Good evening. Tonight, I want to talk about the debate we’ve been having in Washington over the national debt -- a debate that directly affects the lives of all Americans.
晚上好。今晚，我想和你们谈谈我们在华盛顿就国家的债务问题所展开的辩论——一场直接影响到所有美国人生活的辩论。
For the last decade, we’ve spent more money than we take in. In the year 2000, the government had a budget surplus. But instead of using it to pay off our debt, the money was spent on trillions of dollars in new tax cuts, while two wars and an expensive prescription drug program were simply added to our nation’s credit card.
10年来，我们的支出一直高于我们的收入。政府在2000年曾有过预算盈余，但这笔钱没有被用来偿还国债，而被用于数万亿美元的新的减税计划，此外，两场战争和一项昂贵的处方药计划又增加了我国的超前支出。
As a result, the deficit was on track to top $1 trillion the year I took office. To make matters worse, the recession meant that there was less money coming in, and it required us to spend even more — on tax cuts for middle-class families to spur the economy; on unemployment insurance; on aid to states so we could prevent more teachers and firefighters and police officers from being laid off. These emergency steps also added to the deficit.
因此，在我就任总统那年，财政赤字已接近突破一万亿美元。更糟糕的是，经济衰退意味着收入减少，同时却要求我们进一步增加开支——为中产阶层减税以刺激经济;发放失业保险金;资助州政府以避免更多的教师、消防队员和警察被裁员。这些紧急措施也增加了财政赤字。
Now, every family knows that a little credit card debt is manageable. But if we stay on the current path, our growing debt could cost us jobs and do serious damage to the economy. More of our tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on our loans. Businesses will be less likely to open up shop and hire workers in a country that can’t balance its books. Interest rates could climb for everyone who borrows money -- the homeowner with a mortgage, the student with a college loan, the corner store that wants to expand. And we won’t have enough money to make job-creating investments in things like education and infrastructure, or pay for vital programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
每个家庭都知道，持有少量的信用卡债务不会有问题。但如果我们再这样继续下去，日益增长的债务就会导致工作机会减少并严重损害经济。越来越多的纳税人的钱将用于偿还国债利息。公司企业将不太愿意到一个不能做到收支平衡的国家开展业务和雇佣员工。利率可能上涨，危及每个贷款的人——有房屋抵押贷款的房主、有大学学费贷款的学生、想扩大经营的街角小店。而且，我们将不会有足够的资金投资于能够创造就业机会的教育和基础建设部门，也不能为联邦老年医保和联邦贫困医保等重要项目提供资金。
Because neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, both parties have a responsibility to solve it. And over the last several months, that’s what we’ve been trying to do. I won’t bore you with the details of every plan or proposal, but basically, the debate has centered around two different approaches.
由于两党对导致这个问题的种种决策都不是无可挑剔，因此两党也都有责任来解决这个问题。几个月来，我们一直在努力这样做。我不想赘述每项计划或提案的具体细节，但这场辩论基本上围绕着两种不同的方式展开。
The first approach says, let’s live within our means by making serious, historic cuts in government spending. Let’s cut domestic spending to the lowest level it’s been since Dwight Eisenhower was President. Let’s cut defense spending at the Pentagon by hundreds of billions of dollars. Let’s cut out waste and fraud in health care programs like Medicare -- and at the same time, let’s make modest adjustments so that Medicare is still there for future generations. Finally, let’s ask the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations to give up some of their breaks in the tax code and special deductions.
第一种方式主张量入为出，对政府开支进行严肃的、历史性的削减。让我们把国内开支削减到自德怀特·艾森豪威尔总统任期以来的最低水平。让我们将五角大楼的国防开支削减数千亿美元。让我们砍掉联邦老年医保等医保计划中存在浪费和造成欺诈的部分——同时稍作调整，使联邦老年医保计划能继续为子孙后代提供保障。最后，让我们要求最富裕的美国人和最大的公司企业放弃一些他们所享受的税收优惠和特殊减免。
This balanced approach asks everyone to give a little without requiring anyone to sacrifice too much. It would reduce the deficit by around $4 trillion and put us on a path to pay down our debt. And the cuts wouldn’t happen so abruptly that they’d be a drag on our economy, or prevent us from helping small businesses and middle-class families get back on their feet right now.
这种均衡的方式要求每个人都做出一点贡献，但并不要求任何人做出太大的牺牲。这将使财政赤字降低4万亿美元左右，并让我们步入偿清债务的轨道。这类削减不会太突然，以致拖累我国经济，或阻止我们帮助小企业和中产阶层家庭尽快重新站稳脚跟。
（责任编辑:allen）
