雅思扩展阅读--经济学人赏析之美国人在慢慢拒绝碳酸饮料

Most interesting, fizzy—drink companies are skilled at swatting away attempts at regulation.Ms Nestle describes an extraordinarily broad team of allies. That includes obvious friends, suchas employees, bottlers and distributors, as well as the restaurants, cinemas, shops and sportsstadiums that sell their products. But the companies are also astute philanthropists. WhenMichael Bloomberg, then mayor of New York, tried to block the use of government vouchers tobuy sodas in 2010, the congressional black caucus was among those to lobby against it. Thecaucus's foundation has received money from both Coke and Pepsi. In 2011 Philadelphia wasconsidering a soda tax. After the soda lobby offered a big donation to the city's children'shospital, the idea fizzled out.

更有趣的是，碳酸饮料企业对规避规范化的尝试颇有一套。奈斯特将其描述为一个非比寻常的庞大联盟。很显然，这个联盟包括了这些企业的盟友们，比如雇员，瓶装工，经销商，那些出售他们商品的饭店，电影院，商店以及体育场。但这些碳酸饮料企业同时也是非常精明的慈善家。2010年，当时的纽约市市长迈克尔?布隆伯格试图阻止人们用政府代金券购买碳酸饮料，但却遭到了包括美国国会黑人同盟在内的多数人的反对。2011年，费城考虑是否要征收碳酸饮料税，但在碳酸饮料游说集团出资捐助了一家当地的儿童医院之后，这项提议未能实施。

Coca—Cola and PepsiCo do have a few notable adversaries. Mr Bloomberg, a billionaire,remains their single biggest foe. It is telling that in two rare instances when a soda tax hasbeen passed—in Berkeley, California and in Mexico—it was with the help of cash from MrBloomberg. Drinks companies must also reckon with a small army of health advocates, amongwhich Ms Nestle is a major—general.

可口可乐和百事可乐确实有一些颇为出名的对手。布隆伯格，这位亿万富翁是他们最大的对手。据说在两个颇为罕见的通过征收碳酸饮料税的例子中—一个是加利福尼亚的伯克利市，另一个是墨西哥—都是在布隆伯格的资金帮助下通过了碳酸饮料税法案。饮料公司还得去对付那些以奈斯特为首的健康军团。

With the slow decline of soda in America, she and her allies are advancing. Coca—Cola andPepsiCo are peddling healthier drinks, such as bottled water. However, as they try to face downa long—term threat while maintaining near—term profits, they are still pushing their syrupyfare.

随着美国人慢慢地拒绝碳酸饮料，奈斯特和她的盟友们正向成功一步步迈进。可口可乐和百事可乐正忙于推销更健康的饮料，如瓶装水。然而，他们仍旧努力推动碳酸饮料事业的发展，试图在维持短期利润的同时，努力克服长期以来的威胁。

Ms Nestle is impatient. To the casual reader, her suggestions can seem extreme. She writesenthusiastically about adorning soda cans with warning labels, such as pictures of a diabetic'sfoot ulcer. She suggests that parents should teach their children about fizzy drinks by gentlyboiling down a Coke or a Pepsi into sludge, which sounds rather fun, and asking them tocalculate the precise length of grocery shelves bearing sodas, which sounds less so. This zealthreatens to overshadow her stronger points: fizzy drinks offer no nutritional benefit andimpose clear costs—on individuals' health and on society.

奈斯特女士可没那么好的耐心。对于一般的读者，她给的建议似乎很极端。在书中她强烈建议碳酸饮料瓶上面必须贴有糖尿病患者脚部溃烂诸如此类的警示标志。她建议父母们在向孩子们介绍碳酸饮料时，将可口可乐和百事可乐说成是垃圾，这看上去颇为有趣，并要求孩子们去算算杂货店摆满碳酸饮料的货架究竟有多长，这听上去似乎没那么好笑了。这份热情让斯耐特关于碳酸饮料的观点显得不那么重要了：碳酸饮料没有任何营养价值，对个人的健康没有好处，而且还增加了社会的负担。