PREP1-Q57, essay#17

Essay #17.  549   (23848-!-item-!-188;#058&00549-00)

Many people believe that because wages are lower in developing countries than in developed countries, competition from developing countries in goods traded internationally will soon eliminate large numbers of jobs in developed countries.  Currently, developed countries' advanced technology results in higher productivity, which accounts for their higher wages.  Advanced technology is being transferred ever more speedily across borders, but even with the latest technology, productivity and wages in developing countries will remain lower than in developed countries for many years because developed countries have better infrastructure and better-educated workers.  When productivity in a developing country does catch up, experience suggests that wages there will rise.  Some individual firms in developing countries have raised their productivity but kept their wages (which are influenced by average productivity in the country's economy) low.  However, in a developing country's economy as a whole, productivity improvements in goods traded internationally are likely to cause an increase in wages.  Furthermore, if wages are not allowed to rise, the value of the country's currency will appreciate, which (from the developed countries' point of view) is the equivalent of increased wages in the developing country.  And although in the past a few countries have deliberately kept their currencies undervalued, that is now much harder to do in a world where capital moves more freely.

The passage suggests that if the movement of capital in the world were restricted, which of the following would be likely?

(A) Advanced technology could move more quickly from developed countries to developing countries.

(B) Developed countries could compete more effectively for jobs with developing countries.

(C) A country's average wages could increase without significantly increasing the sophistication of its technology or the value of its currency.

(D) A country's productivity could increase without significantly increasing the value of its currency.

(E) Workers could obtain higher wages by increasing their productivity.

答案是(D), 想不明白为什么不是(E)呢??

我的推论是这样的

The movement of capital is restricted >> Some countries can keep values of their currencies undervalued >> Values of their currencies will not appreciate >> Productivity improvement is likely to cause an increase in wages. >> Workers could obtain higher wages by increasing their productivity.

请问哪里出错了呢?? 请高人指点一下

我刚好做到这里, 定位在最后一句,

And although in the past a few countries have deliberately kept their currencies undervalued, that is now much harder to do in a world where capital moves more freely.

past a few countries have deliberately kept their currencies undervalued= (that  ) :is harder to do  if capital move more freely

     (答案D)                                                                                      =  : could do                    if          相反: restrict

其实就是最后一句条件取非, 问结构.

我表达得不好,我离高人还很远, 不知道你能不能看明白.

sorry, 还是看不太明白....我也是用取非做的，换句说就是那些国家就可以使他们的货币价值低估

原句是说:

1. 透过生产力的增加，有可能会有加薪。

2. 就算没有加薪，那些国家的币值也会上升。

3. 币值的上升等于变相的加薪

4. 虽然有些国家处心积虑的使他们国家的币值低估，可是目前在资本自由流通的市场是很难达成的。

取非倒推回去:

1. 在资本被限制的市场，有些国家可以使他们国家的币值低估

2. 币值不会上升，所以透过生产力增加会加薪

还是搞不清楚我的思路哪里出错了??? 有哪位高人可以帮忙指点吗??

在资本被限制的市场，有些国家可以使他们国家的币值低估-->市值被低估 等於不加薪 (答案e錯)

(币值的上升等于变相的加薪)

谢谢楼上的回覆....可是我还是不太懂

文章不是说透过促进生产力，员工很有可能获得加薪

而如果不加薪的话，货币就会升值

>>> 那如果这个国家可以故意贬低货币市值，那不就代表员工可以透过生产力的增加获得加薪吗??

有哪位高手可以再帮忙指点一下?? 感激不尽.....

确实是对最后一句话的取非。取非后这样的：movement of capital in the world were restricted－》 few countries can deliberately kept their currencies undervalued

再对比选项，AB肯定错，C中和technology无关，E 错在 政府不让货币升值的原因就是不希望提高工资，也就得不到 Workers could obtain higher wages 

只有D对，产量无论如何都能提高的！！

UP:>

D和E还是不是很明白....