2005年考研英语|2005考研“考试虫”英语8套模拟试卷(一)2

【shitiku.jxxyjl.com--考研】

it has done in the past — move up the value-added ladder tocreate new products and services. That means promoting better education, com­pleting the job of reforming the capital market, and reducing business and investor risk at home and abroad. If it can restart the growth engine, the U. S. has nothing to fear from the great white-collar migration. If it doesn’ t, there may be serious trouble ahead.
21. Globalization of current decade proves to be
A.)a dramatic event resulting in serious economic problems.
B.)a massive transfer of manual workers from West to East.
C.)identical to the previous movement in scale and value.
D.sending upscale jobs off the highly-developed countries.
22. The white-collar migration may lead to
A.)rapid progress in manufacturing industry.
B.)sufferings for U. S. technical professionals.
C.)great advances in information technology.
D.)forceful intervention by the government.
23. In consequence of the burst of the .tech bubble, many companies are
A.)shifting well-paying jobs to the developing countries.
B.)exporting well-trained and experienced workers.
C.)exhausting the, sources of service-job supply.
D.)undermining the healthy basis of employment.
24. The move of services may be beneficial to developed countries, for it
A.)throws off the heavy burden of service duties.
B.)prevents the production of low-value goods.
C.)makes conditions ready for new breakthroughs.
D.)drives corporations to pursue the biggest profits.
25. To get over the difficulties caused by service shift,
A.)developed countries have to check their exports.
B.)the U. S. should act as it did during the last shift.
C.)the middle class must receive further education.
D.)financial firms are to escape investment risks.
Forget the fight between Republicans and Democrats. When it comes to economic policy, what’s going on now is a struggle between "growth optimists" on one side and "economic declinists" on the other. Optimists, whether conservative or liberal, believe that the long-term growth potential of the U. S. remains bright. Sure, there’s dispute about the best way to encourage growth. Conservatives fa­vor lower taxes on capital; liberals support more funding for research and development and education. And technologists, regardless oftheir political stripe(派别) , want to encourage the innovative compa­nies of Silicon Valley. But the optimists have a common goal: sustaining, or even beating, the strong economic performance of the 1990s.
   By contrast, declinists — and there are plenty of them among both conservatives and liberals — think the 1990s boom was at best an anomaly, and at worst a bubble that did more harm than good. Such declinists preach the doctrine of sacrifice and belt-tightening. They would rather hold down the federal budget deficit, instead of encouraging private investment through tax cuts or providing more funding for research and development and education. And because declinists think of the economy as relatively slow-growing, they worry more about how to divide up the economic pie than how to make it bigger.
   One of the most influential declinists is Paul Krugman, a Princeton economist and New York Times columnist, who has long been pessimistic about the U. S. economy’s future. In the mid-1990s, he strongly objected to the New Economy idea that technology could raise the rateof productivity growth, writing that "there is no good reason to believe that the speed limit on the economy has been raised. " Moreover, in the short run, he argues for Keynesian measures, such as providing more aid for hard-pressed state governments. But in the long run, Krugman, like other declinists, seems fixated on controlling the budget deficit. Unfortunately economic theory suggests that even eliminating the bud­get deficit will have a relatively small impact on the long-run growth rate.
The best thing for poor Americans is fast growth and low unemployment, even if it brings more inequality. That’s the lesson of the 1990s, when the rich prospered but the poverty rate fell as well, going from 15% in 1993 to less than 12% in 2001. Over the same stretch, real wages for production and non-supervisory workers rose by 10% — reversing a 20-year downward trend. An economy should be judged, at least partly, by how well it treats the poor. By that measure, the 1990s were a success.

26. With respect to economic policy, the conflict usually goes on
A.)between the U. S. two major political parties.
B.)between liberal and conservative economists.
C.)among economists irrespective of party stripe.
D.)among politicians of the US both main parties.

27. Economic optimists disagree with one another as to
[A] how to prompt economic progress most.
B.)how to lighten the burden of taxation.
C.)how to render aid to scientific research.
D.)how to urge hi-tech firms on to fresh efforts.
28. It is the declinists’ belief that
A.)economy is doomed to move on at a low rate.
B.)federal budget deficit is to be sustained.
C.)people have to suffer economic depress.
D.)reducing taxes is mortal to national economy.
29. In Paul Krugman’s view, it is true that
A.)the idea of New Economy seemed unfounded.
B.)the 1990s prosperity was an unusual irregularity.
C.)technical advance may have impact on production.
D.)economic speed limit can be exceeded in no way.
30. The author agrees that a successful economy is to be measured by
A.)providing enough aid for strained states.
B.)eliminating the federal deficit financing.
C.)diminishing people’s income inequality.
D.)reducing unemploymentto the utmost.
Text 3
   Remember the days when companies such as Microsoft and Mc-Kinsey took immense satisfaction from subjecting job candidates to mind-crunching strategy sessions? If you thought that was rough, imagine an interview in which no amount of research or questioning of insiders will help. Imagine in­stead that all you can do is have a healthy breakfast, pick out your nicest suit,and hope for the best. In the new interview, they’re not just testing what you know. They’re also testing who you are.
   It’s called the situational interview, and it’s quickly becoming a must in the job-seeking world. In the post-Enron culture of caution, corporations are focusing on an obvious insight: that a gold-plat­ed resume and winning personality are about as accurate in determining job performance as Wall Street analysts are in picking stocks. Now, with shareholder scrutiny, hiring slowdowns,and expense-reduc­ing, no manager can afford to hire the wrong person. Hundreds of companies are switching to the new methods. Whereas the conventional interview has been found to beonly 7% accurate in predicting job performance, situational interviews deliver a rating of 54% — the most of any interviewing tool.
   The situational technique’s superiority stems from its ability to trip up even the wittiest of inter­viewees. Of course, every applicant must display a healthy dose of occupational know-how, but behav­ior and ethical backbone play a big role. For example, a prospective analyst at a Wall Street bank might have to face, say, a customer with an account argument. It’s not happening on paper, but in real time — with managers and experts watching nearby. The interviewer plays the role of a fierce customer on the phone, angry about money last when a trade wasn’t executed on time. It’s set up as an obvious mistake on the banker’s part.
Interviewers watch the candidates’ reactions: how they process the complex account information, their ability to talk the client down, what their body language displays about their own shortcomings, and which words they choose. In this instance, not being honest about the mistake or showing anger

本文来源：https://shitiku.jxxyjl.com/kaoyan/1408.html