ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 4816|回复: 23
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[阅读小分队] 揽瓜阁阅读做题小分队 第184天 政府公交补贴

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2021-10-25 19:43:12 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
请大家在本帖回复:
1. 文章大概结构
2. 自己写的答案

解析+文章翻译明晚微信群里公布

报名活动,加微信号killgmat

关注考什么试微信公众号~获取第一时间考试新闻,心经和经验分享
Transit privatization is highly controversial, with proponents claiming great potential benefits and detractors pointing to cases where privatization has been very problematic. One critical consideration in this argument is the concept of merit good. The rationale behind this concept is that governments should guarantee basic service in public transportation to deprived customer groups despite the fact that it is economically irrational.

Today, the question among most observers is not whether public transportation should be subsidized, but what the optimal level of subsidy should be. All public transportation systems need some degree of subsidy to run, but some are more privatized than others. The U.S. air transportation system is an example where “privatization” has worked well: very little government subsidy goes to the airlines, but tickets are both inexpensive and readily available.

However, in markets where there is no economic incentive for airlines to fly, the government has instituted a program called Essential Air Service. Unlike airline privatization as a whole, this program, a holdover from the days of bloated airline regulation, has been a disastrous example of overspending and inefficiency. Across Alaska and many other rural states like Maine and North Dakota, airports and airlines are subsidized so that unprofitable routes are flown in the name of “merit good.” However, in most of these places, airports are neither required nor important to deprived customer groups; they are simply an economic boon to important special interest groups that support congressmen and senators.
While there is a place for subsidy and even direct government involvement beyond the required minimum – when true merit good issues are concerned – most transportation systems are better today after privatization than they were in the days of total government control. All you need to do is look at the “Essential Air Service” program to understand the wastefulness and inefficiency that existed in the 60’s and 70’s when most public transportation systems were under full government control.

1. The author would most likely agree with government subsidies beyond the required minimum for which of the following companies:
A. a steel manufacturing plant that cannot remain profitable without infrastructure improvement and higher steel prices.
B. a bus company that services remote towns in which many deprived people live and that cannot be profitable without subsidies.
C. a train company that services many affluent summer communities and will stop service without appropriate subsidies.
D. a bio-medical company that will make an important vaccines for rare diseases but needs access to start-up money.
E. an airline that services the major U.S. markets but is failing to compete with its rivals, some of which operate in the Essential Air Service program.

2. All of the following can be properly inferred from the passage EXCEPT:
A. A majority of public transportation systems are better under privatization than they were under government control.
B. Some public transportation systems in the U.S. can be run without subsidies.
C. Most observers agree that there should be some degree of government subsidy in public transportation.
D. Most public transportation systems were under government control in the 60’s and 70’s.
E. Many Essential Air Service flights are on unprofitable routes in rural states.

3. The author’s highlighted statement at the end of the passage assumes which of the following:
A. The Essential Air Service program is not drastically different than the government airline programs in the 60’s and 70’s.
B. Government subsidy programs have not improved dramatically since the 60’s and 70’s.
C. Public transportation systems are not better today than they were in the 60’s and 70’s.
D. The Essential Air Service program is not going to change dramatically and remove some of the most inefficient routes.
E. The need for the Essential Air Service program has not increased dramatically over the past few years.


参考答案:BBA

本帖子中包含更多资源

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有帐号?立即注册

x
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2021-10-25 20:53:37 发自 iPhone | 只看该作者
交通私有化有争议,但我(作者)认为私有化就是好

有时候确实需要政府补贴

补贴有时候就是浪费钱

总结一下,我支持私有化

整体来看,我支持私有化以及我为什么支持私有化

BBE
板凳
发表于 2021-10-25 22:52:31 发自手机 Web 版 | 只看该作者
來了
地板
发表于 2021-10-26 12:45:32 发自 iPad 设备 | 只看该作者
5#
发表于 2021-10-26 15:48:38 | 只看该作者
之前交通私有化有争议,现在争议点在政府资助多少给公共交通
美国的就私有化程度高且资助少,但EAS就又花钱又没意义
总体来说私有化后交通好了很多
BBA
6#
发表于 2021-10-26 16:43:55 | 只看该作者
看一下!               
7#
发表于 2021-10-26 16:52:25 | 只看该作者
BBB
1. A controversial about transit privatization whose critical consideration is merit good.
2. The air transportation system is good example in which the privatization function well
3. A program subsided by government is inefficient
4. Overall the privatization is good
8#
发表于 2021-10-26 18:27:06 | 只看该作者
transit privation controversial
争议点-merit good,
today-what level of subsidy should be
air-EAS 不好,只是政治手段
privation 更好
BBB
9#
发表于 2021-10-26 18:30:07 | 只看该作者
第一段提出交通私有化争论中的一个观点
第二段进一步支持完善支持私有化,提出现在的争议在于政府资助多少,并解释举例
第三段举反例eas说明政府控制及没效又花费多
第四段总结私有化使交通情况变好
BBA
10#
发表于 2021-10-27 09:03:01 | 只看该作者
同意!               
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-30 11:38
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部