passage 4

The world is going through the biggest wave of mergers and acquisitions ever witnessed. The process sweeps from hyperactive America to Europe and reaches the emerging countries with unsurpassed might. Many in these countries are looking at this process and worrying: "Won't the wave of business concentration turn into an uncontrollable anti-competitive force?"
　　There's no question that the big are getting bigger and more powerful. Multinational corporations accounted for less than 20% of international trade in 1982. Today the figure is more than 25% and growing rapidly. International affiliates account for a fast-growing segment of production in economies that open up and welcome foreign investment. In Argentina, for instance, after the reforms of the early 1990s, multinationals went from 43% to almost 70% of the industrial production of the 200 largest firms. This phenomenon has created serious concerns over the role of smaller economic firms, of national businessmen and over the ultimate stability of the world economy.
　　I believe that the most important forces behind the massive M&A wave are the same that underlie the globalization process: falling transportation and communication costs, lower trade and investment barriers and enlarged markets that require enlarged operations capable of meeting customers' demands. All these are beneficial, not detrimental, to consumers. As productivity grows, the world's wealth increases.
　　Examples of benefits or costs of the current concentration wave are scanty. Yet it is hard to imagine that the merger of a few oil firms today could re-create the same threats to competition that were feared nearly a century ago in the US, when the Standard Oil trust was broken up. The mergers of telecom companies, such as World Com, hardly seem to bring higher prices for consumers or a reduction in the pace of technical progress. On the contrary, the price of communications is coming down fast. In cars, too, concentration is increasing — witness Daimler and Chrysler, Renault and Nissan — but it does not appear that consumers are being hurt.
　　Yet the fact remains that the merger movement must be watched. A few weeks ago, Alan Greenspan warned against the megamergers in the banking industry. Who is going to supervise, regulate and operate as lender of last resort with the gigantic banks that are being created? Won't multinationals shift production from one place to another when a nation gets too strict about infringements to fair competition? And should one country take upon itself the role of "defending competition" on issues that affect many other nations, as in the US vs. Microsoft case?
63. What is the typical trend of businesses today?
　　[A] To take in more foreign funds.
　　[B] To invest more abroad.
　　[C] To combine and become bigger.
　　[D] To trade with more countries.
64. According to the author, one of the driving forces behind M&A wave is ________.
　　[A] the greater customer demands
　　[B] a surplus supply for the market
　　[C] a growing productivity
　　[D] the increase of the world's wealth
65. From paragraph 4 we can infer that ________.
　　[A] the increasing concentration is certain to hurt consumers
　　[B] WorldCom serves as a good example of both benefits and costs
　　[C] the costs of the globalization process are enormous
　　[D] the Standard Oil trust might have threatened competition
66. Toward the new business wave, the writer's attitude can be said to be ________.
　　[A] optimistic
　　[B] objective
　　[C] pessimistic
　　[D] biased

passage 5

When I decided to quit my full time employment it never occurred to me that I might become a part of a new international trend. A lateral move that hurt my pride and blocked my professional progress prompted me to abandon my relatively high profile career although, in the manner of a disgraced government minister, I covered my exit by claiming "I wanted to spend more time with my family".
　　Curiously, some two-and-a-half years and two novels later, my experiment in what the Americans term "downshifting" has turned my tired excuse into an absolute reality. I have been transformed from a passionate advocate of the philosophy of "have it all", preached by Linda Kelsey for the past seven years in the pages of she magazine, into a woman who is happy to settle for a bit of everything.
　　I have discovered, as perhaps Kelsey will after her much-publicized resignation from the editorship of She after a build-up of stress, that abandoning the doctrine of "juggling your life", and making the alternative move into "downshifting" brings with it far greater rewards than financial success and social status. Nothing could persuade me to return to the kind of life Kelsey used to advocate and I once enjoyed: 12-hour working days, pressured deadlines, the fearful strain of office politics and the limitations of being a parent on "quality time".
　　In America, the move away from juggling to a simpler, less materialistic lifestyle is a well-established trend. Downshifting — also known in America as "voluntary simplicity" — has, ironically, even bred a new area of what might be termed anti-consumerism. There are a number of bestselling downshifting self-help books for people who want to simplify their lives; there are newsletters, such as The Tightwad Gazette, that give hundreds of thousands of Americans useful tips on anything from recycling their cling-film to making their own soap; there are even support groups for those who want to achieve the mid-'90s equivalent of dropping out.
　　While in America the trend started as a reaction to the economic decline — after the mass redundancies caused by downsizing in the late '80s — and is still linked to the politics of thrift, in Britain, at least among the middle class downshifters of my acquaintance, we have different reasons for seeking to simplify our lives.
　　For the women of my generation who were urged to keep juggling through the '80s, downshifting in the mid-'90s is not so much a search for the mythical good life — growing your own organic vegetables, and risking turning into one — as a personal recognition of your limitations.
67. Which of the following is true according to paragraph 1?
　　[A] Full-time employment is a new international trend.
　　[B] The writer was compelled by circumstances to leave her job.
　　[C] "A lateral move" means stepping out of full-time employment.
　　[D] The writer was only too eager to spend more time with her family.
68. The writer's experiment shows that downshifting ________.
　　[A] enables her to realize her dream
　　[B] helps her mold a new philosophy of life
　　[C] prompts her to abandon her high social status
　　[D] leads her to accept the doctrine of She magazine
69. "Juggling one's life" probably means living a life characterized by ________.
　　[A] non-material

上一页  [1] [2] [3] [4] 下一页