大学六级-109及答案解析.doc
《大学六级-109及答案解析.doc》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《大学六级-109及答案解析.doc(37页珍藏版)》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。
1、大学六级-109 及答案解析(总分:693.00,做题时间:90 分钟)一、BPart Writing(总题数:1,分数:106.00)1.北京地区采取措施限制私家车的通行 2这些措施的影响 3我的看法 B Limiting the Use of Private Cars/B(分数:106.00)_二、BPart Reading (总题数:1,分数:70.00)B Rich Man, Poor Man/BGluers and sawyers from the furniture factories in Galax near the mountains of Virginia lost the
2、ir jobs last year when American retailers decided they could find a better supplier in China. At the other end of the furniture industry Robert Nardelli lost his job this month when Home Depot decided it could find a better chief executive in his deputy. But any likeness ends there. Mr. Nardellis ex
3、it was as extravagantly rewarded as his occupation of the corner office had been. Next to his $ 210 million severance pay, the redundant woodworkers packages were mean to the point of provocation (激怒).Thats the way it goes all over the rich world. If you look back 20 years, the total pay of the typi
4、cal top American manager has increased from roughly 40 times the average-the level for four decades - to 110 times the average now. These are the glory days of global capitalism. The mix of technology and economic integration transforming the world has created unparalleled prosperity. In the past fi
5、ve years the world has seen faster growth than at any time since the early 1970s. Having joined the global labor force, hundreds of millions of people in developing countries have won the chance to escape squalor (肮脏) and poverty. Hundreds of millions more stand to join them.That promises to improve
6、 the lot of humanity as a whole incalculably. But in the rich world labors share of GDP has fallen to historic lows, while profits are soaring. A clamor is abroad that Mr. Nardelli and his friends among the top hundredth - or even the top thousandth - of the population are seizing the lions share of
7、 globalizations gains. Meanwhile everyone else - not just blue-collar factory workers but also the wider office - working middle class - shuffles along, grimly waiting for the next round of cost-cuts.BFear and clothing/BSigns of a backlash abound. Stephen Roach, the chief economist at Morgan Stanley
8、, has counted 27 pieces of anti-China legislation in Congress since early 2005. The German Marshall Fund found last year that, although most people still say they favor free trade, more than half of Americans want to protect domestic companies from foreign competition even if that slows economic gro
9、wth. In a hint of labors possible resurgence, the House of Representatives has just voted to raise the federal minimum wage for the first time in a decade. Even Japan is alarmed about inequality, stagnant (不景气的) wages and jobs going to China. Europe has tied itself in knots trying to “manage“ trade
10、in Chinese textiles.BShould you blame your computer?/BThe panic comes in part from a rush to lump all the blame on globalization. Technology - an even less resistible force - is also destroying white- and blue-collar tasks in a puff of automation and may play a bigger role in explaining rising wage
11、inequality. The distinctions between technology and globalization count, if only because people tend to welcome computers but condemn foreigners (whether as competitors or immigrants). That makes technology easier to defend.For economists, the debate about whether technology or globalization is resp
12、onsible for capitals rewards outpacing those of labor is crucial, complicated and unresolved. One school, which blames globalization, argues that the rocketing profits and sluggish middling wages of the past few years are the long-lasting results of trade, as all those new developing-country workers
13、 enter the labor market. This school says that technology helps workers by increasing their productivity and benefits them in other aspects. The opposing school retorts(反驳) that technology does not increase wages immediately as they blaming globalization say, and some sorts of information technology
14、 seem to boost the returns to capital instead.The first rule is to avoid harming the very miracle that generates so much wealth. Take for instance the arguments about high executive pay. Some say this is simply a matter of governance - and forcing company boards to work better. If only it were that
15、simple. High pay is, by and large, the price needed to attract and motivate gifted managers, as our special report argues in this issue. The abuses of companies such as Home Depot obscure how most high pay has been caused not by powerful bosses fixing their own wages, but by the changing job of the
16、chief executive, the growth of large companies and the competitive market for talent. Executive-pay restrictions would not put that horse back in its box, but they would harm companies.If the winners are difficult to curb without doing damage to your economy, the losers are tough to help. Doling out
17、 aid for the victims of trade makes sense in theory; but in practice it is increasingly hard to do. When the jobs going abroad are not whole assembly lines, but bits of departments, how exactly do you pick out the person who has lost his job to globalization from the millions of people changing jobs
18、 for other reasons? And, hardhearted though it may sound, most of the gains from trade and technology alike come from the way they redeploy investment and labor to activities that create more wealth. That, like all change, can be painful; but it is what makes a country richer. A policy locking peopl
19、e into jobs that could be better done elsewhere is self-defeating.BThe limits of redistribution/BIf protectionism will not help the losers, what about using the tax system? Some argue that redistributing more cash from the Nardellis to the Galaxians would not just make society less unequal; it would
20、 also buy middle-class support for globalization. In fact the two arguments should be kept separate.This newspaper has long argued that a mobile society is better than an equal one: disparities are tolerable if combined with meritocracy and general economic advance. For decades America has shown how
21、 dynamic economies are better than equality-driven ones at generating overall prosperity. That still leaves plenty of room to debate how progressive to make taxation, or how lavish to make public services. But a society would want compelling evidence that the social contract had been torn up before
22、flexing the tax system to offset what may turn out to be only temporary fluctuations in relative incomes. And it makes little sense for free-traders to use taxes to buy off people from voting for protectionism, when doing so would in any case be against their interests.BActive, not reactive/BInstead
23、, the way to ease globalization is the same as the way to ease other sorts of economic change, including the impact of technology. The aim is to help people to move jobs as comparative advantage shifts rapidly from one activity to the next. That means less friction in labor markets and regulatory sy
24、stems that help investment. It means an education system that equips people with general skills that make them mobile. It means detaching health care and pensions from employment, so that every time you move your job, you are not risking an awful lot else besides. And for those who lose their jobs -
- 1.请仔细阅读文档,确保文档完整性,对于不预览、不比对内容而直接下载带来的问题本站不予受理。
- 2.下载的文档,不会出现我们的网址水印。
- 3、该文档所得收入(下载+内容+预览)归上传者、原创作者;如果您是本文档原作者,请点此认领!既往收益都归您。
下载文档到电脑,查找使用更方便
2000 积分 0人已下载
下载 | 加入VIP,交流精品资源 |
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 大学 109 答案 解析 DOC
