以下是一些讀者對Ratigan所講的回應, 他們是當地人,應對此話題較清楚,故我相信Cut是指expenditure cuts:
(1)I totally agree with Mr. Ratigan's comment about not being able to cut your way out but have to grow or build your way back to prosperity/profitability
2010-11-26 10:20:18 補充:
(2)The problem is that you cannot really make any headway against the deficit through spending cuts
(3)I think that yes, you can, make good headway against the deficit through spending cuts.
2010-11-26 10:49:08 補充:
亦請參考另一網上文章:
Colorado Can't cut our way out of budget Crisis
The cuts outlined by the Governor's budget office in today's Joint Budget Committee meeting include: eliminating 270 state jobs
http://coloradopolicymatters.blogspot.com/2009/08/colorado-cant-cut-our-way-out-of-budget.html
2010-11-28 20:06:36 補充:
eric網友: 不好意思。本人未加上面三項意見時,不知你是回答者。直至見你的21及22項意見時,才估到你是002回答者。你説得冇錯,cut the way out 應可指走捷徑,特別是我們講司機cut 線,就是想用short cut,走捷徑。
不過,我看清楚001回答時提及那個講航空公司解決crisis的文章,標題是you can't cut your way out of crisis,內容有 Any single business responds to tough times by cutting back and laying off
2010-11-28 20:07:02 補充:
及We need a strategy that builds, not cuts.
上面用了builds and cuts,與Ratigan的標題的cut and build 很吻合,所以仍覺得cut是指spending cut居多
純個人意見