小额贷款法、小额贷款公司现状(外文翻译).docx

译文（字数 3015）：

小额贷款法的通行

作者：布鲁斯G.卡拉瑟斯

Timothy W.吉南

yoonseok李

    我们感谢罗素圣人基金会、国家科学基金会和经济增长中心（耶鲁）支持这项研究。的意见和建议，我们感谢米迦勒的东风，威廉英语，价格moehling锯齿，卡洛琳，玛莎奥尔尼，史葛雷德尼厄斯，研讨会的参加者在牛津，剑桥，和圣迭戈。米迦勒东风请提供从他的博士论文章节的进展。我们提供特别感谢菲什巴克和他的合著者肖恩坎特，谁做他们的非常有用的数据集可供其他学者使用。伊丽莎白安德森和爱丽丝库珀提供优秀的科研援助。

摘要

    统一的小额贷款法（USLL）允许特许银行收取更高的利率比大多数国家法律允许的高利贷。作为回报，小额贷款经纪人不得不坚持严格的透明度标准。战斗的USLL它视为贷款利率高到上半年的第二十世纪的穷人的灾难是罗素塞奇基金会的主要设备。该基金会起草了法律的连续版本，然后在几个州的立法机构中率先争取通过了这一法案。约三分之二的州已经通过了USLL当基础结束了这方面的努力，在20世纪40年代。本文中，这是一个大项目的一部分，描述了USLL然后在计量经济学模型的报告通过USLL当。我们发现，人口和政治因素，占据了很大的基础上自己的讨论发挥了小作用。另一方面，国家的经济结构以及信用社和银行的存在，都是国家通过强大的相关因素。令人惊讶的是，没有任何证据的空间依赖性在法律的通道。

外文原文（字符数 9250）：

Preliminary; please do not cite or quote. Carruthers is professor of sociology, Northwestern; Guinnane is professor of economics and history, Yale; Lee is a PhD student in economics at Yale. Correspondence to Guinnane (timothy.guinnane@yale.edu). We thank the Russell Sage Foundation, the National Science Foundation, and the Economic Growth Center (Yale) for supporting this research. For comments and suggestions we thank Michael Easterly, William English, Price Fishback, Carolyn Moehling, Martha Olney, Scott Redenius, and seminar participants at Oxford, Cambridge, and San Diego. Michael Easterly kindly provided chapters from his in-progress PhD dissertation. We offer a special thanks to Fishback and his co-author Shawn Kantor, who made their extremely useful dataset available for other scholars to use. Elisabeth Anderson and Elise Couper provided excellent research assistance.

Abstract

The Uniform Small Loan Law (USLL) allowed specially-licensed lenders to charge much higher interest rates than those allowed by most state usury laws. In return, the small-loan brokers had to adhere to strict standards of transparency. The USLL was the Russell Sage Foundation’s primary device for fighting what it viewed as the scourge of high-rate lending to poor people in the first half of the twentieth century. The Foundation drafted successive versions of the law and then took the lead in fighting for its passage in the several state legislatures. About two-thirds of the states had passed the USLL when the Foundation ended this effort in the 1940s. This paper, which is part of a larger project, describes the USLL and then reports on econometric models of which states passed the USLL and when. We find that the demographic and political factors that occupied much of the Foundation’s own discussion played little role. Measures of state economic structure as well as the presence of credit unions and banks, on the other hand, are powerful correlates of the state’s passage. Surprisingly, there is no evidence of spatial dependence across states in the law’s passage.