V3 by 狼来也(770) 其中一个问题是根据文中促成gray economy发展的因素,那个选项其策略类似于可以阻止gray economy发展的策略,两个选项比较纠结,一个是教练给运动员们一个总的比赛方针,但没规定他们面对面单挑的战术,另一个是学校制定 sufficient for learning的规章但该规章又不至于严格到促使学生去do stealth
V6 第一段说明他发生在noncompliance with governmentregulations,注意第二句的"并非是illegal的",有考题,相对应答案中的"unlawful" 第二段主要说这个情形的衡量指标在于GDP,其中有提到electric,问他的作用是?之后便述明采用GDP是有其缺陷的,仅能衡量量化的数据.
 1: The introduction of Grey GDP.Because of he rigorous government regulation Grey GDP contributes more in threecountries( exemplified by the author) than other three country (Canada, USA,Belgium?, Switzerland)  2:The Grey Industry could onlydeveloped in individual or in small groups. Since only under such small scalecan the grey industry stay away of the scrutinize of the government. However,being such small group, the grey industry cannot get new technology. (Q3: Whichdesire is limited because of the scrutinize of the government? A: Newtechnology and market) V2:bycorn800 第一篇是讲灰色经济greyeconomy,大概是已经掉到低分区了吧,挺简单的??桑心?? 第一段大概是下了个定义,灰色经济就是哪些游走在法规边缘的一些经济体。 第二段先讲怎么衡量灰色经济,最普遍的是用GDP的一个portion,而其程度和国家经济法规是否繁杂有关,讲了六个国家的对比,六个国家中有theUnited States, Canada, Switzerland是正面的例子,反面例子有Greece以及另外两个国家,忘了。此处有细节题。正面国家政策开明所以灰色经济少,反面国家机构冗杂,灰色经济多。继续说国家应该采取什么态度,主要是既要管理,又不能扼杀。 第三段是说灰色经济体多是只有几个人,规模小,效率低,不能采取新技术,举了个marketingstrategy的例子吧。
Q1: Grey GDP in which country contribute morethan which country? A: ... contributesmore than Switzerland) Q2: Which ofthe following is analogy to the measure to resolve the Grey GDP? A: A principal who make a rule in the school, which won'tbe violated by the students, but it is still valid.) Q3:infer 就是国家的间 哪个经济更健康 题里说过经济发达和 g e 的关系然后说了 greek 还有一些国家不像美国加拿大什么的就选greek比美国健康 Q4:问哪个类似文中的一个什么关系 文中大体就是越细致的政策越有利于减少g e(定位第二段中间)我选的答案是就是什么零售商对商品和流通什么的一堆规定 Q5:为什么会导致ge 的情况没政府预计的严重 答案是很多企业为了…… 不让给雇佣的员工登记…… 第二段中后面 (答案12由 740提供)
版本1 另一个是gray economy,在grey economy中,more costly and complex regulation, more GDP,所以在富有的国家中,列举几个国家有希腊西班牙,他们排在前面,而美国意大利却在后面 第二段好像是怎么 offset grey economy 说有些发达国家GDP中有一部分就是灰色经济带来的,第一段提到是不是illegal,有题。第二段提到有三个国家包括Italy属于灰色经济,跟美国瑞士比较,有题。 但第一段说完发达国家GDP中有一部分就是灰色经济带来的,就开始对比国家
版本2 灰色经济那篇,很容易,基本上原来JJ都说到了。补充一道类比题,国家如果想减少grey economy应该采取与下列哪项类似的措施?其中有两个易混淆,一个是c或者d项说学校应该实行比较严格的管理但是不至于让学生为了逃避管理而有偷偷摸摸的行为;还有E项说图书馆应该实行严格的借阅管理制度但是对于不太严重的那些超期不还的人可以refrain the fine。我选C/d那项。
版本3 第一段:提出什麼叫做gray economy,提到雖然這並不是illegal,但是noncompliance with the government 第二段,說政府的規定越complex那就越可能造成gray economy,還有提到怎樣測量,由GDP跟electricity(由商業要用的電力來測量),然後說在哪些經濟很強的國家中gray economy占的比重相當大(Greece, Italy…)但在哪些佔的比重比較少(U.S., Canada, Switzerlad…) 第三段,提到其實這些組成gray economy的國家大都是小公司或企業,並且提到他們較不可能採用新科技。 問題一:infer題,如果政府要減輕gray economy會採用下列那種類似策略,這題不簡單,答案都臭長。 (A) 說球隊教練只提出策略,但場上打球則讓球員發揮。 (C) 說學校採用了提高教學品質的方式,但卻不會到會讓學生stealth的地步。 這是我覺得比較有可能的兩個設計,個人選C。 問題二:細節題,哪些國家會有比較嚴格或複雜的規定,請定位國家舉例那邊,答案是兩個國家比,注意比較順序。 問題三:inter題,說那些造成gray economy的公司會有下列哪種情形之類的。我的答案是他們不會有太多的員工。
原文未缩减gitarrelieber– a CDer since 2003 730V37考后感:和考试原文还是相当接近 节选自TheEconomist (@ 18 June 2004) If so,then depending on your local laws you may have been participating in whateconomists call the "informal" or "grey" economy. Inessence, the grey economy consists of legal activities whose participants failto pay tax or comply with regulations. The informal (or "underground"or "parallel" economy) is often taken to mean something broader,including illegal activities such as prostitution and drug dealing as well,although there is no agreed strict definition.
The greyeconomy is often thought of as something found at the margins of poorcountries, such as a hawker stand in Thailand or a roadside vendor in Ghana.But that is misleading. Although it represents a greater share of total outputin poor countries, it exists in rich and poor places alike. Recent researchsuggests that the grey economy is growing. Moreover, a new study suggests thatit may be slowing the overall economic growth of developing countries.
By itsvery nature, the informal economy's size in any country is hard to observe. Ina paper published a couple of years ago ("Size and Measurement of theInformal Economy in 110Countries Around the World," World Bank WorkingPaper, July 2002), Friedrich Schneider, of the Johannes Kepler University ofLinz, exhaustively examined the ways of estimating it. There are two basicapproaches. The first is direct: you could ask people whether they dodge taxes,or look at the results of spot tax-audits. However, people are unlikely toconfess to breaking the law, and tax inspectors do not usually check on arandom sample of the population. So the second method, indirect detective-work,is better. For example, you might compare data on cash transactions orelectricity consumption with official output figures. If the use of cash orelectricity is growing much faster than the measured economy, this mightindicate that the informal share of total activity is rising.
Using such techniques, Mr. Schneider estimated that the informal economy indeveloping countries in 2000 was equivalent to 41% of their official GDP. InZimbabwe, the figure was 60%. In Brazil and Turkey, around half of non-farmworkers are in the informal sector. In OECD countries the share of the informaleconomy was lower, but far from negligible, at 18%.
There is little mystery about why the informal economy exists. There are a lotof advantages to operating in the shadows. For a start, there are no incometaxes to pay. Avoiding social-security charges, which often drive a chunkywedge between take-home pay and employers' wage bills, can both cut labourcosts and thicken wage packets. People can also save a fair bit by ignoringsafety, environmental and health rules, not to mention intellectual propertyrights.
Indeed, in cross-country comparisons, the more expensive and more complicatedare taxes and regulations, the bigger is the informal economy as a share ofGDP. That explains why, among rich countries, Spain, Greece, Italy and Belgiumhave some of the largest grey economies and why America, Canada and Switzerlandhave much smaller ones. In recent years, the growth in the grey market in somepoor countries may owe a lot to the International Monetary Fund's austerityprograms, which increase taxes and thus encourage many entrepreneurs to optout.
A booming grey economy sounds like good news, if only because many of theofficially jobless are in fact earning a living. So if the poorest are winning,who loses? The entire economy does, according to a new study by Diana Farrellof the McKinsey Global Institute. The price for having a large grey economy canbe much lower productivity. Grey firms tend to be small and want to stay thatway lest they come to the attention of the authorities. However, their smallscale limits their ability to make the most of new technology and businesspractices.
作者: 晨依Jacqueline 时间: 2013-3-5 21:32
顶起!作者: 493698202 时间: 2013-3-6 09:21
谢谢LZ!!!!!作者: lihaoyang 时间: 2013-3-6 10:29
up up up up up作者: 黑絔电视 时间: 2013-3-6 12:46
谢楼主啊!!!!作者: mhrenda 时间: 2013-3-6 17:12
由衷感谢作者: 晨依Jacqueline 时间: 2013-3-9 17:59
考古求确认作者: hyjxp 时间: 2013-3-16 13:06
up up up!!!!!!!!!