首頁 考試吧論壇 Exam8視線 考試商城 網(wǎng)絡(luò)課程 模擬考試 考友錄 實用文檔 求職招聘 論文下載
2011中考 | 2011高考 | 2012考研 | 考研培訓(xùn) | 在職研 | 自學(xué)考試 | 成人高考 | 法律碩士 | MBA考試
MPA考試 | 中科院
四六級 | 職稱英語 | 商務(wù)英語 | 公共英語 | 托福 | 雅思 | 專四專八 | 口譯筆譯 | 博思 | GRE GMAT
新概念英語 | 成人英語三級 | 申碩英語 | 攻碩英語 | 職稱日語 | 日語學(xué)習(xí) | 法語 | 德語 | 韓語
計算機等級考試 | 軟件水平考試 | 職稱計算機 | 微軟認(rèn)證 | 思科認(rèn)證 | Oracle認(rèn)證 | Linux認(rèn)證
華為認(rèn)證 | Java認(rèn)證
公務(wù)員 | 報關(guān)員 | 銀行從業(yè)資格 | 證券從業(yè)資格 | 期貨從業(yè)資格 | 司法考試 | 法律顧問 | 導(dǎo)游資格
報檢員 | 教師資格 | 社會工作者 | 外銷員 | 國際商務(wù)師 | 跟單員 | 單證員 | 物流師 | 價格鑒證師
人力資源 | 管理咨詢師考試 | 秘書資格 | 心理咨詢師考試 | 出版專業(yè)資格 | 廣告師職業(yè)水平
駕駛員 | 網(wǎng)絡(luò)編輯
衛(wèi)生資格 | 執(zhí)業(yè)醫(yī)師 | 執(zhí)業(yè)藥師 | 執(zhí)業(yè)護士
會計從業(yè)資格考試會計證) | 經(jīng)濟師 | 會計職稱 | 注冊會計師 | 審計師 | 注冊稅務(wù)師
注冊資產(chǎn)評估師 | 高級會計師 | ACCA | 統(tǒng)計師 | 精算師 | 理財規(guī)劃師 | 國際內(nèi)審師
一級建造師 | 二級建造師 | 造價工程師 | 造價員 | 咨詢工程師 | 監(jiān)理工程師 | 安全工程師
質(zhì)量工程師 | 物業(yè)管理師 | 招標(biāo)師 | 結(jié)構(gòu)工程師 | 建筑師 | 房地產(chǎn)估價師 | 土地估價師 | 巖土師
設(shè)備監(jiān)理師 | 房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀(jì)人 | 投資項目管理師 | 土地登記代理人 | 環(huán)境影響評價師 | 環(huán)保工程師
城市規(guī)劃師 | 公路監(jiān)理師 | 公路造價師 | 安全評價師 | 電氣工程師 | 注冊測繪師 | 注冊計量師
繽紛校園 | 實用文檔 | 英語學(xué)習(xí) | 作文大全 | 求職招聘 | 論文下載 | 訪談 | 游戲
考研_考試吧考研_首發(fā)2011考研成績查詢
考研網(wǎng)校 模擬考場 考研資訊 復(fù)習(xí)指導(dǎo) 歷年真題 模擬試題 經(jīng)驗 考研查分 考研復(fù)試 考研調(diào)劑 論壇 短信提醒
考研英語| 資料 真題 模擬題  考研政治| 資料 真題 模擬題  考研數(shù)學(xué)| 資料 真題 模擬題  專業(yè)課| 資料 真題 模擬題  在職研究生

2010教育部考試中心考研英語模擬試題閱讀理解2

為幫助2010年考研學(xué)員更好的備考英語,考試吧考研頻道特分類整理了2010年考研英語閱讀理解模擬試題及解析,供學(xué)員備考復(fù)習(xí),祝各位考生復(fù)習(xí)順利!取得好成績!

  課程:2010考研課程免費試聽  交流:考研 論壇    ?迹在線考試中心

  2010年教育部考試中心考研英語模擬題分類匯編

  2010年教育部考試中心考研英語模擬試題

----閱讀理解部分匯編

  二、美私有化方案

  The National Association of Securities Dealers is investigating whether some brokerage houses are inappropriately pushing individuals to borrow large sums on their houses to invest in the stock market. Can we persuade the association to investigate would-be privatizers of Social Security? For it is now apparent that the Bush administration’s privatization proposal will amount to the same thing: borrow trillions, put the money in the stock market and hope.

  Privatization would begin by diverting payroll taxes, which pay for current Social Security benefits, into personal investment accounts. The government would have to borrow to make up the shortfall. This would sharply increase the government’s debt. “Never mind”, privatization advocates say, “in the long run, people would make so much on personal accounts that the government could save money by cutting retirees’ benefits.”

  Even so, if personal investment accounts were invested in Treasury bonds, this whole process would accomplish precisely nothing. The interest workers would receive on their accounts would exactly match the interest the government would have to pay on its additional debt. To compensate for the initial borrowing, the government would have to cut future benefits so much that workers would gain nothing at all. However, privatizersclaim that these investments would make a lot of money and that, in effect, the government, not the workers, would reap most of those gains, because as personal accounts grew, the government could cut benefits.

  We can argue at length about whether the high stock returns such schemes assume are realistic (they aren’t), but let’s cut to the chase: in essence, such schemes involve having the government borrow heavily and put the money in the stock market. That’s because the government would, in effect, confiscate workers’gains in their personal accounts by cutting those workers’ benefits.

  Once you realize whatprivatization really means, it doesn’t sound too responsible, does it? But the details make it considerably worse. First, financial markets would, correctly, treat the reality of huge deficits today as a much more important indicator of the government’s fiscal health than the mere promise that government could save money by cutting benefits in the distant future. After all, a government bond is a legally binding promise to pay, while a benefits formula that supposedly cuts costs 40 years from now is nothing more than a suggestion to future Congresses. If a privatization plan passed in 2005 called for steep benefit cuts in 2045, what are the odds that those cuts would really happen? Second, a system of personal accounts would pay huge brokerage fees. Of course, from Wall Street’s point of view that’s a benefit, not a cost.

  1.According to the author, “privatizers”are those_____.

  [A] borrowing from banks to invest in the stock market [B] who invest in Treasury bonds

  [C] advocating the government to borrow money from citizens [D] who earn large sums of money in personal accounts

  2.In the first paragraph, individual borrowing is cited because_____.

  [A] it shares similarities with the government’s Social Security policies

  [B] there is no guarantee that it will be profitable in the stock market

  [C] it is not proper for the brokerage houses to persuade people to borrow money

  [D] it is an indication of the Bush administration’s serious concern over the stock market

  3.According to its advocates, who will gain from the privatization of Social Security?

  [A] Investors in stock markets. [B] Retired workers in the future. [C] The future Congresses. [D] Account information brokers.

  4.It can be inferred from the passage that Social Security privatization will_____.

  [A] provide high returns for the new governments [B] be strongly opposed by Wall Street

  [C] bring the future retirees more benefits [D] allow individuals to invest in personal accounts

  5.The author’s attitude towards the privatization proposal is_____.

  [A] impartial [B] suspicious [C] neutral [D] approval

  答案:1.C 2.A 3.C 4.D 5.B

  核心詞匯和超綱詞匯

  (1)brokerage(n.)經(jīng)紀(jì)人之業(yè)務(wù),回扣

  (2)would-be(a.)想要成為的,自稱自許的,自充的,例He founded a school for would-be actors(他創(chuàng)辦學(xué)校,訓(xùn)練有意做演員的人)。

  (3)shortfall(n.)不足量

  (4)cut to the chase 抄捷徑去追獵物(不繞圈子,開門見山,單刀直入)

  (5)confiscate(v.)沒收,充公;征用

  (6)deficit(n.)赤字,不足額

  全文翻譯

  全國證券交易商協(xié)會正在調(diào)查一些證券行是否不適當(dāng)?shù)卮偈箓人以房屋為抵押大舉借款投資股票市場。我們能否說服該協(xié)會來調(diào)查提倡社會保障私有化的人呢?因為現(xiàn)在很明顯,布什政府的私有化措施將產(chǎn)生同樣的結(jié)果:借上萬億的債,投資股市并期望從中獲利。

  將現(xiàn)在用于支付社會福利金的工資稅轉(zhuǎn)移到個人投資帳戶上,私有化就開始了。政府必須借錢來彌補這種不足。這將急劇增加政府的負(fù)債。私有化的提倡者說:沒關(guān)系,從長遠(yuǎn)來看,人們在個人帳戶上會賺很多錢,以至于政府可以通過削減離退休人員的福利而節(jié)省開支。

  即使如此,如果個人投資帳戶被用于投資國庫債券,那么這個過程將一無所獲。工人們從他們的帳戶上得到的利息將恰好等于政府不得不為它的額外債務(wù)而支付的利息。為了彌補這種初始借入,政府將不得不大幅度減少未來福利以至于工人將一無所獲。然而私有化的提倡者聲稱,這些投資將賺很多錢,而且實際上是政府而非工人將從中獲益最大,因為當(dāng)個人帳戶增長時,政府將減少福利開支。

  我們能長時間地爭論這些方案所認(rèn)為的高額的股票報酬是否現(xiàn)實(它們并不現(xiàn)實),但是開門見山地說吧:其實,這些方案需要讓政府大舉借債并將錢投入股票市場。因為實際上政府會通過減少工人的福利而將他們個人帳戶中的收益充公。

  一旦你意識到私有化的真正含義時,它聽起來不是很負(fù)責(zé),對嗎?但是細(xì)節(jié)使它更糟。首先,金融市場將恰當(dāng)?shù)匕讶缃竦拇罅砍嘧挚醋魇钦斦】禒顩r的重要標(biāo)志,而不是政府做出的能夠在遙遠(yuǎn)的未來通過減少福利節(jié)省開支的輕率承諾。畢竟,政府債券是具有法律效力的償還承諾,而一個猜想從現(xiàn)在起四十年后會削減開支的利潤公式只不過是對未來眾國會的一個建議。如果在2005年通過的一個私有化計劃要求在2045年大幅度削減收益,那么這種情況真正發(fā)生的幾率是多少呢?其次,個人帳戶系統(tǒng)將償付巨額的經(jīng)紀(jì)費用。當(dāng)然,在華爾街來看,那是收益,不是費用。

  相關(guān)推薦:2010考研英語真題閱讀理解試題及名師解析匯總
       2010年教育部考試中心考研英語模擬題分類匯編
       2010年考研英語常見詞組突破匯總(持續(xù)更新)
文章搜索
任汝芬老師
在線名師:任汝芬老師
   著名政治教育專家;研究生、博士生導(dǎo)師;中國國家人事人才培...[詳細(xì)]
考研欄目導(dǎo)航
版權(quán)聲明:如果考研網(wǎng)所轉(zhuǎn)載內(nèi)容不慎侵犯了您的權(quán)益,請與我們聯(lián)系800@exam8.com,我們將會及時處理。如轉(zhuǎn)載本考研網(wǎng)內(nèi)容,請注明出處。