CD11里面的80年代美国经济增长变缓原因何在

uvoice

1.         T-3-Q33-Q36经济增长率

(This passage is excerpted from material published in 1997)

Whereas United States eco-

nomic productivity grew at an annual

rate of 3 percent from 1945 to 1965,

Line                      it has grown at an annual rate of

(5)                        only about 1 percent since the early

1970’s. What might be preventing

higher productivity growth? Clearly,

the manufacturing sector of the

economy cannot be blamed. Since

(10)                      1980, productivity improvements

in manufacturing have moved the

United States from a position of

acute decline in manufacturing

to one of world prominence.

(15)                      Manufacturing, however, consti-

tutes a relatively small proportion

of the economy. In 1992, goods-

producing businesses employed

only 19.1 percent of American

(20)                      workers, whereas service-producing

businesses employed 70 percent.

Although the service sector has

grown since the late 1970’s, its

productivity growth has declined.

(25)                      Several explanations have been

Offered for this declined and for the

discrepancy in productivity growth

between the manufacturing and

service sectors. One is that tra-

(30)                      ditional measures fail to reflect

service-sector productivity growth

because it has been concentrated

in improved quality of services.

Yet traditional measures of manu-

(35)                      facturing productivity have shown

significant increases despite the

undermeasurement of quality,

whereas service productivity has

continued to stagnate. Others argue

(40)                      that since the 1970’s, manufacturing

workers, faced with strong foreign

competition, have learned to work

more efficiently in order to keep their

jobs in the United States, but service

(45)                      workers, who are typically under

less global competitive pressure,

have not. However, the pressure on

manufacturing workers in the United

States to work more efficiently has

(50)                      generally been overstated, often

for political reasons. In fact, while

some manufacturing jobs have been

lost due to foreign competition, many

more have been lost simply because

(55)                      of slow growth in demand for manu-

factured goods.

       Yet another explanation blames

the federal budget deficit: if it were

lower, interest rate would be lower

(55)                      too, thereby increasing investment

in the development of new technol-

ogies, which would spur productivity

growth in the service sector. There

is, however, no dearth of techno-

(60)                      logical resources, rather, managers

in the service sector fail to take

advantage of widely available skills

and machines. High productivity

growth levels attained by leading-

(65)                      edge service companies indicate

that service sector managers

who wisely implement available

technology and choose skillful

workers can significantly improve

(70)                      their companies’ productivity.

The culprits for service-sector

productivity stagnation are the

forces－such as corporate

takeovers and unnecessary

(75)                      governmental regulation－that

distract managers from the task

of making optimal use of available

resources.

 

T-3-Q33

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the budget deficit explanation for the discrepancy mentioned in line 27?

1. Research shows that the federal budget deficit has traditionally caused service companies to invest less money in research and development of new technologies.

2. New technologies have been shown to play a significant role in companies that have been able to increase their service productivity.

3. In both service sector and manufacturing, productivity improvements are concentrated in gains in quality.

4. The service sector typically requires larger investments in new technology in order to maintain productivity growth than dose manufacturing

5. High interest rates tend to slow the growth of manufacturing productivity as much as they slow the growth of service-sector productivity in the United States.

T-3-Q34

The passage states which of the following about the effect of foreign competition on the American manufacturing sector since the 1970’s?

1. It has often been exaggerated.

2. It has not been a direct cause of job loss.

3. It has in large part been responsible for the subsequent slowing of productivity growth.

4. It has slowed growth in the demand for manufactured goods in the United States.

5. It has been responsible for the majority of American jobs lost in manufacturing.

第一个选E,第二个A

那位NN能解释一下，为什么第一个选E？第二个题我觉得应该选 B， 大家怎么看？

 

will_kk

文章大概是这样的:文章整体是讨论70年代后美国生产力增长乏力的原因

第一段:主要是说,乏力不是制造业的原因,作者提出了两个支撑点,1,制造业80年代把美国变成了世界领先;2制造业占很小的比例

然后得出作者的观点,乏力是服务业的原因

第二段,主要是在例举几种对为什么造成服务业生产力增长乏力的解释,然后一一驳斥

1,是说统计的手段落后,就是measurement的问题,统计不出服务业的增长,作者说不对,理由是制造业也是underestimate的问题,但是人家照样涨

2,是说由于服务业竞争不如制造业强,员工所以没有压力促使其提高效率,作者说错,理由是,制造业的员工失业都是需求不足造成

3,是说财政赤字还是什么导致了投资不足,投资不足是服务业的技术没有提高,作者说乱讲,理由是,当时的先进技术都没有被充分利用,那些服务业公司的maneger一天就被那些杂七杂吧的事distract了,没空管利用新技术的事情

上面是我当时回另一篇帖子对于文章的分析,希望有帮助

对于你的两个问题,第一题,就是对于第三段第一个explanation的取非

第二题,对应于文章的overstate

uvoice

多谢kk了~~~感动中，分析得这么详细。

但是我还有个问题，第二题，我觉得题目中说的是，制造业因为外来竞争导致员工效率提高使overstated，为什么不能选b？因为外来竞争不是导致失业的主要原因，（向你上面说的，是因为需求不足造成的）？这是我的疑惑。

will_kk

MM,你定位到原文看看,你就可以知道B是不准确的,原文说的是什么?注意作者承认了"some"失业的确是因为foreign competition,再说的many more怎么怎么样

对于A,其实这个就是正确答案的模式often是generally的改写,exagerate是overstate的改写

做题的时候注意答案是怎么改写原文的~

uvoice

感谢kk~~~~~随便问一下kk，你考前作prep的sc效果如何？我很受打击，错了一半。