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.
Regarding the future of the EU,the author seems to feel____
Regarding the future of the EU,the author seems to feel____
A.pessimistic
B.desperate
C.conceited
D.hopeful
B.desperate
C.conceited
D.hopeful
参考解析
解析：态度题【命题思路】这是一道态度题。态度有正向答案，也有负向答案，需要对文章最后一段的信息进行锁定，从而推理判断得出答案。【直击答案】根据题干信息定位到最后一段首句“It is too soon to write off the EU.”其中动词短语“write off”的意思是“取消；认定……失败”。因此这句话的意思是“认定欧盟失败还为时过早”。由此判断得出作者对欧盟的态度很乐观，根据答案给出的备选选项，只有D项“有希望的”与作者的态度一致，故D项正确。
相关考题：
Middle (functional) managers have the greatest influence in the direction of the project in which type of organizational structure?A.Project.B.Strong matrix.C.Weak matrix.D.Project coordinator.E.Project expeditor.
I have a small token of our gratitude________ A.that the process can be made simpler.B.when we look at this question.C.which is the Mark 2 project.D.which I would like you to have.
49) Creating a “European identity” that respects the different cultures and traditions which go to make up the connecting fabric of the Old Continent is no easy task and demands a strategic choice -- that of producing programs in Europe for Europe.
At the beginning, how did many scientists view Peppeberg's work?A． It would reveal a creature's mind.B． It would probably end in failure.C． It would be hard to judge its value.D． It would be a long-term project.
The reforms threaten the port\\\'s competitiveness in that ______.［A］the truckers' unionization would raise the cost of the ports［B］truckers working at the docks are price-takers［C］the Teamsters' union would have little bargaining power［D］environmental groups are not enthusiastic about the plans
Many modern critics of American literature have called Mark Twain, born Samuel Clemens, ______.A. as America's greatest writerB. was America's greatest writerC. America's greatest writerD. to have been America's greatest writer
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.
The Project Management Triangle is a model of the constraints of project management. These constraints have been listed scope (or quality),(), and cost.A.resourceB.timeC.planD.tool
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 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.32.According to J.J.Kinahan,the main reason of graduates'moving back home isA.their desire ofliving with their parents.B.their preparation for buying a home.C.their inability of paying debts.D.their laziness to do right things.
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
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.33.The author suggested that young adults ought toA.find a job to pay offtheir debts.B.get firiancial assistance from their family.C.manage to repay their student-loan debt.D.be as independent as possible.
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 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.34.What can be inferred from Paragraph 4?A.Living at home ofyoung adult should be regarded as a stigma.B.To be independent or not is somewhat related to the expense of colleges attended.C.Living alone is important to become independent.D.Parents should not encourage their children to attend colleges.
It can be inferred from the text that__________.A.employees are facing a reduction in working hours todayB.increased leisure time would benefit two-career householdsC.companies have no set standard to evaluate their staffD.high incomes don't guarantee Americans enough leisure time
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.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 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.
共用题干Where Did All the Ships Go?The Bermuda Triangle（三角区）is one________(1) the greatest mysteries ofthe sea.In this triangular area between Florida,Puerto Rico and Bermuda in Atlantic,ships and airplanes__________(2)to disappear more often than in________(3)parts of the ocean.And they do so_________(4)leaving any sign of an accident or any dead bodies.It is_________(5)that Christopher Columbus was the first person to record strange happenings in the area.His compass stopped working,a flame came down from the sky, and a wave 100 to 200-feet-high carried his ship about a mile away.The most famous disappearance in the Bermuda Triangle was the U. S. Naval（海军的）Air Flight 19._________(6)December 5,1945,five bomber planes carrying 14 men_________(7)on a training mission from the Florida coast.Later that day,allcommunications with Flight 19 were lost.They just disappeared without a trace.The next morning,242 planes and 19 ships took part in the largest air-sea search in history.But they found nothing.Some people blame the disappearances__________(8) supernatural（超自然的） forces.It is suggested the_________(9)ships and planes were either transported to other times and places, kidnapped（绑架）by aliens（外星人）_________(10) attacked by sea creatures.There are_____________(11)natural explanations,though.The U.S. Navy says that the Bermuda Triangle is one of two places on earth__________(12)a magnetic compass（指南针）points towards true north __________ (13) magnetic north. ____________(14),planes and ships can lose their way if they don't make adjustments.The area also has changing weather and is known____________(15)its high waves. Storms can turn up suddenly and destroy a plane or ship.Fast currents could then sweep away any trace of an accident._________(4) A:without B:by C:from D:upon
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.