Text 4 Will the European Union make it?The question would have sounded strange not long ago.Now even the project's greatest cheerleaders talk of a continent facing a“Bermuda triangle”of debt,population decline and lower growth.As well as those chronic problems,the EU faces an acute crisis in its economic core,the 16 countries that use the single currency.Markets have lost faith that the euro zone's economies,weaker or stronger,will one day converge thanks to the discipline of sharing a single currency,which denies uncompetitive members the quick fix of devaluation.Yet the debate about how to save Europe's single currency from disintegration is stuck.It is stuck because the euro zone's dominant powers,France and Germany,agree on the need for greater harmonization within the euro zone,but disagree about what to harmonies.Germany thinks the euro must be saved by stricter rules on borrow,spending and competitiveness,backed by quasiautomatic sanctions for governments that do not obey.These might include threats to freeze EU funds for poorer regions and EU megaprojects and even the suspension of a country's voting rights in EU ministerial councils.It insists that economic coordination should involve all 27 members of the EU club,among whom there is a small majority for freemarket liberalism and economic rigour;in the inner core alone,Germany fears,a small majority favour French interference.A“southern”camp headed by French wants something different:“European economic government”within an inner core of eurozone members.Translated,that means politicians intervening in monetary policy and a system of redistribution from richer to poorer members,via cheaper borrowing for governments through common Eurobonds or complete fiscal transfers.Finally,figures close to the France government have murmured,eurozone members should agree to some fiscal and social harmonization:e.g.,curbing competition in corporatetax rates or labour costs.It is too soon to write off the EU.It remains the world's largest trading block.At its best,the European project is remarkably liberal:built around a single market of 27 rich and poor countries,its internal borders are far more open to goods,capital and labour than any comparable trading area.It is an ambitious attempt to blunt the sharpest edges of globalization,and make capitalism benign.To solve the euro problem，Germany proposed that______A.EU funds for poor regions be increasedB.stricter regulations be imposedC.only core members be involved in economic coordinationD.voting rights of the EU members be guaranteed
Text 4 Will the European Union make it?The question would have sounded strange not long ago.Now even the project's greatest cheerleaders talk of a continent facing a“Bermuda triangle”of debt,population decline and lower growth.As well as those chronic problems,the EU faces an acute crisis in its economic core,the 16 countries that use the single currency.Markets have lost faith that the euro zone's economies,weaker or stronger,will one day converge thanks to the discipline of sharing a single currency,which denies uncompetitive members the quick fix of devaluation.Yet the debate about how to save Europe's single currency from disintegration is stuck.It is stuck because the euro zone's dominant powers,France and Germany,agree on the need for greater harmonization within the euro zone,but disagree about what to harmonies.Germany thinks the euro must be saved by stricter rules on borrow,spending and competitiveness,backed by quasiautomatic sanctions for governments that do not obey.These might include threats to freeze EU funds for poorer regions and EU megaprojects and even the suspension of a country's voting rights in EU ministerial councils.It insists that economic coordination should involve all 27 members of the EU club,among whom there is a small majority for freemarket liberalism and economic rigour;in the inner core alone,Germany fears,a small majority favour French interference.A“southern”camp headed by French wants something different:“European economic government”within an inner core of eurozone members.Translated,that means politicians intervening in monetary policy and a system of redistribution from richer to poorer members,via cheaper borrowing for governments through common Eurobonds or complete fiscal transfers.Finally,figures close to the France government have murmured,eurozone members should agree to some fiscal and social harmonization:e.g.,curbing competition in corporatetax rates or labour costs.It is too soon to write off the EU.It remains the world's largest trading block.At its best,the European project is remarkably liberal:built around a single market of 27 rich and poor countries,its internal borders are far more open to goods,capital and labour than any comparable trading area.It is an ambitious attempt to blunt the sharpest edges of globalization,and make capitalism benign.
To solve the euro problem，Germany proposed that______
To solve the euro problem，Germany proposed that______
A.EU funds for poor regions be increased
B.stricter regulations be imposed
C.only core members be involved in economic coordination
D.voting rights of the EU members be guaranteed
B.stricter regulations be imposed
C.only core members be involved in economic coordination
D.voting rights of the EU members be guaranteed
参考解析
解析：细节题【命题思路】这是一道局部细节题，需要对文章第四段的信息进行锁定，从而判断得出答案。【直击答案】根据题干信息定位到文章第四段首句“Germany thinks…and competitiveness…”，这句话的意思是“德国认为必须通过实施更加严格的借贷、支出和竞争条例来拯救欧元…….”。由此可知B项中“stricter regulations”是对原文“stricter rules”的同义替换，故B项正确。【干扰排除】由第四段第二句“These might…poorer regions…”可知冻结欧盟给贫困地区的资金，A项与原文信息相反，故不选。C项中的“only core members”是对第四段第三句“It insists that…all 27 members…”中的“all 27 members”偷换了概念，故错误。第四段第三句“It insists that…all 27 members…”，D项中的“be guaranteed”（得到保障）是对第四段第二句“…and even the supension…ministerial councils.”中“suspension”（停职）偷换了概念，故错误。
相关考题：
The advantages and disadvantages of a large population have long been a subject of discussion among economists. It has been argued that the supply of good land is limited. To feed a large population, poor land must be cultivated and the good land worked intensively. Thus, each person produces less and this means a lower average income than could be obtained with a smaller population. Other economists have argued that a large population gives more chance of development of facilities such as ports, roads and railways, which are not likely to be built unless there is a big demand.One of the difficulties in carrying out a worldwide birth control program lies in the fact that of ficial attitudes to population growth vary from country to country depending on the level of industrial development and the availability of food and raw materials. In the developing country where a vastly expanded population is pressing hard upon the limits of food, space and natural resources, the first concern of government will be to set a limit on the birthrate, whatever the final result may be. In a highly industrialized society the problem may be more complex. A decreasing birth rate may lead to unemployment because it results in a declining market for manufactured goods.When the pressure of population on housing declines, prices also decline and building industry grow weaker. Faced with concern such as these, the government of a developed country may well prefer to see a slowly increasing population, rather than one which is stable or in decline.(1)The main topic of this article is _____________.A、environment protectionB、population growthC、environment and economyD、climate changing(2) The passage says that a small population may lead to _____________.A、higher production, but a lower average incomeB、lower production and lower average incomeC、higher production and a higher average incomeD、lower production, but a higher average income(3) According to the passage, the use of birth control perhaps is good for_____________.A、a developing countryB、a developed countryC、the whole worldD、each nation with a big population(4) In a developed country, people will perhaps be unemployed if the birthrate _____________.A、goes upB、goes downC、remains stableD、is out of control(5) The author is aiming to show that_____________.A、humans will run out of their food supply in the futureB、it is necessary for humans to carry out a worldwide plan for birth controlC、different nations have different views of population growthD、we need to take necessary measures to prevent the overuse of natural resources.
Australia is the world's smallest continent and largest island, a relatively young nation established in an ancient land. Its development represents a triumph(胜利)over remoteness and a harsh landscape.It is generally accepted that Australia's original inhabitants, the aboriginal(土著的)people, have lived on the continent for 40,000 to 60,000 years. They were also its sole(唯一的)human inhabitants until two centuries ago. Indonesian traders probably visited Australia's northwest but it was unknown to the rest of the world until the 1600s. A huge south land appeared on maps before 200 AD but its existence was not confirmed until the 17th century when Portuguese, Spanish and Dutch merchants ventured into Asia.The first European settlement of the continent--by the British--began in 1788, on the site now occupied by Sydney, Australia's largest city. There were then about 1500 Europeans and an estimated 300,000 aboriginal people in Australia. The population has reached 2.25 million by 1881, 5.41 million by 1921 and 7.4 million by the end of World War II(1945). It increased sharply, partly because of a large postwar immigration program, and reached more than 17 million in 1991, despite a decline that began in the 1970s in the natural increase and net immigration. The rate of population increase in the 40 years after world war II, about two percent, has halved.Australia is one of the most urbanized countries in the world, with about 70 percent of the population living in the 10 largest cities. Australians have a high standard of living by world standards. The flag of Australia is the only one to fly over a whole continent in the world. The small Union Jack represents the historical link with Britain, the largest star has six points for each of the states and one point for the territories, and the small stars form. the Southern Cross - a prominent of the southern hemisphere night sky.1. The passage is written to _____.A. present a general picture of AustraliaB. persuade people to travel in AustraliaC. tell people the history of AustraliaD. describe the characteristic of Australia2. The first sentence in paragraph 1 mainly suggests that _____.A. Australia is a strange countryB. it is not easy to find AustraliaC. Australia has contradictory(矛盾的)featuresD. Australia is a continent and a country as well3. Which statement about Australia's population can NOT be inferred? _____A. The population change is a gradual increase.B. The population increased rapidly for a time owing to the government's special policy.C. The rates of population increase in different periods varied.D. The rate of population increase before World War II was about one percent.4. The word urbanized means _____.A. of towns or citiesB. of emergencyC. of suburbsD. of the countryside5. Which of the following statements is NOT true? _____A. The large star on the flag of Australia has seven points.B. People were certain of Australia's existence before 200 AD because it had appeared on maps.C. Australia enjoy relatively high standard of living compared with people in other countries.D. The aboriginal people of Australia were its only human inhabitants before the 18th century.
We have spent all of our spare time()our spare money on the project.A. as soon asB. as long asC. as well as
Since all the goods have been cased up according to the S／C, it would be too late to make a change even if we agreed to.(英译中)
Philip: Danny, I got fired this morning. Could you help me?Danny: How come? Last time I saw you, you told me it was a good job and you would like to take it as a career.Philip: ________________ In a word, I didn't do a good job of it. I messed up a business deal that would make several million dollars.A、I have many words to say.B、There is much to discuss.C、It's a long story.D、It's a long-time talk.
Text 3 How long is too long for young adults to live at home after college?In a recent survey by TD Ameritrade,teenagers on average said it would become embarrassing to still be living at home at age 26.Young adults aging 20 t0 26-probably because they've already been out in the real world-thought the cutoff should be 28,But 27 percent of those surveyed said they wouldn't be ashamed to be living at home even in their thirties or so.Here's the reality:Nearly half of post-college millennials have moved back home.Wages are stagnant,and many graduates with debt find it's hard to live on their own.Survey participants said their debt is causing them to delay saving for retirement,buying a home,getting married and having children.Twenty percent said the education they received wasn't worth the debt they accumulated."ln many cases,people view young adults moving back home as a sign that they were lazy or not doing things'right,'"said J.J.Kinahan,chief strategist at TD Ameritrade."But many people doing it are being fiscally responsible."I've long advocated for young adults graduating with burdensome debt to move back home if they can.I'll go even further.College graduates should make every effort to find a job in the area where their parents live or another relative or friend is nearby.And in exchange for rent-frce living,they should pledge to extinguish as much of their student-loan debt as they can.You may think that living at home is an improper failure to launch or that it delays the all-important lesson of learning to be independent.But may I suggest we all make an effort to remove the stigma of young adults returning home as a financial embarrassment?It is not,especially if parents allowed or encouraged a student to attend a college that necessitated some heavy borrowing.Soon-to-be graduates often ask me for advice on how to pay off their student loans.Some don't even know how much they owe.But they know it's more than they can comfortably handle on their starting salaries.What they're really asking for is a miracle.They ask hoping there's some get-out-of-debt-free card.Although there is a public service debt forgiveness program for borrowers working for the govemment or a not-for-profit group,the vast majority of borrowers won't get the relief they seek.35.In the following part immediately after this text,the author will most probablyA.recommend a plan to address the debt issue.B.criticize the parents for their neglect.C.blame college graduate for their laziness.D.stress the significance of eanung more.
Text 3 Up until a few decades ago,our visions of the future were largely-though by no means uniformly-glowingly positive.Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity,leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable,as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us,from asteroid strike to epidemic flu and to climate change.You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced.The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years-so why shouldn't we?Take a broader look at our species'place in the universe,and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens,if not hundreds,of thousands of years.Look up Homo sapiens in the"Red List"of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature（IUCN）,and you will read:"Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed,adaptable,currently increasing,and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline."So what does our deep future hold?A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question.For example,the Long Now Foundation has its flagship project a medical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully,it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future.The potential evolution of today's technology,and its social consequences,is dazzlingly complicated,and it's perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage.That's one reason why we have launched Arc,a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance.As so often,the past holds the key to the future:we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet,and our species,to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad.To be sure,the future is not all rosy.But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans,and to improve the lot of those to come.33.Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?A.Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies.B.Technology offers solutions to social problem.C.The interest in science fiction is on the rise.D.Our Immediate future is hard to conceive.
Up until a few decades ago,our visions of the future were largely-though by no means uniformly-glowingly positive.Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity,leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable,as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us,from asteroid strike to epidemic flu and to climate change.You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced.The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years-so why shouldn't we?Take a broader look at our species'place in the universe,and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens,if not hundreds,of thousands of years.Look up Homo sapiens in the"Red List"of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature（IUCN）,and you will read:"Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed,adaptable,currently increasing,and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline."So what does our deep future hold?A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question.For example,the Long Now Foundation has its flagship project a medical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully,it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future.The potential evolution of today's technology,and its social consequences,is dazzlingly complicated,and it's perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage.That's one reason why we have launched Arc,a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance.As so often,the past holds the key to the future:we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet,and our species,to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad.To be sure,the future is not all rosy.But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans,and to improve the lot of those to come.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?A.Uncertainty about Our FutureB.Evolution of the Human SpeciesC.The Ever-bright Prospects of MankindD.Science,Technology and Humanity
Robert F.Kennedy once said that a country’s GDP measures“everything except that which makes life worthwhile.”With Britain voting to leave the European Union,and GDP already predicted to slow as a result,it is now a timely moment to assess what he was referring to.The question of GDP and its usefulness has annoyed policymakers for over half a century.Many argue that it is a flawed concept.It measures things that do not matter and miss things that do.By most recent measures,the UK’s GDP has been the envy of the Western World,with record low unemployment and high growth figures.If everything was going so so well,then why did over 17million people vote for Brexit,despite the warnings about what it could do to their country’s economic prospects?A recent annual study of countries and their ability to convert growth into well-being sheds some light on that question.Across the 163 countries measured,the UK is one of the poorest performers in ensuring that economic growth is translated into meaningful improvement for its citizens.Rather than just focusing on GDR over 40 different sets of criteria from health,education and civil society engagement have been measured to get a more rounded assessment of how countries are performing.While all of these countries face their own challenges,there are a number of consistent themes.Yes,there has been a budding economic recovery since the 2008 global crash,but in key indicators in areas such as health and education,major economies have continued to decline.Yet this isn't the case with all countries.Some relatively poor European countries have seen huge improvements across measures including civil society;income equality and the environment.This is a lesson that rich countries can learn:When GDP is no longer regarded as the sole measure of a country’s success,the world looks very different.So what Kennedy was referring to was that while GDP has been the most common method for measuring the economic activity of nations,as a measure,it is no longer enough.It does not include important factors such as environmental equality or education outcomes-all things that contribute to a person's sense of well-being.The sharp hit to growth predicted around the world and in the UK could lead to a decline in the everyday services we depend on for our well-being and for growth.But policymaker who refocus efforts on improving well-being rather than simply worrying about GDP figures could avoid the forecasted doom and may even see progress.Which of the following is the best?for the text?A.High GDP But Inadequate Well-being,a UK lessonB.GDP figures,a Window on Global Economic HealthC.Robert F.Kennedy,a Terminator of GDPD.Brexit,the UK’s Gateway to Well-being
Text 3 Up until a few decades ago,our visions of the future were largely-though by no means uniformly-glowingly positive.Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity,leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable,as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us,from asteroid strike to epidemic flu and to climate change.You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced.The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years-so why shouldn't we?Take a broader look at our species'place in the universe,and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens,if not hundreds,of thousands of years.Look up Homo sapiens in the"Red List"of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature（IUCN）,and you will read:"Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed,adaptable,currently increasing,and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline."So what does our deep future hold?A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question.For example,the Long Now Foundation has its flagship project a medical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully,it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future.The potential evolution of today's technology,and its social consequences,is dazzlingly complicated,and it's perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage.That's one reason why we have launched Arc,a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance.As so often,the past holds the key to the future:we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet,and our species,to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad.To be sure,the future is not all rosy.But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans,and to improve the lot of those to come.32.The IUCN’s“Red List”suggest that human being areA.a sustained speciesB.a threaten to the environmentC.the world’s dominant powerD.a misplaced race
Text 3 The past five years have been a bad time to be a taxpayer in Europe.Across the continent,govemments have relied heavily on tax rises to cut budget deficits,increasing the total burden by almost 5%of GDP in France and Greece.But rather than raise taxes any further,many countries are startin8 to cut them.The European Commission reckons that the euro zone's tax-to-GDP ratio stabilised in 2013 and is now falliry;.In January France announced plans to cut payroll taxes by 30 billion.This month Italy unveiled income-tax cuts worth 10 billion for those earning less than 25,000 a year.This week Britain proposed tax cuts for most people on low or medium incomes.Ireland and Sptun are also planning tax cuts later this year.Lower taxes may be popular,but how are such giveaways being financed?Few countries have Lhe scope to borrow much more.The commission has criticised France and Spain for repeatedly missing their deficit-reduction targets,though it is not taking action agsunst them.Italy's high level of public debt,which hit 133%of GDP in 2013,has also landed it on the commission's fiscal"watch list".Instead,most countries plan to pay for their tax proposals with public-spending cuts.Italy says it will reduce spendirg by an extra 7 billion this year and save a further 2.2 billion thanks to lower yields on its debt-though these figures may prove optimistic.The politician8 hope that lower taxes will boost growth.As euro-zone countries cannot devalue or lower their own interest rates,tax cuts are one of the few ways of trimming business costs fast,says Guillaume Menuet at Citigroup.France and Italy both hope to improve their competitiveness by reducing the tax"wedge"between employers'costs and what workers actually take home.In 2012 this tax take reached nearly 50%of the payroll biU in France and Italy,against an OECD average of just 36%.Some economists doubt that cutting income tax,Italy's approach,is the best way forward.Instead,they favour slashing Europe's high employer-paid socild security charges,as France proposes to do.Ihis would directly lower labour costs,encouraging companies to hire extra workers as well as to increase their invesLmenl.That would aLso give a welcome boost to growth.France and Spain have been blamed for_____A.borrowing too much debtB.failing to pay the loans backC.planning to cut domestic taxesD.being unable to reduce Lheir deficit
Text 4 Will the European Union make it?The question would have sounded strange not long ago.Now even the project's greatest cheerleaders talk of a continent facing a“Bermuda triangle”of debt,population decline and lower growth.As well as those chronic problems,the EU faces an acute crisis in its economic core,the 16 countries that use the single currency.Markets have lost faith that the euro zone's economies,weaker or stronger,will one day converge thanks to the discipline of sharing a single currency,which denies uncompetitive members the quick fix of devaluation.Yet the debate about how to save Europe's single currency from disintegration is stuck.It is stuck because the euro zone's dominant powers,France and Germany,agree on the need for greater harmonization within the euro zone,but disagree about what to harmonies.Germany thinks the euro must be saved by stricter rules on borrow,spending and competitiveness,backed by quasiautomatic sanctions for governments that do not obey.These might include threats to freeze EU funds for poorer regions and EU megaprojects and even the suspension of a country's voting rights in EU ministerial councils.It insists that economic coordination should involve all 27 members of the EU club,among whom there is a small majority for freemarket liberalism and economic rigour;in the inner core alone,Germany fears,a small majority favour French interference.A“southern”camp headed by French wants something different:“European economic government”within an inner core of eurozone members.Translated,that means politicians intervening in monetary policy and a system of redistribution from richer to poorer members,via cheaper borrowing for governments through common Eurobonds or complete fiscal transfers.Finally,figures close to the France government have murmured,eurozone members should agree to some fiscal and social harmonization:e.g.,curbing competition in corporatetax rates or labour costs.It is too soon to write off the EU.It remains the world's largest trading block.At its best,the European project is remarkably liberal:built around a single market of 27 rich and poor countries,its internal borders are far more open to goods,capital and labour than any comparable trading area.It is an ambitious attempt to blunt the sharpest edges of globalization,and make capitalism benign.Regarding the future of the EU,the author seems to feel____A.pessimisticB.desperateC.conceitedD.hopeful
Text 4 Will the European Union make it?The question would have sounded strange not long ago.Now even the project's greatest cheerleaders talk of a continent facing a“Bermuda triangle”of debt,population decline and lower growth.As well as those chronic problems,the EU faces an acute crisis in its economic core,the 16 countries that use the single currency.Markets have lost faith that the euro zone's economies,weaker or stronger,will one day converge thanks to the discipline of sharing a single currency,which denies uncompetitive members the quick fix of devaluation.Yet the debate about how to save Europe's single currency from disintegration is stuck.It is stuck because the euro zone's dominant powers,France and Germany,agree on the need for greater harmonization within the euro zone,but disagree about what to harmonies.Germany thinks the euro must be saved by stricter rules on borrow,spending and competitiveness,backed by quasiautomatic sanctions for governments that do not obey.These might include threats to freeze EU funds for poorer regions and EU megaprojects and even the suspension of a country's voting rights in EU ministerial councils.It insists that economic coordination should involve all 27 members of the EU club,among whom there is a small majority for freemarket liberalism and economic rigour;in the inner core alone,Germany fears,a small majority favour French interference.A“southern”camp headed by French wants something different:“European economic government”within an inner core of eurozone members.Translated,that means politicians intervening in monetary policy and a system of redistribution from richer to poorer members,via cheaper borrowing for governments through common Eurobonds or complete fiscal transfers.Finally,figures close to the France government have murmured,eurozone members should agree to some fiscal and social harmonization:e.g.,curbing competition in corporatetax rates or labour costs.It is too soon to write off the EU.It remains the world's largest trading block.At its best,the European project is remarkably liberal:built around a single market of 27 rich and poor countries,its internal borders are far more open to goods,capital and labour than any comparable trading area.It is an ambitious attempt to blunt the sharpest edges of globalization,and make capitalism benign.The debate over the EU's single currency is stuck because the dominant powers_____A.are competing for the leading positionB.are busy handling their own crisesC.fail to reach an agreement on harmonizationD.disagree on the steps towards disintegration
Text 3 The past five years have been a bad time to be a taxpayer in Europe.Across the continent,govemments have relied heavily on tax rises to cut budget deficits,increasing the total burden by almost 5%of GDP in France and Greece.But rather than raise taxes any further,many countries are startin8 to cut them.The European Commission reckons that the euro zone's tax-to-GDP ratio stabilised in 2013 and is now falliry;.In January France announced plans to cut payroll taxes by 30 billion.This month Italy unveiled income-tax cuts worth 10 billion for those earning less than 25,000 a year.This week Britain proposed tax cuts for most people on low or medium incomes.Ireland and Sptun are also planning tax cuts later this year.Lower taxes may be popular,but how are such giveaways being financed?Few countries have Lhe scope to borrow much more.The commission has criticised France and Spain for repeatedly missing their deficit-reduction targets,though it is not taking action agsunst them.Italy's high level of public debt,which hit 133%of GDP in 2013,has also landed it on the commission's fiscal"watch list".Instead,most countries plan to pay for their tax proposals with public-spending cuts.Italy says it will reduce spendirg by an extra 7 billion this year and save a further 2.2 billion thanks to lower yields on its debt-though these figures may prove optimistic.The politician8 hope that lower taxes will boost growth.As euro-zone countries cannot devalue or lower their own interest rates,tax cuts are one of the few ways of trimming business costs fast,says Guillaume Menuet at Citigroup.France and Italy both hope to improve their competitiveness by reducing the tax"wedge"between employers'costs and what workers actually take home.In 2012 this tax take reached nearly 50%of the payroll biU in France and Italy,against an OECD average of just 36%.Some economists doubt that cutting income tax,Italy's approach,is the best way forward.Instead,they favour slashing Europe's high employer-paid socild security charges,as France proposes to do.Ihis would directly lower labour costs,encouraging companies to hire extra workers as well as to increase their invesLmenl.That would aLso give a welcome boost to growth.The author's attitude towards France's proposal seems to be_____A.favorableB.pessinusticC.doubtfulD.biased
Text 3 The past five years have been a bad time to be a taxpayer in Europe.Across the continent,govemments have relied heavily on tax rises to cut budget deficits,increasing the total burden by almost 5%of GDP in France and Greece.But rather than raise taxes any further,many countries are startin8 to cut them.The European Commission reckons that the euro zone's tax-to-GDP ratio stabilised in 2013 and is now falliry;.In January France announced plans to cut payroll taxes by 30 billion.This month Italy unveiled income-tax cuts worth 10 billion for those earning less than 25,000 a year.This week Britain proposed tax cuts for most people on low or medium incomes.Ireland and Sptun are also planning tax cuts later this year.Lower taxes may be popular,but how are such giveaways being financed?Few countries have Lhe scope to borrow much more.The commission has criticised France and Spain for repeatedly missing their deficit-reduction targets,though it is not taking action agsunst them.Italy's high level of public debt,which hit 133%of GDP in 2013,has also landed it on the commission's fiscal"watch list".Instead,most countries plan to pay for their tax proposals with public-spending cuts.Italy says it will reduce spendirg by an extra 7 billion this year and save a further 2.2 billion thanks to lower yields on its debt-though these figures may prove optimistic.The politician8 hope that lower taxes will boost growth.As euro-zone countries cannot devalue or lower their own interest rates,tax cuts are one of the few ways of trimming business costs fast,says Guillaume Menuet at Citigroup.France and Italy both hope to improve their competitiveness by reducing the tax"wedge"between employers'costs and what workers actually take home.In 2012 this tax take reached nearly 50%of the payroll biU in France and Italy,against an OECD average of just 36%.Some economists doubt that cutting income tax,Italy's approach,is the best way forward.Instead,they favour slashing Europe's high employer-paid socild security charges,as France proposes to do.Ihis would directly lower labour costs,encouraging companies to hire extra workers as well as to increase their invesLmenl.That would aLso give a welcome boost to growth.It can be inferred from the second paragraph that_______A.all domestic taxes will be cut in France soonB.lax cut may be a good news to some BritonsC.most people in Italy benefit trom the tax cutD.low-income people needn't pay tax in Ireland
Text 3 The past five years have been a bad time to be a taxpayer in Europe.Across the continent,govemments have relied heavily on tax rises to cut budget deficits,increasing the total burden by almost 5%of GDP in France and Greece.But rather than raise taxes any further,many countries are startin8 to cut them.The European Commission reckons that the euro zone's tax-to-GDP ratio stabilised in 2013 and is now falliry;.In January France announced plans to cut payroll taxes by 30 billion.This month Italy unveiled income-tax cuts worth 10 billion for those earning less than 25,000 a year.This week Britain proposed tax cuts for most people on low or medium incomes.Ireland and Sptun are also planning tax cuts later this year.Lower taxes may be popular,but how are such giveaways being financed?Few countries have Lhe scope to borrow much more.The commission has criticised France and Spain for repeatedly missing their deficit-reduction targets,though it is not taking action agsunst them.Italy's high level of public debt,which hit 133%of GDP in 2013,has also landed it on the commission's fiscal"watch list".Instead,most countries plan to pay for their tax proposals with public-spending cuts.Italy says it will reduce spendirg by an extra 7 billion this year and save a further 2.2 billion thanks to lower yields on its debt-though these figures may prove optimistic.The politician8 hope that lower taxes will boost growth.As euro-zone countries cannot devalue or lower their own interest rates,tax cuts are one of the few ways of trimming business costs fast,says Guillaume Menuet at Citigroup.France and Italy both hope to improve their competitiveness by reducing the tax"wedge"between employers'costs and what workers actually take home.In 2012 this tax take reached nearly 50%of the payroll biU in France and Italy,against an OECD average of just 36%.Some economists doubt that cutting income tax,Italy's approach,is the best way forward.Instead,they favour slashing Europe's high employer-paid socild security charges,as France proposes to do.Ihis would directly lower labour costs,encouraging companies to hire extra workers as well as to increase their invesLmenl.That would aLso give a welcome boost to growth.According to the last paragraph,some economists______A.prefer Italy's approach to France'sB.favour slashing employers'salariesC.agree to reduce the costs of employeesD.reckon that cutting tax is the only way
Text 4 Will the European Union make it?The question would have sounded strange not long ago.Now even the project's greatest cheerleaders talk of a continent facing a“Bermuda triangle”of debt,population decline and lower growth.As well as those chronic problems,the EU faces an acute crisis in its economic core,the 16 countries that use the single currency.Markets have lost faith that the euro zone's economies,weaker or stronger,will one day converge thanks to the discipline of sharing a single currency,which denies uncompetitive members the quick fix of devaluation.Yet the debate about how to save Europe's single currency from disintegration is stuck.It is stuck because the euro zone's dominant powers,France and Germany,agree on the need for greater harmonization within the euro zone,but disagree about what to harmonies.Germany thinks the euro must be saved by stricter rules on borrow,spending and competitiveness,backed by quasiautomatic sanctions for governments that do not obey.These might include threats to freeze EU funds for poorer regions and EU megaprojects and even the suspension of a country's voting rights in EU ministerial councils.It insists that economic coordination should involve all 27 members of the EU club,among whom there is a small majority for freemarket liberalism and economic rigour;in the inner core alone,Germany fears,a small majority favour French interference.A“southern”camp headed by French wants something different:“European economic government”within an inner core of eurozone members.Translated,that means politicians intervening in monetary policy and a system of redistribution from richer to poorer members,via cheaper borrowing for governments through common Eurobonds or complete fiscal transfers.Finally,figures close to the France government have murmured,eurozone members should agree to some fiscal and social harmonization:e.g.,curbing competition in corporatetax rates or labour costs.It is too soon to write off the EU.It remains the world's largest trading block.At its best,the European project is remarkably liberal:built around a single market of 27 rich and poor countries,its internal borders are far more open to goods,capital and labour than any comparable trading area.It is an ambitious attempt to blunt the sharpest edges of globalization,and make capitalism benign.The EU is faced with so many problems that_____A.it has more or less lost faith in marketsB.even its supporters begin to feel concernedC.some of its member countries plan to abandon euroD.it intends to deny the possibility of devaluation
资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit. Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc. However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party. The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.” Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously. In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020. “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.” In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit. Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions. European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc. There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes.According to the passage, which of the A.Britain has agreed to discuss the conditions of the exit before discussing the future trade ties.B.Theresa May has mapped out the blue print of the relations between Britain and EU.C.EU might not be satisfied with May’s Speech.D.Britain is fully prepared to withdraw from EU in an orderly way.
资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit. Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc. However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party. The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.” Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously. In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020. “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.” In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit. Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions. European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc. There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes. There’s a stalemate between EU and BrA.The two sides have not reached an agreement on conditions of Britain’s orderly exit.B.Britain refuses to fill the financial bole of the EU.C.British People are divided on the issue of Brexit.D.EU does not want Britain to exit from it.
资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit. Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc. However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party. The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.” Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously. In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020. “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.” In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit. Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions. European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc. There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes. What’s the purpose of May’s speech?( A.To demonstrate her resolve to divorce Britain from EU.B.To pave the way for dialogues and negotiations with EU on Brexit.C.To comfort the sentiment of British people.D.To end the division between her cabinet and the Conservative Party.
资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit. Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc. However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party. The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.” Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously. In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020. “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.” In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit. Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions. European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc. There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes. Theresa May’s speech mentioned the foA.The rights of EU’s citizens will be protected in Britain after the divorce.B.Britain would be willing to continue to fulfill the commitment they have made during the period of membership.C.A good trade relation between Britain and the EU is in line with the interests of both sides.D.Britain will provide 20 billion euros to EU during the transition period.
资料：Seeking to end a stalemate in negotiations over her country’s withdrawal from the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May of Britain offered Friday substantial payments to the bloc during a two-year transition period immediately after the country’s exit. Mrs. May’s long-awaited intervention, during a speech in Florence, Italy, was being watched closely in capitals on the Continent and in London, where members of her cabinet have been fiercely divided over Britain’s tortuous divorce from the bloc. The speech aimed to open the way to serious negotiations on what is commonly known as Brexit, and to a broader and more productive discussion about Britain’s relationship with the bloc. However, while offering some concessions designed to do that, Mrs. May did not give any fresh insight into the type of ties she ultimately wants Britain to have to the bloc-a question that divides her cabinet and her Conservative, or Tory, Party. The European Union’s chief negotiators, Michel Barnier, issued a cautious response, saying in a statement that, “We look forward to the United Kingdom’s negotiators explaining the concrete implications of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech. Our ambition is to find a rapid agreement on the conditions of the United Kingdom’s orderly withdrawal, as well as on a possible transition period.” Although Britain is scheduled to exit the European Union in 2019, there has been little progress in talks since March, when London formally announced its intention to leave. Brussels is insisting that Britain agree to the terms of the divorce before discussing future trade ties, while the British would like to do both simultaneously. In light of the continuing standoff, many business worry about a “cliff edge” scenario, in which Britain would crash out without a deal, so Mrs. May is under pressure to find a way out of the impasses. Speaking in Florence on Friday, Mrs. May did not say precisely how much money Britain would continue to contribute to the European Union. But she made a significant promise that the British-who are big net contributors to the bloc-would not leave a hole in the union’s budget in 2019 and 2020. “I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave.” Mrs. May said. That would probably mean payments of around 20 billion euros, or about $24 billion, after Britain’s departure. It would also effectively maintain the state quo for the duration of a two-year transition period, meaning that Britain would allow the free movement of European workers and accept rulings from the European Court of Justice. This alone is unlikely to be enough to satisfy the 27 other member nations, but Mrs. May hinted that she would be willing to go further and “honor commitments we have made during the period of our membership.” In addition, Mrs. May proposed a security partnership with the European Union, stressing Britain’s importance as a defense power, and also offered new legal safeguards to guarantee the rights of European Union citizens in Britain after Brexit. Over all, Mrs. May sought to stress the common interest London shares with continental European capitals in reaching an agreement and avoiding disruption to trade, wrapping her odder in dialogue that was more positive, and less antagonistic, than that of some previous interventions. European Union negotiators have refused to talk about post-Brexit ties until they judge that there is “sufficient progress” on the issues they consider a priority. the states of European Union citizens in Britain after it leaves, the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland(which is a part of the United Kingdom)and Britain’s financial commitments to the bloc. There is little sign yet that the other 27 nations are prepared to grant Britain a bespoke agreement, and officials have warned London on numerous occasions that there would be no “cherry picking” of the parts of European Union membership it likes. What’s the main idea of this passage?A.Thereas May’s makes financial commitment to EU for the transition period.B.Britain insists on leaving EU without any agreement.C.EU won’t talk to Britain unless Britain makes concessionsD.Thereas May seeks to unlock Brexit talks in her speech.
Ireland is unique among European countries for（）.Aits small populationBits beautiful sceneryCits rich natural resourcesDits century-long population decline
问答题Practice 9 Youth unemployment across the world has climbed to a new high and is likely to climb further this year, a United Nations agency said Thursday, while warning of a “lost generation” as more young people give up the search for work. The agency, the International Labor Organization, said in a report that of some 620 million young people ages 15 to 24 in the work force, about 81 million were unemployed at the end of 2009—the highest level in two decades of record-keeping by the organization, which is based in Geneva. “There’s never been an increase of this magnitude — both in terms of the rate and the level — since we’ve been tracking the data,” said Steven Kapsos, an economist with the organization. The agency forecast that the global youth unemployment rate would continue to increase through 2010, to 13.1 percent, as the effects of the economic downturn continue. It should then decline to 12.7 percent in 2011. In some especially strained European countries, including Spain and Britain, many young people have become discouraged and given up the job hunt, it said. The trend will have “significant consequences for young people,” as more and more join the ranks of the already unemployed, it said. That has the potential to create a “‘lost generation’ comprised of young people who have dropped out of the labor market, having lost all hope of being able to work for a decent living.” The report studied the German, British, Spanish and Estonian labor markets and found that Germany had been most successful in bringing down long-term youth unemployment. In Spain and Britain, increases in unemployment were particularly pronounced for those with lower education levels. Data from Eurostat, the European Union’s statistical agency, show Spain had a jobless rate of 40.5 percent in May for people under 25. That was the highest level among the 27 members of the European Union, far greater than the 9.4 percent in Germany in May and 19.7 percent in Britain in March.
单选题Ireland is unique among European countries for（）.Aits small populationBits beautiful sceneryCits rich natural resourcesDits century-long population decline
问答题Practice 2 Directions: Read the following text(s) and write an essay to 1) summarize the main points of the text(s), 2) make clear your own viewpoint, and 3) justify your stand. In your essay, make full use of the information provided in the text(s). If you use more than three consecutive words from the text(s), use quotation marks (“ ”). You should write 160—200 words on the ANSWER SHEET. It is all very well to blame traffic congestion, the cost of petrol and the hectic pace of modern lift, but manners on the roads are becoming deplorable. Everybody knows that nicest men become monsters behind the wheel. It is all very well again to have a tiger in the tank, but to have one in the drivers seat is completely another awkward and difficult situation. You might tolerate the odd mad hog, but nowadays the well-mannered motorist is the exception to the rule. Perhaps the situation calls for a “Be Kind to Other Drivers” campaign; otherwise it may get completely out of hand. Road courtesy is not only good manners, but good sense too. It takes the most levelheaded and good-tempered of drivers to resist the temptation to retaliate when subjected to uncivilized behavior. On the other hand, a little courtesy goes a long way towards relieving the tensions and frustrations of motoring. A friendly nod or a wave of acknowledgement in response to an act of courtesy helps to create an atmosphere of goodwill and tolerance so necessary in modern traffic conditions. But such acknowledgements of courtesy are all too rare today. Many drivers nowadays don't even seem able to recognize courtesy when they see it. Lorry drivers say they have almost abandoned the practice of signaling cars to overtake when the road is clear, because many of the cars took too long to pass. Their drivers couldn't be bothered to select a lower gear. Others, after overtaking, slowed down again and hogged the road. They manufacture them by force, using their direction indicators as a threat rather than a warning. Slanting matches and even punch-ups（打架斗殴）are quite common. It can't be long before we hear of pistols and knives being used: we can then call our dual carriageways, and solve a spelling problem in the process. Driving is essentially a state of mind. However technically skilled a driver may be, he can't be all advanced motorist if he is always arrogant and aggressive.
问答题Practice 4 Europeans have long aspired to end American dominance as the world’s economic leader. The single market and the euro are widely seen as essential steps in this direction. But is Europe ready to lead? Do Europeans understand what it would take? Despite a budding recovery, the United States is hardly the model of economic health that it once was. On several issues—from steel tariffs to the resurgent deficit to shady corporate practices—America has demonstrated a growing failure of leadership. Over the past two decades the United States has shown what it takes to be an economic superpower—a strong currency, openness to imports, concessions in trade negotiations and articulating an economic philosophy for the rest of the world. Now that it’s apparently fading on so many counts, the question becomes: is Europe willing and prepared to do what the United States once did, in order to supplant it? First the exchange-rate issue. The euro will probably continue strengthening against the dollar, if only because of America’s huge and growing $400 billion-a-year current-account deficit. This means that, every year, the United States borrows about 4 percent of its GDP on world markets. If international investors lose confidence in the U.S. economy, fewer people will want to hold dollar assets. The dollar will fall—and the euro will appreciate. This may be a normal market cycle, but there will be consequences. Among others, European companies will see their U.S. profits erode. What happens if the dollar falls farther and faster than anticipated? Are European industrial companies ready to compete with a euro worth $1.10, $1.15 or $1.25? The flip side of the much-desired strong euro would almost certainly be a surge in imports from the United States and the rest of the world. Exports might fall, resulting in job losses—perhaps even a trade deficit for the European Union. Europeans are rightfully angry at new U.S. steel tariffs. But given the sheer size of America’s trade deficit, Washington’s policies are actually relatively moderate. The question remains: if Europe were in a similar position, would its voters and politicians be equally sensitive to what’s best for the global economy? Would European politicians be able to face the incredible pressures that would build for protectionist measures if it were Europe, and not the United States, that ran a persistent trade deficit? Not likely, I fear. America’s retreat from its leading role presents an opportunity for the European Union. Trouble is, its political institutions have yet to mature to the point where they can resolve trade disputes, say, by looking beyond the immediate and narrow self-interests of its member states. Europe’s chance for economic leadership may come sooner than expected. But too many Europeans haven’t yet grasped the basic secret of America’s leadership—the hard work and tough choices that are involved. That’s what Europeans now face, in this season of elections and decision making that will shape their future. Let’s hope they recognize that such sacrifices will pay off for them, as well as for the rest of the world.