One out of every ten Americans was out of work.

每十個美國人就有一個失業。

It was bad.

狀況很慘。

But not as bad as the worst year of the Great Depression, when the unemployment rate was one in four.

但沒有比經濟大蕭條最糟的那一年還慘，當時失業率來到了 25%。

Few Americans alive today have ever seen that many people out of work.

現在的美國人，幾乎沒有看過那麼多人失業。

Until now.

直到現在。

Coronavirus outbreaks at meatpacking plants, forcing many to close.

疫情在肉類工廠爆發，導致許多工廠關閉。

Ford, General Motors, and Fiat Chrysler, all temporarily closing U.S. plants because of the coronavirus.

福特、通用汽車與飛雅特克萊斯勒汽車都因疫情暫時關閉美國工廠。

Parking lots, bare.

停車場空無一人。

Retail stores, corporate offices all closed.

零售商店、企業辦公處都關閉。

By the end of April 2020, 30 million Americans had filed unemployment claims.

到了 2020 年四月底，3 千萬名美國人申請了失業救助。

Economists estimated that the U.S. unemployment rate was about 13 percent.

經濟學家估計美國失業率為 13%。

The highest since the Great Depression.

自經濟大蕭條以來最高的。

But in some other countries, like the U.K., for instance, it's a totally different story.

但在別的國家，像是英國，就不ㄧ樣了。

Factories, restaurants... all that stuff is closed.

工廠、餐廳之類的地方都關了。

But this?

但急升的失業率？

This isn't happening.

就沒有發生在英國了。

In the U.S., lawmakers have assumed that all these closed factories, shops, and restaurants have one inevitable outcome—mass unemployment.

在美國，立法人已經假定所有關閉的工廠、商店與餐廳，都無可避免地會帶來龐大的失業人口。

But what if that's wrong?

但如果那是錯的怎麼辦？

What if millions of people didn't have to lose their jobs?

如果那幾百萬人其實是不用失業的又如何？

What if it didn't have to be this way?

如果事情可以不用這樣發展呢？

For most of U.S. history, if you were laid off, you didn't have a lot of options.

從美國歷史來看，當時如果被炒魷魚了，你並沒什麼選擇。

Churches and charities did what they could, but for the most part, you were on your own.

教堂與慈善機構會盡力幫忙，但基本上你還是只能靠自己。

That changed during the Great Depression.

那在經濟大衰退發生了改變。

With help from the federal government, states began to hold back a share of every worker's paycheck.

在聯邦政府的幫忙之下，各州開始在每個人的工資裡扣除一份錢。

That money went into a fund that workers could tap into if they got laid off.

這些錢會到一個基金中，當有人失業時就可以使用。

Workers in every state of the union are now protected if they are temporarily laid off or lose their jobs.

在聯邦內的每個被暫時解僱或失業的居民現在已受到保護。

The system worked pretty well, as long as too many people didn't lose their job all at once.

這個系統運行得很好，前提是沒有太多人一次失業。

Our unemployment insurance system is well-suited towards a very mild recession, where there's not a lot of stress put on the system.

我們的失業保險系統對於輕微的經濟不景氣相當好，尤其是在系統沒有承受太多壓力的時候。

But that is definitely not what happened during the coronavirus lockdowns.

但在這個新冠肺炎封鎖的階段，絕對不是輕微的不景氣。

You can think of the economy as a web of connections.

可以把經濟想成一張彼此連結的大網。

During normal times, every day, billions of dollars change hands across these connections, between different companies and industries.

在一般的時候，每天都會有數十億的金錢在這些公司與企業中流通。

Airlines pay oil companies for jet fuel.

航空公司會付錢給石油公司來換取燃油。

Those oil companies pay computer engineers to make software that helps them find new reserves.

石油公司則付錢給電腦工程師們，製作軟體來尋找更多有蘊含石油的地方。

And those software companies pay ad agencies to make commercials for them.

而這些軟體公司則付錢給廣告公司來幫他們打廣告。

Then they pay to put those ads in front of things you like to watch.

然後廣告公司在付錢將廣告放在你會看到的地方。

And a tiny portion of that money helps pay for us to make videos.

其中的一小部分錢會幫助我們製作影片。

We spend some of that money on, say, plane tickets for reporting trips, and the whole cycle repeats.

我們則會花當中一部分的錢來買，假設出公差的機票，然後整個循環不斷重複。

During normal times, these connections are what allow businesses to pay their employees.

一般時期，這些連結就是企業付薪水給員工的來源。

If some connections break, and a business lays off workers, unemployment insurance is there to help them get by until those connections reform and businesses are ready to hire again.

如果某些連結斷了，有員工被解僱了，失業保險就會幫助他們度過難關，直到連結再度修復，他們再度找到工作。

But when the lockdowns started and businesses closed down, lots of those connections broke away entirely.

但，當封鎖開始，企業關閉，許多連結都完全斷開了。

Businesses laid off millions of workers in just a few weeks, faster than at any time in U.S. history.

許多企業在短短數週內解僱了數百萬個員工，是美國歷史上最快的一次。

In response, congress has passed several bills, aimed at helping states get unemployment benefits to more people, more quickly.

作為應對，議會通過了許多法條，要來幫助各州更快地得到更多資源來幫助這些失業人口。

But even if that helps in the short term, it might not be enough down the road.

但，這在短期而言或許有幫助，在將來可能就不一定了。

Because once the lockdowns are over, many of those businesses simply won't be there anymore.

因為當封城結束後，許多企業早已完全倒閉。

The businesses that I think will be particularly hard-hit will be small and medium-sized businesses who just don't have enough in reserve.

我認為打擊最大的企業，將會是沒有足夠儲備金的小型與中小型企業。

Even if they lay off employees, businesses still have to pay rent.

就算企業開除員工，他們還是得付租金。

Plus insurance, utilities, and other business costs.

還有保險、水電費與其他花費。

But there's no money coming in.

但卻沒有收入。

Without relief, those businesses are gonna have no choice but to shutter.

如果沒有救助金，這些企業沒有選擇，只能倒閉。

Once the lockdown is lifted, and it's safe to work again, a lot of businesses will be gone.

當城市解封，大家可以再度工作時，許多公司早已消失。

And there will be way fewer jobs to come back to.

剩下的工作將少之又少。

Lots of unemployed people will likely stay unemployed.

許多失業人口，將會繼續失業。

Which will draw the economic crisis out even further.

而這將會導致更大的經濟危機。

But things don't have to turn out that way.

但事情並不一定得這樣發展。

Just like in the U.S., most of the U.K. is on lockdown.

就如果美國，英國大部分的地區也都在封城中。

Many of those connections between businesses have fallen off.

許多企業之間的連結都斷了。

But instead of waiting for workers to get laid off, the government in the U.K. is doing something different.

但與其是坐等員工失業，英國政府嘗試做了不同的事。

The way that they're going about it is saying to companies, "We will pay you to pay your employees."

政府向企業們說：「我們會給錢，讓你們可以付給員工薪水。」

Workers get paid 80 percent of their previous salary and businesses get help covering rent and other costs.

員工可以得到八成的薪水，而政府幫忙企業負擔租金與其他花費。

Denmark and the Netherlands have put similar systems in place.

丹麥與荷蘭也有類似的措施。

In all of these countries, government support has put the economy on pause to keep it from falling apart later.

在這些國家裡，政府的扶助讓經濟暫停，一避免未來的分崩離析。

Everything is still there; everything is connected, people still have those jobs.

東西都還在，都還連接著，人們都還有工作。

In the U.S., congress did set aside a chunk of money for grants and loans to small businesses in the hopes that they would keep their workers on payroll.

在美國，議會的確有撥出一大筆錢給小企業，希望他們可以繼續付給員工薪水。

But to get that money, business owners had to apply through commercial banks like Chase and Bank of America.

但要拿到那筆錢，企業主得透過商業銀行來申請，像是大通銀行或美國銀行。

That extra step, combined with the onslaught of applications, resulted in massive delays.

這額外的步驟，加上突然湧入的申請數，導致了嚴重的延遲。

By the time many small businesses got approval, the fund was already empty.

當小企業終於通過申請時，該基金早已乾涸。

We missed a big wave, we've already done a lot of damage, but if we got something in place tomorrow, that could avert more layoffs.

我們做錯了，已經造成許多傷害，但如果在明天可以作出改善，仍可以挽救更多人失去工作。

When the U.S. first set up unemployment insurance during the Great Depression, that idea didn't come out of thin air.

當美國第一次在經濟大蕭條時設立失業保險，這點子可不是憑空想出來的。

Policymakers studied similar systems in England and Germany, and then adapted them.

立政策者研究了英國與德國類似的系統，並套用他們。

This pandemic transcends national borders.

這次的疫情跨越了國界。

The solutions should, too.

而解方，也應該各國共享。