Most economists in the
seem captivated by the spell of the free market. Consequently, nothing seems
good or normal that does not accord with the requirements of the free market. A
price that is determined by the seller or, for that
matter, established by anyone other than the aggregate of
consumers seems pernicious. Accordingly, it requires a major
act of will to think of price-fixing (the determination of prices by the
seller) as both “normal” and having a valuable economic function. In fact,
price-fixing is normal in all industrialized societies because the industrial
system itself provides, as an effortless consequence of its own development,
the price-fixing that it requires. Modern industrial planning requires and
rewards great size. Hence, a comparatively small number of large firms will be
competing for the same group of consumers. That each large firm will act with
consideration of its own needs and thus avoid selling its products for more
than its competitors charge is commonly recognized by advocates of free-market
economic theories. But each large firm will also act with full consideration of
the needs that it has in common with the other large firms competing for the
same customers. Each large firm will thus avoid significant price-cutting,
because price-cutting would be prejudicial to the common interest in a stable
demand for products. Most economists do not see price-fixing when it occurs
because they expect it to be brought about by a number of explicit agreements
among large firms; it is not.
Moreover, those economists who argue
that allowing the free market to operate without interference is the most
efficient method of establishing prices have not considered the economies of
non-socialist countries other than the
price-fixing, usually in an overt fashion.
公开的方式
Formal price-fixing by cartel and informal
price-fixing by agreements covering the members of an industry are commonplace.
Were there something peculiarly efficient about the free market and inefficient
about price-fixing, the countries that have avoided the first and used the
second would have suffered drastically in their economic development. There is
no indication that they have.
Socialist industry also works within
a framework of controlled prices. In the early
began to give firms and industries some of the flexibility in adjusting prices
that a more informal evolution has accorded the capitalist system. Economists
in the
have hailed the change as a return to the free market. But Soviet firms are no more subject to prices
established by a free market over which they exercise little influence than are
capitalist firms; rather, Soviet firms have been given the power to fix prices.
6. According to the author, price-fixing in non-socialist countries
is often
(A) accidental but
productive
(B) illegal but useful
(C) legal and innovative
(D) traditional and rigid
(E) intentional and
widespread
3. The author’s attitude toward “Most economists in the
(A) spiteful and envious
(B) scornful and
denunciatory
(C) critical and
condescending
(D) ambivalent but deferential
(E) uncertain but interested
文章里面说的就是non-socialist啊
就是intentional and overt
屈尊。作者不同意这种观点，却又来客观详细的评论这个观点，就是有一种屈尊的态度
关键是别的都太不合适了。scornful and denunciatory程度太高了。我觉得只有当年批判走资派的大字报可以称得上这两个词
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |