D. your hunger and thirsty problems in the Macdonald’s
C
Why doesn’t the unemployment rate ever reach zero? Economists, who generally believe that supply tends to meet demand, have long thought about this question. Even in good times, i.e. not now, there are people who can’t find work. And even in bad times, i.e. now, there are job openings. With over 14 million people out of work and looking for a job, you would think every available job would be filled. But that’s not the case. Not now and not ever.
On Monday, the Nobel Prize committee awarded the prize for economics to the three scholars who have done the most to explain this phenomenon. Two of the winners are Americans, Peter Diamond of MIT and Dale Mortensen of Northwestern. The third winner is Christopher Pissarides, who teaches at the London School of Economics and was born on Cyprus.
Like most of economics, what they have found about why the jobless and ready-employers don’t find each other seems obvious. You have to find out there is job opening you are interested in. Employers need to get resumes (简历). It takes a while for both employers and employees to make the decision that this is what they want. And these guys came up with a frame-work to study the problem of why people stay unemployed longer than they should and what can be done about it.
So what would today’s Nobel Prize winners do to solve the current problem of the unemployed? And does the awarding of the prize contribute to the politicians’ lowering joblessness?
Speaking from his north London home, Pissarides told The Associated Press the announcement came as “a complete surprise” though his work had already helped shape thinking on both sides of the Atlantic.
For example, the New Deal for Young People, a British government policy aimed at getting 18-24-year-olds back on the job market after long periods of unemployment, “is very much based on our work,” he said.
“One of the key things we found is that it is important to make sure that people do not stay unemployed too long so they don’t lose their feel for the labor force,” Pissarides told reporters in London. “The ways of dealing with this need not be expensive training – it could be as simple as providing work experience.”
63. According to the writer, which is true about finding jobs?
A. It is always difficult to find a job.
B. Everyone can find a job in good times.
C. Contrary to popular belief, it is easier to find a job in bad times.
D. It is possible to find a job even in times as bad as now.
64. What is it that leads to their winning the prize?
A. They have found the reason for unemployment.
B. They have put forward a set of ideas to deal with unemployment.
C. They have found out why people don’t want to be employed.
D. They have long studied the problem of unemployment.
65. Which of the following statements is NOT true according to the passage?
A. Pissarides thinks his work surprising.
B. The work of Pissarides has influenced many economists.
C. Some of the winners’ ideas have been put into practice.
D. It is probable that unemployed young people in Britain benefit from Pissarides’ work.
66. According to Pissarides, _________ is effrctive in dealing with unemployment.
A. spending large sums of money on training
B. teaching some knowledge of economics
C. providing work experience
D. keeping people unemployed for some time
D
Are some people born clever, and others born stupid? Or is intelligence developed by our environment and our experiences? Strangely enough, the answer to both these questions is yes. To some extent our intelligence is given us at birth, and no amount of special education can make a genius out of a child born with low intelligence. On the other hand, a child who lives in a boring environment will develop his intelligence less than one who lives in rich and varied surroundings. Thus the limits of a person's intelligence are fixed at birth, but whether or not he reaches those limits will depend on his environment. This view, now held by most experts, can be supported in a number of ways.
It is easy to show that intelligence is to some extent something we are born with. The closer the blood relationship between two people, the closer they are likely to be in intelligence. Thus if we take two unrelated people at random(随机地) from the population,it is likely that their degrees of intelligence will be completely different. If on the other hand we take two identical (完全相同的) twins they will very likely be as intelligent as each other. Relations like brothers and sisters, parents and children, usually have similar intelligence, and this clearly suggests that intelligence depends on birth.
Imagine now that we take two identical twins and put them in different environments. We might send one, for example, to a university and the other to a factory where the work is boring. We would soon find differences in intelligence developing, and this indicates that environment as well as birth playsa part. This conclusion is also suggested by the fact that people who live in close contact with each other, but who are not related at all, are likely to have similar degrees of intelligence.
- 北京四中高三英语期中试题
- › 北京四中高二地理期中考试题
- › 北京四中高三英语期中试题
- › 北京四中高三英语期中测试卷
- › 北京四中高三数学期中试题（文）
- › 北京四中高三数学期中试题（理）
- › 2016北京四中期中地理试题及答案
- › 北京四中2016学年上学期初中九年级化学期中考试
- › 北京四中小升初语文测试题
- › 北京四中小升初面试题
- › 北京四中小升初综合素质面试题及相关解析
- › 小升初必备:北京四中小升初面试题摘选
- › 北京四中小升初面试您了解多少
- 在百度中搜索相关文章：北京四中高三英语期中试题
- 在谷歌中搜索相关文章：北京四中高三英语期中试题
- 在soso中搜索相关文章：北京四中高三英语期中试题
- 在搜狗中搜索相关文章：北京四中高三英语期中试题