双语资料:国际货币基金组织总裁克里斯蒂娜·拉加德新加坡金融科技节讲话
发布时间:2018年12月06日
发布人:nanyuzi  

Winds of Change: The Case for New Digital Currency

变革之风:发行新型数字货币的理由

 

By Christine Lagarde, IMF Managing Director

国际货币基金组织总裁 克里斯蒂娜·拉加德

 

Singapore, Fintech Festival

新加坡金融科技节

 

November 13, 2018

2018年11月13日

 

Introduction

引言

 

Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen – good morning and thank you for the opportunity to participate in this important event.

尊敬的各位来宾,女士们、先生们,早上好!感谢你们让我有幸参加这一重大盛事。

 

In Singapore, it is often windy. Winds here bring change, and opportunity. Historically, they blew ships to its port. These resupplied while waiting for the Monsoon to pass, for the seasons to change.

新加坡是一个多风的国家。风云际会既带来了变化,也带来了机会。过去,一旦刮起大风,船只就不得不回到港口,一边等待季风过境、时节更替,一边重新进行补给。

 

“Change is the only constant,” wrote the ancient Greek philosopher, Heraclitus of Ephesus. Singapore knows this. You know this. It is the true spirit of the Fintech Festival – opening doors to new digital futures; hoisting sails to the winds of change.

古希腊哲学家、埃菲斯的赫拉克利特曾经写下这样一句话:“世间唯一不变者,乃变化本身。新加坡深谙此道——这是众所周知。这就是金融科技节的真正精神所在——开怀接纳新的数字未来;迎着变革之风扬帆起航。

 

And yet change can appear daunting, destabilizing, even threatening. This is especially true for technological change, which disrupts our habits, jobs, and social interactions.

然而,变革可能看起来令人生畏、破坏稳定,甚至具有威胁性。技术变革尤其如此,因为它打破了我们的习惯,扰乱了我们工作,中断了我们的社交互动。

 

The key is to harness the benefits while managing the risks.

关键是在开展风险管理的同时,利用变革带来的惠益。

 

When it comes to fintech, Singapore has shown exceptional vision – think of its regulatory sandbox where new ideas can be tested. Think of its Fintech Innovation Lab, and its collaboration with major central banks on cross-border payments.

就金融科技而言,新加坡展现了其非同寻常的愿景——我们不妨想一想新加坡的“监管沙盒,它可用以检验各种新的想法;还有新加坡的金融科技创新实验室,以及新加坡与各大中央银行在跨境支付方面开展的合作。

 

In this context, I would like to do three things this morning:

First, frame the issue in terms of the changing nature of money and the fintech revolution.

Second, evaluate the role for central banks in this new financial landscape – especially in providing digital currency.

Third, look at some downsides, and consider how they can be minimized.

因此,我想在今天上午谈谈三件事:

第一,       从不断演变的货币本质和金融科技革命角度界定这个问题。

第二,评价中央银行在这一新金融格局、尤其是在提供数字货币方面的作用。

第三,审视某些不利因素,并考虑如何尽可能减少这些因素。

 

1. The changing nature of money and the fintech revolution

1.不断演变的货币本质和金融科技革命

 

Let me begin with the big issue on the table today – the changing nature of money.

首先,我要说一说今天的大议题——不断演变的货币本质。

 

When commerce was local, centered around the town square, money in the form of tokens – metal coins – was sufficient. And it was efficient.

如果商业仅仅局限于当地并且以城镇广场为中心,那么使用代币(金属硬币)形式的货币足矣。这种货币效率很高。

 

The exchange of coins from one hand to another settled transactions. So long as the coins were valid – determined by glancing, scratching, or even biting into them – it did not matter which hands held them.

硬币易主即完成了交易结算。只要硬币有效(通过扫视、刮擦,甚至牙咬的方式确定),手握硬币之人是谁并不重要。

 

But as commerce moved to ships, like those that passed through Singapore, and covered increasingly greater distances, carrying coins became expensive, risky, and cumbersome.

然而后来,商业转移到了船上——比如那些经过新加坡的船上,其覆盖的地域范围也越来越广,于是携带硬币之举变得成本高昂、风险重重,而且累赘不便。

 

Chinese paper money – introduced in the 9th century – helped, but not enough. Innovation produced bills of exchange – pieces of paper allowing merchants with a bank account in their home city to draw money from a bank at their destination.

中国的纸币(诞生于9世纪)对此虽有帮助,但还不够。创新产生了汇票,这种纸质票据使那些在所居住的城市拥有银行账户的商人可以在目的地银行取款。

 

The Arabs called these Sakks, the origin of our word “check” today. These checks, and the banks that went along with them, spread around the world, spearheaded by the Italian bankers and merchants of the Renaissance. Other examples are the Chinese Shansi and Indian Hundi bills.

阿拉伯人称之为“Sakks ”,这就是如今使用的“支票”一词的起源。在文艺复兴时期意大利银行家和商人的带领下,这些支票以及开设支票业务的银行遍布世界各地。此外还有中国的“山西”票和印度的“ Hundi”票。

 

Suddenly, it mattered whom you dealt with. Was this Persian merchant the rightful owner of that bill? Was the bill trustworthy? Was that Shanxi bank going to accept it? Trust became essential – and the state became the guarantor of that trust, by offering liquidity backstops, and supervision.

忽然之间,交易对象是谁变得重要起来。眼前这个波斯商人是票据的合法所有者吗?这一票据可靠吗?山西银行会接受这一票据吗?信任变得至关重要,而国家通过提供流动性支持和进行监督,成为了这种信任的担保人。

 

Why is this brief tour of history relevant? Because the fintech revolution questions the two forms of money we just discussed – coins and commercial bank deposits. And it questions the role of the state in providing money.

为什么有必要简要回顾这段历史呢?因为金融科技革命对我们刚才讨论的两种形式的货币(硬币和商业银行存款)提出了质疑。它还对国家在提供货币方面的作用提出了挑战。

 

We are at a historic turning point. You – young and bold entrepreneurs gathered here today – are not just inventing services; you are potentially reinventing history. And we are all in the process of adapting.

我们正处在一个历史性的转折点上。今天在座的各位富有胆识的青年企业家,你们不仅仅是在创造各项服务;你们有可能会重塑历史。我们所有人都要经历这个适应过程。

 

A new wind is blowing, that of digitalization. In this new world, we meet anywhere, any time. The town square is back – virtually, on our smartphones. We exchange information, services, even emojis, instantly, peer to peer, person to person.

如今,数字化潮流风头正劲。在这个新世界中,我们可以随时随地会面。城镇广场又回来了——事实上重现在我们的智能手机上。我们点对点、人对人地即时交换各种信息、服务,甚至表情符号。

 

We float through a world of information, where data is the “new gold” – despite growing concerns over privacy, and cyber-security. A world in which millennials are reinventing how our economy works, phone in hand.

我们在信息世界中穿梭游荡;在这个世界里,数据是“新的黄金”——尽管隐私和网络安全问题日益令人担忧。在这个世界里,千禧世代通过手中的手机重塑着我们的经济运作方式。

 

And this is key: money itself is changing. We expect it to become more convenient and user-friendly, perhaps even less serious-looking.

关键一点是,货币本身正在不断演变。我们期望它变得更加方便、容易使用,甚至可以看起来不那么严肃。

 

We expect it to be integrated with social media, readily available for online and person-to-person use, including micro-payments. And of course, we expect it to be cheap and safe, protected against criminals and prying eyes.

我们期望它能与社交媒体相结合,随时供在线和个人之间使用,包括小额支付。当然,我们也期望它便宜而安全,能够防备罪犯和窥探。

 

What role will remain for cash in this digital world? Already signs in store windows read “cash not accepted.” Not just in Scandinavia, the poster child of a cashless world. In various other countries too, demand for cash is decreasing – as shown in recent IMF work. And in ten, twenty, thirty years, who will still be exchanging pieces of paper?

在这个数字世界里,现金还有什么作用?有些商店已经在橱窗里贴出告示称“不接受现金”。除了斯堪的纳维亚这个无现金世界的典型地区以外,其他许多国家对现金的需求也都在不断下降——国际基金组织最近的工作反映了这一点。十年、二十年、三十年以后,还有谁会交换纸质票据呢?

 

Bank deposits too are feeling pressure from new forms of money.

新形式的货币也给银行存款带来了压力。

 

Think of the new specialized payment providers that offer e-money – from AliPay and WeChat in China, to PayTM in India, to M-Pesa in Kenya. These forms of money are designed with the digital economy in mind. They respond to what people demand, and what the economy requires.

大家可以想一想新出现的、提供电子货币的专业支付服务供应商——比如,中国的支付宝和微信、印度的PayTM以及肯尼亚的M-Pesa。这些货币形式的设计结合了数字经济的理念。它们既迎合了人们的需求,又满足了经济的要求。

 

Even cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Ripple are vying for a spot in the cashless world, constantly reinventing themselves in the hope of offering more stable value, and quicker, cheaper settlement.

甚至连比特币、以太币和瑞波币等加密数字货币也在争夺无现金世界的一席之地,这些加密货币正在不断进行自我改造以期提供更加稳定的价值以及实现更加快捷和廉价的结算。

 

2. A case for Central Bank Digital Currencies

2.发行中央银行数字货币的理由

 

Let me now turn to my second issue: the role of the state – of central banks – in this new monetary landscape. Some suggest the state should back down.

接下来,我要谈一谈第二个问题:国家(即中央银行)在这个新的货币格局中的作用。有人认为,国家应当退后。

 

 

Providers of e-money argue that they are less risky than banks, because they do not lend money. Instead, they hold client funds in custodian accounts, and simply settle payments within their networks.

电子货币供应商声称自己比银行风险小,因为它们不发放贷款。这些供应商将客户的资金存放在托管账户中,只在自身网络内进行支付结算。

 

For their part, cryptocurrencies seek to anchor trust in technology. So long as they are transparent – and if you are tech savvy – you might trust their services.

对它们来说,加密货币寻求以技术为依托建立信任。只要它们保持透明度,而你又技术娴熟,那么你可能就会信任它们的服务。

 

Still, I am not entirely convinced. Proper regulation of these entities will remain a pillar of trust.

不过,我并不完全信服。针对这些实体进行适当监管仍然是信任的支柱。

 

Should we go further? Beyond regulation, should the state remain an active player in the market for money? Should it fill the void left by the retreat of cash?

我们是否应当继续前进?除了监管以外,国家是否应当继续积极参与货币市场的活动?它是否应当填补现金撤离所留下的空缺?

 

Let me be more specific: should central banks issue a new digital form of money? A state-backed token, or perhaps an account held directly at the central bank, available to people and firms for retail payments? True, your deposits in commercial banks are already digital. But a digital currency would be a liability of the state, like cash today, not of a private firm.

具体而言就是:中央银行是否应当发行新形式的数字货币 ?以国家支持的代币,抑或是直接在中央银行开立的账户,供个人和企业进行零售付款?确实,商业银行中的存款已经数字化了。可是,数字货币将成为国家而非私人企业的负债,如同今天的现金。

 

This is not science fiction. Various central banks around the world are seriously considering these ideas, including Canada, China, Sweden, and Uruguay. They are embracing change and new thinking – as indeed is the IMF.

这并不是科幻小说。世界各国(例如,加拿大、中国、瑞典和乌拉圭)的中央银行正在认真考虑这些想法。它们正张开双臂接纳变化和新思维——事实上,国际货币基金组织也是如此。

 

Today, we are releasing a new paper on the pros and cons of central bank digital currency – or “digital currency” for short. It focuses on domestic, not cross-border effects of digital currency. The paper is available on the IMF website.

今天,我们将发布一份关于中央银行数字货币(或者简称“数字货币”)之利弊的新文件。其重点关注数字货币的国内而非跨境效应。国际货币基金组织网站已公布了这一文件。

 

I believe we should consider the possibility to issue digital currency. There may be a role for the state to supply money to the digital economy.

我认为,我们应当考虑发行数字货币的可能性。因为,为数字经济提供货币可能是国家的一项任务。

 

This currency could satisfy public policy goals, such as (i) financial inclusion, and (ii) security and consumer protection; and to provide what the private sector cannot: (iii) privacy in payments.

这种货币可以实现公共政策目标,包括(1)普惠金融,和(2)安全性和消费者保护;以及提供私人部门无法提供的服务:(3)支付隐私保护。

 

a)        Financial inclusion

a)        普惠金融

 

Let me start with financial inclusion, where digital currency offers great promise, through its ability to reach people and businesses in remote and marginalized regions. We know that banks are not exactly rushing to serve poor and rural populations.

首先是普惠金融;数字货币在这方面将提供巨大的希望,因为它能够覆盖偏远、边缘地区的人口和企业。我们知道,银行确实并不急于为贫穷和农村人口提供服务。

 

This is critical, because cash might no longer be an option here. If the majority of people adopt digital forms of money, the infrastructure for cash would degrade, leaving those in the periphery behind.

这一点至为关键,因为在这方面现金可能不再是一种选择。如果大多数人采用数字形式的货币,那么现金方面的基础设施将会退化,导致边缘地区人口进一步落后。

 

What about subsidizing cash usage in those areas? But that means that economic life in the periphery would become disconnected from the center.

那么,为这些地区的现金使用提供补贴怎么样呢?这种做法意味着边缘地区的经济生活将与中心地区脱节。

 

Of course, offering a digital currency is not necessarily the only answer. There may be scope for governments to encourage private sector solutions, by providing funding, or improving infrastructure.

当然,提供数字货币并非是唯一的解决办法。各国政府或许可以通过提供资金或者改善基础设施等方式,鼓励实施私人部门参与提供解决方案。

 

b) Security and consumer protection

b) 安全性和消费者保护

 

The second benefit of digital currency relates to security and consumer protection. This is really a David versus Goliath argument. In the old days, coins and paper notes may have checked the dominant positions of the large, global payment firms – banks, clearinghouses, and network operators. Simply by offering a low cost and widely available alternative.

数字货币的第二个好处涉及安全性和消费者保护。这个论点就好比大卫对战歌利亚。过去,硬币和纸币可能限制了全球大型支付企业(银行、票据交换所和网络运营商)的主导地位。其手段只是提供低成本、广泛使用的替代品而已。

 

Without cash, too much power could fall into the hands of a small number of outsized private payment providers. Payments, after all, naturally lean toward monopolies – the more people you serve, the cheaper and more useful the service.

若没有了现金,权力将过多地集中到少数超大规模的私人支付服务供应商手中。毕竟,支付天然具有垄断倾向——服务的受众越多,则服务的成本越低、效用越高。

 

For a start, private firms may under-invest in security to the extent they do not measure the full cost to society of a payment failure. Resilience may also suffer – with only a few links in the payment chain, the system may stop working if one of these links breaks. Think about a cyber-attack, a glitch, bankruptcy, or a firm’s withdrawal from the local market.

首先,私人企业在安全方面可能投资不足,因为它们不会衡量支付失败造成的全部社会成本。抵御风险能力也可能受损——支付链中即便只有几个环节,其中一个环节的断裂也会导致整个系统停止运转。想一想网络攻击、故障、破产或者某个企业退出当地市场的情况就能明白。

 

Regulation may not be able to fully redress these downsides. A digital currency could offer advantages, as a backup means of payment. And it could boost competition by offering a low-cost and efficient alternative – as did its grandfather, the old reliable paper note.

监管可能无法彻底扭转这些不利因素。数字货币作为一种备用支付手段,具有若干优势。它提供了一种低成本、高效率的替代支付工具,因而可以促进竞争——与它的祖父、古老而可靠的纸币如出一辙。

 

c) Privacy

c) 隐私

 

The third benefit of digital currency I would like to highlight lies in the privacy domain. Cash, of course, allows for anonymous payments. We reach for cash to protect our privacy for legitimate reasons: to avoid exposure to hacking and customer profiling, for instance.

我要突出强调的数字货币的第三个好处在于隐私领域。毫无疑问,现金可以匿名支付。我们使用现金的原因在于能够以正当理由保护隐私:例如,避免成为黑客攻击的目标和客户分析的对象。

 

Consider a simple example. Imagine that people purchasing beer and frozen pizza have higher mortgage defaults than citizens purchasing organic broccoli and spring water. What can you do if you have a craving for beer and pizza but do not want your credit score to drop? Today, you pull out cash. And tomorrow? Would a privately-owned payment system push you to the broccoli aisle?

举个简单的例子。假设购买啤酒和冰冻披萨的人群抵押贷款违约率比购买有机西兰花和矿泉水的居民更高。你很想买啤酒和披萨,但又不想信用评分下降,你该怎么办?今天,你可以取现金使用。明天呢?一个私人支付系统就能让你走进西兰花货架通道?

 

Would central banks jump to the rescue and offer a fully anonymous digital currency? Certainly not. Doing so would be a bonanza for criminals.

中央银行会迅速伸出援手、提供一种完全匿名的数字货币吗?当然不会。这么做对罪犯来说,不啻提供了一条生财之路。

 

3. Downsides of Bank Digital Currencies

3.银行数字货币的不利因素

 

This brings me to my third area – the potential downsides of digital currency. The obvious ones are risks to financial integrity and financial stability. But I would also like to highlight risks of stifling innovation – the last thing you want.

这就引出了我要说的第三个方面,数字货币可能存在的不利因素。数字货币显然可能给金融诚信和金融稳定带来风险。但我还要强调,数字货币可能抑制创新,这是大家都不想见到的情况。

 

My main point will be that we should face these risks creatively. How might we attenuate them by designing digital currency in new and innovative ways? Technology offers a very wide canvas to do so.

关键是我们应采用创造性举措来应对这些风险。我们应当思考如何依靠数字货币的创新设计来降低风险。就目前的技术条件而言,我们可发挥创造力的空间巨大。

 

a) Risks to financial integrity

a) 金融诚信风险

 

Let’s return to the tradeoff between privacy and financial integrity. Could we find a middle ground?

让我们回到个人隐私与金融诚信这两者之间的权衡问题上来。我们能否在这之间找到一个恰当的平衡点呢?

 

Central banks might design digital currency so that users’ identities would be authenticated through customer due diligence procedures and transactions recorded. But identities would not be disclosed to third parties or governments unless required by law. So when I purchase my pizza and beer, the supermarket, its bank, and marketers would not know who I am. The state might not either, at least by default.

中央银行在设计数字货币时,应当确保能够通过用户尽职调查程序来验证用户身份并保留交易记录。除非法律另有要求,身份不会披露给第三方或政府。这样,我在买披萨和啤酒时,超市、银行和市场营销人员都不会获取我的身份信息。国家至少在默认情况下也不会知道我的身份。

 

Anti-money laundering and terrorist financing controls would nevertheless run in the background. If a suspicion arose it would be possible to lift the veil of anonymity and investigate.

反洗钱和打击恐怖主义融资的系统仍会在后台运行。如发现可疑迹象,可以取消匿名保护并开展调查。

 

This setup would be good for users, bad for criminals, and better for the state, relative to cash. Of course, challenges remain. My goal, at this point, is to encourage exploration.

与现金相比,这样的安排有利于用户,不利于罪犯,而且更加有利于国家。当然,目前仍存在诸多挑战。我鼓励就此展开研究。

 

b) Risks to financial stability

b)金融稳定风险

 

The second risk relates to financial stability. Digital currencies could exacerbate the pressure on bank deposits we discussed earlier.

第二项风险涉及金融稳定。我们之前讨论过,数字货币可能加重银行的存款压力。

 

If digital currencies are sufficiently similar to commercial bank deposits – because they are very safe, can be held without limit, allow for payments of any amount, perhaps even offer interest – then why hold a bank account at all?

如果数字货币与商业银行存款足够类似——非常安全、持有金额无限制、支付金额无限制,甚至还可提供利息,那么为何还需要持有银行账户?

 

But banks are not passive bystanders. They can compete with higher interest rates and better services.

但银行并不是被动的旁观者。银行仍可通过提高利息和改善服务来参与竞争。

 

What about the risk of bank runs? It exists. But consider that people run when they believe that cash withdraws are honored on a first-come-first-serve basis – the early bird gets the worm. Digital currency, instead, because it can be distributed much more easily than cash, could reassure even the person left lying on the couch!

是否存在挤提的风险?的确存在。如果人们认为提取现金遵循“先到先得”的规则——越早提现越有利,那么会出现怎样的混乱情景就可想而知。相比之下,数字货币的分配远比现金容易,即使是躺在沙发上的人也不用担心无法提现。

 

In addition, if depositors are running to foreign assets, they will also shun the digital currency. And in many countries, there are already liquid and safe assets to run toward – think of mutual funds that only hold government bonds. So, the jury is still out on whether digital currencies would really upset financial stability.

另外,如果存款人一窝蜂地购买外国资产,则也会抛弃数字货币。许多国家已提供了一些流动性好的安全资产供存款人选择,例如,仅持有政府债券的共同基金。因此,数字货币是否真的会破坏金融稳定仍无定论。

 

c) Risks to innovation

c)创新风险

 

If digital currency became too popular, it might ironically stifle innovation. Where is your role if the central bank offers a full-service solution, from digital wallet, to token, to back-end settlement services?

如果数字货币过于普及,它反倒可能抑制创新。如果中央银行提供全套服务——数字钱包、代币和后台结算服务,则其他市场参与者还能做什么?

 

What if, instead, central banks entered a partnership with the private sector – banks and other financial institutions – and said: you interface with the customer, you store their wealth, you offer interest, advice, loans. But when it comes time to transact, we take over.

但如果变换做法,由中央银行与商业银行和其他金融机构等私人部门达成合作伙伴安排:私人部门负责与客户互动、保管客户财富以及提供利息、建议和贷款,而中央银行负责交易过程;情况又会怎样呢?

 

This partnership could take various forms. Banks and other financial firms, including startups, could manage the digital currency. Much like banks which currently distribute cash.

这种合作伙伴安排可以采取多种形式。银行和其他金融企业(包括初创企业)可以管理数字货币,与目前分配现金的银行很像。

 

Or, individuals could hold regular deposits with financial firms, but transactions would ultimately get settled in digital currency between firms. Similar to what happens today, but in a split second. All nearly for free. And anytime.

或者,个人可以在金融企业存有常规存款,但交易最终以数字货币在企业之间进行结算。与当前情况类似,但在瞬间完成,基本没有任何费用,且随时可以执行。

 

The advantage is clear. Your payment would be immediate, safe, cheap, and potentially semi-anonymous. As you wanted. And central banks would retain a sure footing in payments. In addition, they would offer a more level playing field for competition, and a platform for innovation. Meanwhile your bank, or fellow entrepreneurs, would have ensured a friendly user experience based on the latest technologies.

这样的安排优势很明显。客户的支付即时、安全、手续费低,并且可能是半匿名的。这些都符合客户的期望。中央银行将在支付过程中稳固地占有一席之地。此外,这会提供一个更为公平的竞争环境和一个创新平台。同时,银行或企业家可基于最先进的技术确保提供令客户满意的体验。

 

Putting it another way: the central bank focuses on its comparative advantage – back-end settlement – and financial institutions and start-ups are free to focus on what they do best – client interface and innovation. This is public-private partnership at its best.

换言之,中央银行可专注于自身的比较优势(后台结算),而金融机构及初创企业则可自由选择自己最擅长的方面,即客户端互动和创新。这是一种最佳的公私合作伙伴关系。

 

Conclusion

结论

 

Let me conclude. I have tried to evaluate the case this morning for digital currency.

总结一下。今天上午,我尝试评价了发行数字货币的理由。

 

The case is based on new and evolving requirements for money, as well as essential public policy objectives. My message is that while the case for digital currency is not universal, we should investigate it further, seriously, carefully, and creatively.

这一理由是基于对货币提出的不断变化的新要求以及至关重要的公共政策目标。我想要传递的讯息是,虽然发行数字货币的理由并非普遍适用,但我们仍应以认真、细致和创新的精神来开展进一步研究。

 

More fundamentally, the case is about change – being open to change, embracing change, shaping change. Technology will change, and so must we. Lest we remain the last leaf on a dead branch, the others having decided to fly with the wind.

从根本上看,这一理由的核心是变革—对变革持开放和接纳的态度并积极地影响变革。技术不会一成不变,我们也必须改变。否则,在其他人都决定顺势而为之时,我们却可能成为潮流的弃儿。

 

In the world of Fintech, we need to harness change so it is fair, safe, efficient, and dynamic. That was the goal of the Bali Fintech Agenda launched by the IMF and World Bank last October.

在金融科技世界中,我们也需要具备驾驭变革的能力,以确保其公平、安全、高效和充满活力。这也是国际货币基金组织和世界银行今年10月发布的“巴厘金融科技议程”的目标。

 

When the winds of change pick up, what will guide us in our journey? The captains sailing through the Straits of Singapore followed the North Star.

当变革之风吹起,我们应当以何为航向?过去,穿行新加坡海峡的船长都以北极星为指路明灯。

 

And today? Tomorrow?

今天呢?未来呢?

 

I suggest we follow a girl. A young girl. A fearless girl. If you are lucky, you might be able to meet her in person in New York’s financial district.

我建议大家不妨跟随一个年轻且无畏的女孩的脚步。大家如果有幸,可能会在纽约的金融区当面见到这个女孩。

 

She is bold. She is brave. She is confident. She faces forward, toward the future, with grit and determination – a future she herself is going to shape, with eyes wide open, eagerly, steadily.

她是大胆、勇敢、自信的化身。她面向前方,充满勇气和决心地展望她即将亲手塑造的未来,眼神热切而坚定。

 

I hear her say: Let us sail ahead. I am not afraid. (pause) I, am not afraid.

Thank you.

我仿佛听见她在说:让我们扬帆前行。我无所畏惧。(停顿)我,无所畏惧。

谢谢大家。