For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs, day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal.Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.According to the article, which of the following is NOT supporting the point that“the phase-out of cash should be gradual?"A. In rural areas the intemet access still need time to be enhanced.B. The rush towards digital money should be targeting at the most beneficial results of goverment.C. It could buy govemment time for helping those impoverished people open bank accounts, and to teach elderly people Io prepare for the eleetronice payments systems.D. Banks' are obliged to offer assistance in the long process towards the final eliminating of cash.
For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs, day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal.
Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.
Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.
Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.
There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.
In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.
Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.
Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.
These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.
Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.
According to the article, which of the following is NOT supporting the point that“the phase-out of cash should be gradual?"
Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.
Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.
Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.
There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.
In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.
Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.
Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.
These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.
Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.
According to the article, which of the following is NOT supporting the point that“the phase-out of cash should be gradual?"
A. In rural areas the intemet access still need time to be enhanced.
B. The rush towards digital money should be targeting at the most beneficial results of goverment.
C. It could buy govemment time for helping those impoverished people open bank accounts, and to teach elderly people Io prepare for the eleetronice payments systems.
D. Banks' are obliged to offer assistance in the long process towards the final eliminating of cash.
B. The rush towards digital money should be targeting at the most beneficial results of goverment.
C. It could buy govemment time for helping those impoverished people open bank accounts, and to teach elderly people Io prepare for the eleetronice payments systems.
D. Banks' are obliged to offer assistance in the long process towards the final eliminating of cash.
参考解析
解析：由最后一段 “beef up intemet acess in rural areas. (加强农村地区的互联网接入)”可知A项正确。由“This will buy goverments time to help the poor open bank accounts,educate the elderly (这将为政府争取时间，帮助贫困人口开设银行账户，教老年人使用)”可知C项正确。由“banks should be obliged to acepet and distribute ceash in populated arcas. (银行有义务在人口密集的地区接受和发放现金)”可知D项正确。网上支付不是为了保证政府利益最大化，B项表述错误，所以答案选B.
相关考题：
Frown _______ his brow when he was deep in thought. A. contactedB. conductedC. contractedD. confirmed
What does the passage tell us about women shoppers for clothes?A. They welcome suggestions from anyone.B. They rarely consider buying cheap clothes.C. They often buy things without giving the matter proper thought.D. They listen to advice but never take it.
In China, when someone gives you a present, it’s thought impolite to open it ______.A: immediatelyB: luckilyC: clearlyD: properly
Communication is not merely a matter of a speaker forming a thought in language and sending it as spoken message through space, or as a written message on paper, to a listener or reader who listens to or reads it.()
____________, Miss Brown decided to take a taxi.A、She thought she must be lateB、Being thought she must be lateC、When thought she must be lateD、Thinking she must be late
For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs, day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal.Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time. According to the article, what is the crrt method for banks and digtal firms to deal with customers' privacies? ( )A. Banks, under the govemment's supervisions, need to fulfill the obligations of keeping customer information private.B. Banks should cooperate with advertisement companies to sell customers' privacies for better profits.C. Digital firms do not have to protect users' privacies as long as their business model is made explicit to users.D. Banks should assume that all the customers are glad to enjoy firee services even their privacies are being tracked.
For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs, day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal.Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.Which of the following is the correct understanding of two forces that are“making cashdie out?( )A. Most financial firms prefer to use cash in the transactions of buying and slling.B. Cash economy is bringing high cost comparing to the ceashless economy.C. One of the foroes is the new generation of consumens who are eager for using online paymcnts because they suggest cash is caus ing sanitary problems.D. Few pcople could ceatch up with the trend of the wide use of online paymcnts.
For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs, day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal.Over the past decade，however ，digital payments have taken off-- tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics from which they can pull data and pocket fees.There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy-- ATMs， vans carrying notes, tellers who acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly fees.In the main，the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries, minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history, helping consumers borrow.Yet set against these benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor, the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash, an anonymous payment method, for a digital system could let govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap,instant，bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ，as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep priccs low so that the poor can afford most services, and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in,. making the system resilient. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr information private, so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data, through, for example, advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.Last, the phasc-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years," banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy govermments time to help the poor open bank accounts, educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.Which of the following is NOT one of the advantages of cashless economy based on the article?( )A. Govemments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion,B. Cashless economy vastly expands the play ground of small bus inesses and sole traders byenabling them to sell beyond their borders.C. When payments dematerialise people and shops are less vulncrable to thef,D. Countries are hiring more tellers to aecepl coins for them.
A healthy life is frequently thought to be connected with the open countryside and homegrown food.A:tied B:boundC:involved D:associated
Language and thought may be viewed as two independent circles overlapping in some parts. When language and thought are identical or closely parallel to each other， we may regard thought as “subvocal speech，” and speech as “（）”.Avocal thoughtBsubvocal thoughtCcovert thoughtDovert thought
Teaching Children to Spend Pocket Money Wisely School-going children need pocket money for food, stationery and bus fares. Parents give pocket money to their children in different ways. Some give a lump sum at the beginning of a month or a week. ____1____ The way in which pocket money is given affects how money is spent or saved. On the other hand, the children's spending habits may affect how pocket money is given. Pocket money given on a daily basis is sometimes termed as "food money". ____2____ They learn how to manage small sums of money. As the money is limited, they have to control their spending. Some parents choose this method of allocating pocket money in order to prevent their children from overspending, hoping that in time they can be trusted with larger sums of money. ____3____. Giving pocket money on a daily basis places responsibilities of budgeting on the parents, instead of the child. The child may spend every single cent of the daily pocket money by overindulging in junk food, as they know they will get another sum of money the next day. This results in children being short-sighted in their spending. ____4____ They may develop the mentality that money is meant to be spent. Others spend more than they are given. They borrow from their siblings or their classmates when they feel like indulging themselves. Then they may ask for money to pay off their debts. This habit of borrowing causes them to depend on others to solve their problems. ____5____.____3____内应选（）A、There is no better way to teach children to manage money than to start with their pocket money.B、The thought of saving money never crossed their minds.C、Children usually use the pocket money to buy food during recess and also at lunch hour if they have school activities in the afternoon.D、Others prefer to give pocket money on a daily basis.E、Parents who earn daily wages may also opt for this due to financial constraints.F、In such instances, the purpose of rationing is defeated.
The name"Canada"is thought to be derived from kanata,an Indian word meaning（）A、a guitarB、a meeting placeC、a settlementD、a piece of land
单选题Which of the following is the best revision of the underlined portion of sentence 2 (reproduced below)?This is the experience that a thinker has when, after they thought about a problem long and hard, they suddenly come upon a solution in a flash when they are no longer thinking about it.Athat a thinker has when, after they thought long and hard about a problem, their solution suddenly arises like a flashBthat thinkers have when a solution suddenly had arisen like a flash after they were thinking long and hard about a problemCthat a thinker has when, after having thought long and hard about a problem, they suddenly come upon a solutionDthat thinkers have when, after having thought long hard hard about a problem, they suddenly come upon a solutionEthat thinkers have when, thinking long and hard about a problem, they suddenly come upon a solution in a flash
单选题What can we infer（推断） from the story?AAunt Polly gave Tom a lot of pocket money for what he had done.BBen and the other boys might feel unhappy when they found out the truth.CTom believed that he had discovered how to deal with different people.DEveryone thought Tom clever when they realized what had happened.
单选题Teaching Children to Spend Pocket Money Wisely School-going children need pocket money for food, stationery and bus fares. Parents give pocket money to their children in different ways. Some give a lump sum at the beginning of a month or a week. ____1____ The way in which pocket money is given affects how money is spent or saved. On the other hand, the children's spending habits may affect how pocket money is given. Pocket money given on a daily basis is sometimes termed as "food money". ____2____ They learn how to manage small sums of money. As the money is limited, they have to control their spending. Some parents choose this method of allocating pocket money in order to prevent their children from overspending, hoping that in time they can be trusted with larger sums of money. ____3____. Giving pocket money on a daily basis places responsibilities of budgeting on the parents, instead of the child. The child may spend every single cent of the daily pocket money by overindulging in junk food, as they know they will get another sum of money the next day. This results in children being short-sighted in their spending. ____4____ They may develop the mentality that money is meant to be spent. Others spend more than they are given. They borrow from their siblings or their classmates when they feel like indulging themselves. Then they may ask for money to pay off their debts. This habit of borrowing causes them to depend on others to solve their problems. ____5____.____1____内应选（）AThere is no better way to teach children to manage money than to start with their pocket money.BThe thought of saving money never crossed their minds.CChildren usually use the pocket money to buy food during recess and also at lunch hour if they have school activities in the afternoon.DOthers prefer to give pocket money on a daily basis.EParents who earn daily wages may also opt for this due to financial constraints.FIn such instances, the purpose of rationing is defeated.
单选题请阅读 Passage 2，完成第 26~30小题 。Passage 2Paper money is used every day but people do not often think of money as just paper.This is because people agree that it has value，and paper money is supported by the government.People have used paper money for only a few hundred years，but what did people do before printed money was invented? In Medieval England，a stick was the official representation of money. The common system that was used involved counting debt on a piece of wood called a tally stick. The tally stick was marked with a knife.Each mark，or tally，indicated an amount of money.The tally stick acted as a contract.No one really knows who invented the tally stick，but King Henry I of England is credited as the first to use the stick in a widespread fashion.In England，the tally stick was used from 1100-1826.Marks were made on a tally stick to represent the amount of service or goods that were exchanged.The tally stick was cut in halflengthwise into two parts，and one stick was longer than the other.The person giving services or goods received the longer end of the stick，called the stock，and the person paying for the service or goods received the shorter end.Once the stick was cut，it could not be altered.When put together，the two halves fit perfectly together.Medieval England was not the only country to use the tally stick system.In 1960，Belgian scientist Jean de Heinzelin de Braucourt discovered an extremely old tally stick made of baboon bone in Africa.At first，he determined the stick to be between about 8，000 to 10，000 years old.This surprised many people because it proved that the tally stick system had been in use for much longer than everyone had previously thought.Further research has shown that this stick is actually much older: now，scientists believe it is 20，000 years old.The tally stick system may no longer be in use today，but its influence is still apparent.People still make contracts and people still borrow and lend money.People still trust that things-whether they are sticks，paper，or coins-have value.The next time paper money is used，just remember: it is only paper!Which of the following statements is true?AEnglish tally sticks have more marks than African ones.BTally sticks are a practical tool in use today.CThe current representation of money is in the form of paper.DMany models for money have been cut short.
单选题请阅读 Passage 2，完成第 26~30小题 。Passage 2Paper money is used every day but people do not often think of money as just paper.This is because people agree that it has value，and paper money is supported by the government.People have used paper money for only a few hundred years，but what did people do before printed money was invented? In Medieval England，a stick was the official representation of money. The common system that was used involved counting debt on a piece of wood called a tally stick. The tally stick was marked with a knife.Each mark，or tally，indicated an amount of money.The tally stick acted as a contract.No one really knows who invented the tally stick，but King Henry I of England is credited as the first to use the stick in a widespread fashion.In England，the tally stick was used from 1100-1826.Marks were made on a tally stick to represent the amount of service or goods that were exchanged.The tally stick was cut in halflengthwise into two parts，and one stick was longer than the other.The person giving services or goods received the longer end of the stick，called the stock，and the person paying for the service or goods received the shorter end.Once the stick was cut，it could not be altered.When put together，the two halves fit perfectly together.Medieval England was not the only country to use the tally stick system.In 1960，Belgian scientist Jean de Heinzelin de Braucourt discovered an extremely old tally stick made of baboon bone in Africa.At first，he determined the stick to be between about 8，000 to 10，000 years old.This surprised many people because it proved that the tally stick system had been in use for much longer than everyone had previously thought.Further research has shown that this stick is actually much older: now，scientists believe it is 20，000 years old.The tally stick system may no longer be in use today，but its influence is still apparent.People still make contracts and people still borrow and lend money.People still trust that things-whether they are sticks，paper，or coins-have value.The next time paper money is used，just remember: it is only paper!Who was responsible for making the tally stick system so popular?AHenry Ⅰ.BNo one really knows.CMoney borrowers.DJean de Heinzelin de Braucourt.
单选题They thought they could ______ for another week without more food.AkeepBlastCmaintainDretain
单选题请阅读 Passage 2，完成第 26~30小题 。Passage 2Paper money is used every day but people do not often think of money as just paper.This is because people agree that it has value，and paper money is supported by the government.People have used paper money for only a few hundred years，but what did people do before printed money was invented? In Medieval England，a stick was the official representation of money. The common system that was used involved counting debt on a piece of wood called a "tally stick". The tally stick was marked with a knife.Each mark，or tally，indicated an amount of money.The tally stick acted as a contract.No one really knows who invented the tally stick，but King Henry I of England is credited as the first to use the stick in a widespread fashion.In England，the tally stick was used from 1100-1826.Marks were made on a tally stick to represent the amount of service or goods that were exchanged.The tally stick was cut in halflengthwise into two parts，and one stick was longer than the other.The person giving services or goods received the longer end of the stick，called the "stock"，and the person paying for the service or goods received the shorter end.Once the stick was cut，it could not be altered.When put together，the two halves fit perfectly together.Medieval England was not the only country to use the tally stick system.In 1960，Belgian scientist Jean de Heinzelin de Braucourt discovered an extremely old tally stick made of baboon bone in Africa.At first，he determined the stick to be between about 8，000 to 10，000 years old.This surprised many people because it proved that the tally stick system had been in use for much longer than everyone had previously thought.Further research has shown that this stick is actually much older: now，scientists believe it is 20，000 years old.The tally stick system may no longer be in use today，but its influence is still apparent.People still make contracts and people still borrow and lend money.People still trust that "things"-whether they are sticks，paper，or coins-have value.The next time paper money is used，just remember: it is only paper!According to the passage，what makes money valuable?APeople who use it.BGold that people find.CInventions.DAgreement.
单选题Language and thought may be viewed as two independent circles overlapping in some parts. When language and thought are identical or closely parallel to each other， we may regard thought as “subvocal speech，” and speech as “（）”.Avocal thoughtBsubvocal thoughtCcovert thoughtDovert thought
单选题All living creature are thought to ______ an organism that came into being three billion years ago.Adescend toBdescend onCdescend intoDdescend from
填空题Believe it or not, when first (introduce) ____ to Europe, tomato was thought to be poisonous.
单选题请阅读 Passage 2，完成第 26~30小题 。Passage 2Paper money is used every day but people do not often think of money as just paper.This is because people agree that it has value，and paper money is supported by the government.People have used paper money for only a few hundred years，but what did people do before printed money was invented? In Medieval England，a stick was the official representation of money. The common system that was used involved counting debt on a piece of wood called a "tally stick". The tally stick was marked with a knife.Each mark，or tally，indicated an amount of money.The tally stick acted as a contract.No one really knows who invented the tally stick，but King Henry I of England is credited as the first to use the stick in a widespread fashion.In England，the tally stick was used from 1100-1826.Marks were made on a tally stick to represent the amount of service or goods that were exchanged.The tally stick was cut in halflengthwise into two parts，and one stick was longer than the other.The person giving services or goods received the longer end of the stick，called the "stock"，and the person paying for the service or goods received the shorter end.Once the stick was cut，it could not be altered.When put together，the two halves fit perfectly together.Medieval England was not the only country to use the tally stick system.In 1960，Belgian scientist Jean de Heinzelin de Braucourt discovered an extremely old tally stick made of baboon bone in Africa.At first，he determined the stick to be between about 8，000 to 10，000 years old.This surprised many people because it proved that the tally stick system had been in use for much longer than everyone had previously thought.Further research has shown that this stick is actually much older: now，scientists believe it is 20，000 years old.The tally stick system may no longer be in use today，but its influence is still apparent.People still make contracts and people still borrow and lend money.People still trust that "things"-whether they are sticks，paper，or coins-have value.The next time paper money is used，just remember: it is only paper!Why were many people surprised about tihe tally stick in Africa?AThe material it was made from had never been seen before.BIt was much older than previously thought.CIt was cut sideways instead of lengthwise.DMoney did not exist in Africa then.
单选题So, Hayes reached his$28,000 target(目标)and ______ to get money for his degree in food science from the University of Illinois.Akept onBcalled onCwent onDput on
单选题The farm produced more food than _____ thought possible during World War II.Aever beBwould ever beChas ever beenDhad ever been