒有可以兩全的辦法？
翻譯其中兩段：
As Congress considers another Covid-19 rescue bill, the usual partisan divide has opened over limiting pandemic-related tort liabilities. Republicans and business owners argue that litigation will hamstring recovery. Trial lawyers, unions and Democrats counter that liability limits would encourage businesses to endanger employees and consumers. The Senate Republican leadership proposes immunity for all businesses that comply with public-health guidelines except in cases of “gross negligence” and willful misconduct.
正當國會考慮進行另一波新冠肺炎疫情紓困時，對於是否該開放造成疫情流行的責任限制，出現黨派分歧。共和黨和企業認為限制將會阻礙復甦，但民主黨、工會與律師則認為，責任限額將可能造成企業員工與消費者的安危。參議院共和黨領導人則提議，除非出現“重大過失”和故意不當行為，否則對所有符合公共衛生準則的企業應該給予造成疫情流行的責任豁免權。
Republicans’ approach is appealing in theory, but in practice it can’t be implemented without detailed regulatory standards—which in the case of Covid-19 won’t be written for some time. Rather than permanently change liability standards based on incomplete information about the virus, it would be wiser to enact an immediate but temporary immunity. That would permit the economy to begin reopening while allowing time for federal regulators to promulgate standards on which long-term immunity could be conditioned.
共和黨的政策理論上具有吸引力，但實際運作上，若缺乏詳細監管標準將無法實施。與其現在根據不完整的病毒資訊永久改變責任規範標準，不如制定暫時豁免權更明智，這將有助於經濟重啟，也讓聯邦監管機構有更充裕的時間根據變動情況制定更完整規範。
---
這篇文章搭配最新消息：福特汽車復工後又出現3名員工確診，不得不再度停工來看，美國企業復工真的還是一條漫漫長路，畢竟誰擔得起造成疫情二度蔓延的責任呢？即便股市表現不錯，但全球經濟情勢仍應該保守看待。
楚文專屬VVIP華爾街日報訂閱，訂就送《全球頂尖領袖親授17堂課》和300元SOGO禮券，一起加入：https://events.storm.mg/member/TWWSJ/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/lawsuits-neednt-block-recovery-11589993211?mod=opinion_lead_pos5
negligence gross negligence 在 The Difference Between Ordinary Negligence vs. Gross ... 的相關結果
Gross negligence is the extreme indifference to or reckless disregard for the safety of others. Gross negligence is more than simple ... ... <看更多>