新视野大学英语4第二版课文及翻译Unit6

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) favors a code of conduct that would ban the giving and seeking of bribes.
This code would try to distinguish between commissions paid for real services and exaggerated fees that really amount to bribes.
An interesting example of this kind of payment is provided by the story of a sales manager who had been trying for some months to sell road machinery to the Minister of Works of a Caribbean country.
The company rejected these charges and they were later withdrawn.
Nevertheless, at that time, there were people in the motor industry in Britain who were prepared to say in private: "Look, we're in a very competitive business.
It is difficult to resist the impression that bribery and other questionable payments are on the increase.
<P2>Indeed, they seem to have become a fact of commercial life.
In a court case involving an arms deal with Iran, a witness claimed that ￡1 million had been paid by a British company to a "negotiator" who helped close a deal for the supply of tanks and other military equipment to that country.
Finally, he hit upon the answer.
Discovering that the minister collected rare books, he bought a rare edition of a book, slipped $20,000 within its pages, then presented it to the minister.
Students taking business courses are sometimes a little surprised to find that classes on business <3>ethics</3> have been included in their schedule.
They often do not realize that <1>bribery</1> in various forms is on the increase in many countries and, in some, has been a way of life for centuries.
This man examined its contents, then said, "I understand there is a two-volume edition of this work."
The sales manager, who was <4>quick-witted</4>, replied, "My company cannot afford a two-volume edition, sir, but we could offer you a copy with a preface!"
Some time ago a British car manufacturer was accused of operating a fund to pay bribes, and of other questionable practices such as paying agents and purchasers an exaggerated commission, offering additional discounts, and making payments to numbered bank accounts in Switzerland.
For example, one US corporation offered a large sum of money in support of a US presidential candidate at a time when the company was under investigation for possible violations of US business laws.
<P1>Now, the question is: Do you pay up or stand by your principles?
It is easy to talk about having high moral standards but, in practice, what would one really do in such a situation?
Every year we're selling more than a ￡1billion worth of cars abroad.
If we spend a few million pounds to keep some of the buyers happy, who's hurt?
If we didn't do it, someone else would."
Other countries have also been known to put pressure on foreign companies to make donations to party bank accounts.
The second category covers payments made to obtain quicker official approval of some project, to speed up the wheels of government.
This same company, it was revealed, was ready to finance secret US efforts to throw out the government of Chile.
In this category, we may also include large payments made to ruling families or their close advisers in order to secure arms sales or major petroleum or construction contracts.
Some Middle East countries would be included on this list, as well as certain Asian countries.
Is it possible to devise a code of rules for companies that would prohibit bribery in all its forms?
For discussion purposes, we can divide these payments into three broad categories.
The first category consists of substantial payments made for political purposes or to secure major contracts.
However, the French delegates think it is the business of governments to make and impose law.
The job of a business community like the ICC is to say what is right and wrong, but not to impose anything.
A short time later, the deal was approved.
The third category involves payments made in countries where it is traditional to pay people to help with the passage of a business deal.
To take just one example, the Chrysler Corporation, the third largest of the US car manufacturers, revealed that it made questionable payments of more than $2.5 million between 1971 and 1976.