[雙語翻譯]房地產(chǎn)外文翻譯--英國和美國的住房市場和政策

1、6900 英文單詞， 英文單詞，3.6 萬英文字符，中文 萬英文字符，中文 1.1 萬字 萬字文獻出處： 文獻出處：Jones C , Richardson H W . Housing markets and policy in the UK and the USA: A review of the differential impact of the global housing crisis[J]. International Jo

2、urnal of Housing Markets & Analysis, 2014, 7(1):129-144(16).Housing markets and policy in the UK and the USAA review of the differential impact of the global housing crisisColin Jones,Harry W. RichardsonAbstractPurpo

3、se – This paper aims to examine how the exogenous shock of the global financial crisis has had a differential impact on the housing markets of the USA and UK.Design/methodology/approach – The paper begins by examining th

4、e nature and dynamics of the global financial crisis. It presents a detailed comparison of institutional and housing market characteristics in each country. A particular focus is the differences in mortgage funding and s

5、ubprime lending trends over the decade leading up to the financial crisis.Findings – The analysis demonstrates the distinctiveness of the recent housing cycles and the geography of the downward price adjustments. Relativ

6、e unemployment rates play a key role in these outcomes. Despite the different dynamics of the boom and bust, there is a common legacy in terms of the collapse of house building, repossessions/foreclosures and falling hom

7、e ownership rates. The short-term policy responses by both governments addressed the same target issues in alternative ways but with different outcomes. Longer-term solutions are still being debated in both countries.O

8、riginality/value – Innovatory insights are provided by the comparison of the sub-national spatial pattern of the recent house price cycle in two countries.Keywords: USA, UK, Interest rates, Housing finance systems, Inter

9、national housing markets, Rent or buyIntroductionThis paper examines how the exogenous shock of the global financial crisis has had a differential impact on the housing markets of the USA and UK. Both countries had simil

10、ar home ownership rates in the upper 60 percentile and mature mortgage markets with liberal refinancing regimes prior to the credit crunch. The relative aggregate housing market downturns are also on a par but the USA su

11、ffered higher rates of repossessions with severe local impacts suggesting subtle but fundamental differences in the underlying dynamics.The paper seeks to explore these differences by looking beyond simple macroeconomic

12、influences. House price cycles are almost always associated with the fundamentals of the economy, namely interest rates and real incomes. Similarly, downturns in housing markets are historically linked to the overheating

13、 of the macroeconomy. This time the story is more complex, wound up initially with subprime mortgage lending, wholesale funding and the international financial crisis. This is the starting point for the paper.It takes a

14、disaggregated comparative approach to the task that seeks to offer a deeper understanding than obtained from aggregate macro-modelling such as Adams and Fuss (2010). Such a comparative approach has substantial advantages

15、 over a simple quantitative analysis because of differences in data definitions and institutional frameworks, and the ability to provide an understanding of the different policy contexts (Hantrais, 2009). It also enables

16、 the analysis to examine sub-national impacts to highlight differences in market outcomes. Finally, the research is subsequent positive bounce, and US and UK unemployment rates remained above 9 and 8 percent, respectivel

17、y, into late 2011.Governments responded by a fiscal stimulus to ameliorate the worst of the downturn. In the USA the Bush administration in 2008 introduced a $168 billion stimulus primarily in the form of tax rebates, an

18、d this was followed by a three year$787 billion fiscal package announced by Obama in February 2009. In 2010 Obama, under strong political pressure, extended the Bush tax cuts to 2012. Any subsequent recovery was dampened

19、 by pressures to reduce the increase in public debt reflecting bank rescues and counter-cyclical spending/tax cuts. The switch from fiscal stimulus to fiscal discipline, while continuing to be debated in the USA, was cle

20、ar in the UK with the change of government. Substantial cuts in public spending were announced by the new coalition government in October 2010 to remove the whole of the structural fiscal deficit by Spring 2015 (the prev

21、ious labour government had planned to halve this debt over the same period).This brief overview reveals the complexity of the recent inter-related events. At the outset of this paper it is important to make a distinction

22、 between the impact of the subprime mortgages crisis, the subsequent international banking liquidity crisis that followed because of the securitisation of subprime mortgages, the recession, and the eventual fiscal tighte

23、ning at least in the UK. In this regard it is important to note that the major American bank failures arose from the subprime lending crisis while the British banks succumbed to the international banking liquidity crisis

24、. The financial crisis is the immediate context but the seeds of the housing market boom and bust stem from much longer-term forces linked to the housing and mortgage markets considered in the next two sections.Compariso

25、n of housing market and public policy contextsThe levels of owner occupation in the two countries are broadly on a par at broadly just under 70 percent at the turn of the millennium. However, there are considerable diffe

26、rences beneath this headline similarity, both in terms of the wider tenure distribution of the stock and also the historical development of these patterns. In the USA there is a much higher proportion of private rented h

27、ousing, almost 30 percent whereas in the UK it is only just over 10 percent. The contrast is completed by the differences in the role of social housing – in the UK it contributes around 20 percent in comparison with 1.5

28、percent in the USA.In the USA social housing has always been viewed simply as welfare housing and is therefore on a very limited scale (Harloe, 1995), but social housing in the UK grew significantly from its origins in 1

29、919 especially after the Second World War when it was viewed as a mainstream housing solution to initial shortages and then as a means to rehouse households displaced by slum clearance programmes in the cities. By the en

30、d of the 1970s some one-third of households were social housing tenants but in 1980 tenants were given the right to buy their home at a subsidised rate. Some 2.4 million sitting tenants subsequently took up the opportuni

31、ty with the rate of purchases rising whenever the property market was booming ( Jones and Murie, 2006).A further difference between the two countries is that the private rented sector (PRS) is well established in the USA

32、 but in the UK it has grown rapidly by 40 percent over the decade of the noughties to 12 percent. This expansion was facilitated by the acceptance that the removal of rent control in 1989 would not be reintroduced follow

33、ing the election of a labour government in 1997. It was made possible by a reappraisal of the availability and terms of bank lending to the PRS.The comparative taxing of, and subsidies available, for housing also varie