1、大学英语六级改革适用（阅读）模拟试卷 265及答案与解析 Section A 0 Bargain book shoppers must have been pleased looking at Amazons bestseller list this weekend: The online bookseller had dropped prices on some of its top-selling hardcovers, as much as 64% off【 C1】 _ . While people are used to seeing deals at Amazon, the pres
2、ent【 C2】 _ is unusually deep. The booksellers newsletter Shelf Awareness【 C3】 _ a rare Saturday issue about them, writing that the discounts were at “levels weve never seen in the history of Amazon.“ And according to Jack Mckeown, president of Books & Books Westhampton Beach in New York, it is an op
3、en【 C4】 _ of war against the industry. Amazon has just announced that it will add 7,000 jobs 2,000 of those seasonal at its regional shipping and customer service centers. The company says its workers make 30% more than traditional retail【 C5】 _ . President Obama, who is known to【 C6】 _ shop at inde
4、pendent bookstores when given the chance, has angered the American Booksellers Association with a planned appearance Tuesday at an Amazon warehouse. ABA Chief Executive Oren Teicher stated that the appearance is “greatly【 C7】 _ ,“ as he wrote in an open letter to the president because Amazon has cau
5、sed a net loss of jobs, while President Obamas goal is to【 C8】 _ his plan for a stronger economy. Can President Obama be a friend to independent booksellers and the online retailer at the same time? Hes been【 C9】 _ at independent bookstores Prairie lights in Iowa City and Bunch of Grapes in Marthas
6、Vineyard. The next time he shows up to shop for books, they may have some words for him, which may be less than【 C10】 _ . A) trimming B) retail C) evidently D) aggressive E) staff F) promote G) misguided H) motivation I) quest J) delivered K) declaration L) reckon M) photographed N) enthusiastic O)
7、faithfully 1 【 C1】 2 【 C2】 3 【 C3】 4 【 C4】 5 【 C5】 6 【 C6】 7 【 C7】 8 【 C8】 9 【 C9】 10 【 C10】 Section B 10 Get What You Pay For? Not Always A The most expensive election campaign in American history is over. Executives across America can now begin to assess what their companies will get in return for
8、 the roughly $2 billion spent by business interests. B Regardless of the outcome, the conclusion is likely to be not very much. From the point of view of shareholders, corporate contributions will probably turn out to be, at best, a waste of money. At worst, they could undermine their companies perf
9、ormance for a long time. C As Wall Street knows well, the trouble of political spending starts with picking the wrong horse: the financiers who broke so decisively for Barack Obama in 2008 changed their minds after the president started labeling them fat cats and supported a financial reform law the
10、y hate. This time they put $20 million in the campaign of Mitt Romney, more than three times what they contributed to President Obamas re-election. Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, once one of President Obamas favorite bankers, now calls himself “barely a Democrat“ D Its hard to tell exactly how much
11、money companies sank into the election. But its a lot. Only $75 million of the $650 million or so raised by “super PACS“ through the end of October to support (or, mostly, attack) candidates came from corporations directly, according to the Center for Public Integrity, a watchdog (监察委员会 ) group. But
12、 thats just part of the pie. Nonprofits like the United States Chamber of Commerce, which dont have to disclose their donors, spent about $300 million, during the campaign mostly supporting Republicans. Even when companies dont contribute directly to campaigns, their executives may, often through co
13、rporate political action committees. E Campaign finance watchdogs are looking into the data to determine just how much money was released by the Supreme Courts decision in 2010 to remove limits on corporate campaign contributions and to assess the impact on American politics. They worry that the rus
14、h of corporate cash will corrupt the political process reshaping the political map and creating harmful bonds between elected officials and those who finance them. Corporate watchdogs suggest another cause for concern: campaign contributions driven by corporate executives might harm the long-term in
15、terests of their shareholders. F A study published last summer by scholars at Rice University and Long Island University looked at nearly 1,000 firms in the Standard & Poors 1,500-stock composite index between 1998 and 2008 and found that most companies that spent on politicsincluding lobbying and c
16、ampaign donations had lower stock market returns. G Another study published this year by economists at the University of Minnesota and the University of Kansas found that companies that contributed to political action committees and other outside political groups between 1991 and 2004 grew more slow
17、ly than other firms. These companies invested less and spent less on research and development Notably, the study determined that corporate donations to the winners in presidential or Congressional races did not lead to better stock performance over the long term. Indeed, the shares of companies that
18、 engaged in political spending underperformed those of companies that did not contribute. H And the relationship between politics and poor performance seems to go both ways: underperforming companies spend more on politics, but spending on politics may also lead companies to underperform. Campaign s
19、pending by politically active concerns and their executives increased sharply after the Supreme Courts decision to remove limits on corporate donations. “These results are inconsistent with a simple theory in which corporate political activity can be presumed to serve the interests of shareholders,“
20、 wrote John Coates of the Harvard Business School. I These conclusions dont generally apply to companies in heavily regulated sectorswhere political contributions might make sense. Mr. Coates pointed out that it was difficult to reach conclusions about the effectiveness of spending in these areas, l
21、ike banking or telecommunications, because the companies all spend so much supporting candidates and lobbying. J But the recent performance of the financial industry suggests that political spending can be harmful even in the most highly regulated industries. A study at the International Monetary Fu
22、nd found that the banks that lobbied most aggressively to prevent laws limiting predatory lending (掠夺性贷款 ) and mortgage securitization engaged in riskier lending, experienced higher misbehavior rates and suffered a bigger shock during the financial crisis. K Political investments can damage a compan
23、ys reputation, or anger supporters of the “other side.“ Darcy Burner, a former Microsoft programmer running as a Democrat for Washington States 1st Congressional District, has even proposed an iPhone app that would allow shoppers to scan a bar code to check the political spending of the companies ma
24、king the products on the shelf and their top executives. L Campaign watchdogs fear that undisclosed contributions to independent groups supporting candidates will allow companies to hide their political activity. Companies worry that nondisclosure will allow independent groups to blackmail them into
25、 supporting the candidates they represent. M The Conference Board, a trade organization grouping the biggest businesses in the nation, has published an analysis of the new landscape of political spending. The title is “Dangerous Terrain.“ The Conference Board report suggests that “most companies wil
26、l continue to play the game because their competitors are staying in.“ This is a reason that political contributions yield so little for individual firms: political spending becomes a meaningless arms race between companies trying to buy an edge over their rivals. N But thats not the only reason. Co
27、rporate executives often spend on politics not to improve their companies profitability but to serve their own objectives from supporting a personal ideological agenda to building a future career in politics. This kind of spending does little for their companies. O Think of all the former corporate
28、executives in the last couple of administrations. Goldman Sachs alone gave us Robert E. Rubin, Jon S. Corzine and Henry M. Paulson Jr. More than one in 10 chief executives get political jobs after they retire. Unsurprisingly perhaps, Mr. Coates found that the biggest political contributions came fro
29、m firms with weak corporate governing, where shareholders had little control over their top executives actions. Poor governing explains, in part, why political spenders have worse results. But political activity itself could lead to poor business decisions. Executives involved in politics might lose
30、 strategic focus. And their political contributions might influence investments in a way that does shareholders no good. P Remember AT&Ts attempt to buy rival T-Mobile last year for $39 billion? By the standard metrics used by antitrust (反垄断 ) regulators to assess market concentration, the deal was
31、bound to be rejected. It would have taken out one of only three competitors to AT&T in the national market for mobile telecommunications. It would have sharply reduced competition in the nations top cities. Q AT&T could count on perhaps the strongest network of political connections in corporate Ame
32、rica nurtured with $58 million in campaign contributions since 1990, plus $306 million in lobbying expenses, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. In the House, 76 Democrats signed a letter to the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department supporting the deal. Letters su
33、pporting it poured in from liberal-leaning beneficiaries of AT&Ts largess including the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, the N.A.A.C.P. and the National Education Association. R Political alliances, however, were not enough to win the day, as the government rejected the deal. AT&T and it
34、s shareholders had to pay about $6 billion in breakup fees. Over all, it was a bad deal. 11 It is implied in a report that the reason why most companies keep political spending is that their competitors are in it too. 12 The executives from a company can donate to the election campaigns through corp
35、orate political action committees. 13 Some corporate executives spend on politics only for their own future careers, not for the benefit of the companies. 14 Involvement in politics might distract company executives from making their business decisions. 15 A study looked into almost one thousand fir
36、ms for their market performance over a course of a decade. 16 Political alliances were not enough to get what the company wanted. 17 Underperforming companies tend to contribute more to political campaigns. 18 A former Microsoft programmer planned an app that would tell the customers the political s
37、pending of the producers. 19 Campaign finance watchdogs are concerned that corporate contributions will create a harmful relationship between those who are elected and those who finance them. 20 Someone said it was difficult to say whether political spending is effective in heavily regulated industr
38、ies. Section C 20 Mercedes estate cars and Fiat runarounds (轻便小汽车 ) are being used to test up to 22 different monitors designed to detect if a driver is falling asleep at the wheel and trigger a series of devices designed to wake them up. The aim of the project, funded by 4 million of European Union
39、 money as well as privates investment, is to reduce the estimated 30% of fatal accidents which are caused in Europe each year by drivers drifting off at the wheel. The test cars have been fitted with infrared cameras which monitor eye movement, touch-pad sensors that measure the drivers grip on the
40、steering wheel and chassis (汽车底盘 ) monitors which check for veer (转向 ). Should drivers start to doze off they can be quickly woken by a sudden blast of air-conditioned cold air. At the same time a vibrating alarm will sound and the drivers seat will be made to shake. Daimler Chrysler, owner of Merce
41、des, as well as Fiat, will own the patent of the awake system, which could be installed in cars as soon as this year. If the trials are successful the EU is considering introducing a directive which would make the system compulsory in long-distance lorries a leading cause of road accidents. Accordin
42、g to transport department figures, more than 300 people die each year in Britain in accidents thought to be caused by drivers falling asleep at the wheel. Ten people died in the Selby rail crash last year when a car driver fell asleep on a motor-way, crashed onto a railway line and derailed (使脱轨 ) a
43、 passenger train. Motoring organizations said the new system might prevent accidents such as Selby but were cautious as to whether it would prove practical. The safety system also monitors braking frequency and can detect eye movement towards the rear and side mirrors. As no one drives in exactly th
44、e same way, the system must “learn“ the individual characteristics of its owner or owners. The researchers had considered systems that squirted (喷射 ) a refined version of smelling salts at the dozy motorist, opened the windows and activated the brakes automatically. However, such ideas have been aba
45、ndoned as potentially dangerous, startling a driver and leading to sudden changes in steering. 21 According to the passage, if a driver falls asleep in one of the test cars, _. （ A） the car brake will be activated automatically to prevent an accident （ B） a refined version of smelling salt will be s
46、prayed at the driver （ C） the window will be opened to let in fresh air （ D） a vibrating alarm will sound to wake the driver up 22 The second paragraph talks most clearly about_. （ A） the causes of fatal road accidents （ B） the mechanism of the awake system （ C） the ways to awake the dozing drivers
47、（ D） the schedule of developing the awake system 23 According to the passage, road accidents in Europe are mainly caused by _. （ A） drivers falling asleep at the wheel （ B） long-distance lorry driving （ C） cars without a safety system （ D） drivers sudden changes in steering 24 The author may agree t
48、hat the Selby crash _. （ A） triggered the development of the awake system （ B） happened because the train driver drifted off at the wheel （ C） highlighted the advantages of installing the awake system （ D） caused researchers concern about the practicality of the awake system 25 The EUs attitude towa
49、rds the awake system can be best described as “_“. （ A） cautious optimism （ B） insufficient support （ C） sheer confidence （ D） fitful uncertainty 25 A recent case in Australia shows how easily fear can frustrate an informants good intentions. In December, a woman wrote anonymously to the countrys antitrust watchdog, the ACCC, alleging that her employer was colluding with others in breach of the Trade Practices Act. He
