[悦读] 柒月石日起悦读寂静整理（共45只。更新至8\3-20:15）

jackhu001

顶

Lisagua

thank u

Cynthia琳

多谢分享

wendyzhuoqi

感谢

wendyzhuoqi

谢谢啊 辛苦啦

sevenshining

Planter-legislators of the post-Civil War southern United States enacted crop lien laws stipulating that those who advanced cash or supplies necessary to plant a crop would receive, as security, a claim, or lien, on the crop produced.  In doing so, planters, most of whom were former slaveholders, sought access to credit from merchants and control over nominally free laborers--former slaves freed by the victory of the northern Union over the southern Confederacy in the United States Civil War.  They hoped to reassure merchants that despite the emancipation of the slaves, planters would produce crops and pay debts.  lanters planned to use their supply credit to control their workers, former slaves who were without money to rent land or buy supplies. Planters imagined continuation of the pre-Civil War economic hierarchy:  merchants supplying landlords, landlords supplying laborers, and laborers producing crops from which their scant wages and planters' profits would come, allowing planters to repay advances.  Lien laws frequently had unintended consequences, however, thwarting the planter fantasy of mastery without slavery.  The newly freed workers, seeking to become self-employed tenant farmers rather than wage laborers, made direct arrangements with merchants for supplies.  Lien laws, the centerpiece of a system designed to create a dependent labor force, became the means for workers, with alternative means of supply advances, to escape that dependence.   这个是第四篇的内容，prep阅读里面的

saber0425

ddddddddddddddd

sally77589

Planter-legislators of the post-Civil War southern United States enacted crop lien laws stipulating that those who advanced cash or supplies necessary to plant a crop would receive, as security, a claim, or lien, on the crop produced.  In doing so, planters, most of whom were former slaveholders, sought access to credit from merchants and control over nominally free laborers--former slaves freed by the victory of the northern Union over the southern Confederacy in the United States Civil War.  They hoped to reassure merchants that despite the emancipation of the slaves, planters would produce crops and pay debts.  lanters planned to use their supply credit to control their workers, former slaves who were without money to rent land or buy supplies. Planters imagined continuation of the pre-Civil War economic hierarchy:  merchants supplying landlords, landlords supplying laborers, and laborers producing crops from which their scant wages and planters' profits would come, allowing planters to repay advances.  Lien laws frequently had unintended consequences, however, thwarting the planter fantasy of mastery without slavery.  The newly freed workers, seeking to become self-employed tenant farmers rather than wage laborers, made direct arrangements with merchants for supplies.  Lien laws, the centerpiece of a system designed to create a dependent labor force, became the means for workers, with alternative means of supply advances, to escape that dependence.   这个是第四篇的内容，prep阅读里面的

-- by 会员 sevenshining (2012/7/19 16:57:49)

灰常感谢~！

sevenshining

好像又找到一篇 JJ里12、公司缩小规模的原因 对应的是GWD7里的一篇，但是第一个JJ和第二个JJ讲的好像不是不一样的文章，个人猜测可能一个topic的变体Firmstraditionally claim that they downsize (i.e., make permanent personnel cuts)for economic reasons, laying off supposedly unnecessary staff in an attempt tobecome more efficient and competitive. Organization theory would explain this reasoning as an example of the“economic rationality” that it assumes underlies all organizationalactivities.  There is evidence that firmsbelieve they are behaving rationally whenever they downsize; yet recentresearch has shown that the actual economic effects of downsizing are often negativefor firms.  Thus, organization theorycannot adequately explain downsizing; non-economic factors must also beconsidered. One such factor is the evolution of downsizing into a powerfulbusiness myth:  managers simply believethat downsizing is efficacious. Moreover, downsizing nowadays is greeted favorably by the businesspress; the press often refers to soaring stock prices of downsizing firms (eventhough research shows that stocks usually rise only briefly after downsizingand then suffer a prolonged decline). Once viewed as a sign of desperation,downsizing is now viewed as a signal that firms are serious about competing inthe global marketplace; such signals are received positively by key actors—financial analysts, consultants, shareholders—who supply firms with vitalorganizing resources.  Thus, even ifdownsizers do not become economically more efficient, downsizing’s mythicproperties give them added prestige in the business community, enhancing their survivalprospects.

jelly1912

多谢楼主