阅读理解
阅读理解
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic, however, is the notion that increased pressure on declining natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one field the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems unsympathetic. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries—the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agri-businesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crushing foreign indebtedness
Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modem economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary carefulness and self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental disaster which threaten our very existence.
A:Gross National Product is a safe measure for economic growth. B:Increasing natural resources will bring social well-being. C:Prosperity decline mostly accompanied by population growth. D:Growth does not necessarily result in prosperity.
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
A:Gross National Product is a safe measure for economic growth B:Diminishing natural resources will prove harmful to the well-being of humanity C:A decline in prosperity will inevitably lead to a growth in population D:Growth in population will be a chief threat to economic prosperity
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic:, however, is the notion that increased pressure on dwindling natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one arena the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth, other than population growth, in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems callous. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agribusinesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crush ing foreign indebtedness, the proceeds of which goes not into the development of the country but into the purchase of expensive cars and the buying of luxurious residence in Miami.Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the present context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modern economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary prudence and a self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental catastrophes which threaten our very existence.
A:the smooth functioning of the economic system is dependent on sustained prosperity B:economic growth have not relieved the poverty of the Third World countries C:growth in richer countries is achieved at the expense of the Third World countries D:the stages of economic growth cannot be superseded or modified by social mechanisms
Text 1
In most people’s mind, growth is associated with prosperity. We judge how well the economy is doing by the size of the Gross National Product (GNP), a measure, supposedly, of growth. Equally axiomatic, however, is the notion that increased pressure on declining natural resources must inevitably lead to a decline in prosperity, especially when accompanied by a growth in population. So, which is correct
What growth advocates mean, primarily, when they say growth is necessary for prosperity is that growth is necessary for the smooth functioning of the economic system. In one field the argument in favor of growth is particularly compelling and that is with regard to the Third World. To argue against growth in light of Third World poverty and degradation seems unsympathetic. But is it Could it be that growth, especially the growth of the wealthier countries, has contributed to the impoverishment, not the advancement, of Third World countries If not, how do we account for the desperate straits these countries find themselves in today after a century of dedication to growth
To see how this might be the case we must look at the impact of growth on Third World countries—the reality, not the abstract stages-of-economic-growth theory advocated through rose-colored glasses by academicians of the developed world. What good is growth to the people of the Third World if it means the conversion of peasant farms into mechanized agri-businesses producing commodities not for local consumption but for export, if it means the stripping of their land of its mineral and other natural treasures to the benefit of foreign investors and a handful of their local collaborators, if it means the assumption of a crushing foreign indebtedness
Admittedly, this is an oversimplification. But the point, I believe, remains valid: that growth in underdeveloped countries cannot simply be judged in the abstract; it must be judged based on the true nature of growth in these societies, on who benefits and who is harmed, on where growth is leading these people and where it has left them. When considered in this way, it just might be that in the pre sent context growth is more detrimental to the well-being of the wretched of the earth than beneficial.
So, do we need growth for prosperity Only the adoption of zero growth can provide the answer. But that is a test not easily undertaken. Modem economies are incredibly complex phenomena, a tribute to man’s ability to organize and a challenge to his ability to understand. Anything that affects their functioning, such as a policy of zero growth, should not be proposed without a wary carefulness and self-doubting humility. But if the prospect of leaping into the economic unknown is fear-inspiring, equally so is the prospect of letting that fear prevent us from acting when the failure to act could mean untold misery for future generations and perhaps environmental disaster which threaten our very existence.
A:Gross National Product is a safe measure for economic growth. B:Increasing natural resources will bring social well-being. C:Prosperity decline mostly accompanied by population growth. D:Growth does not necessarily result in prosperity.
There is much discussion today about whether economic growth is desirable. At an earlier period, our desire for material wealth may have been justified. Now, however, this desire for more than we need is causing serious problems. Even though we have good intentions, we may be producing too much, too fast.
Those who criticize economic growth argue that we must slow down. They believe that society is approaching certain limits on growth. These include the fixed supply of natural resources, the possible negative effects of industry on the natural environment, and the continuing increase in the world’s population. As society reaches these limits, economic growth can no longer continue, and th9 quality of life will decrease.
People who want more economic growth, on the other hand, argue that even at the present growth rate there are still many poor people in the world. These proponents of economic growth believe that only more growth can create the capital needed to improve the quality of life in the world. Furthermore, they argue that only continued growth can provide the financial resources required to protect our natural surroudings from industrialization.
This debate over the desirability of continued economic growth is of vital importance to business and industry. If those who argue against economic growth are correct, the problems they mention cannot be ignored. To find a solution, economists and the business community must pay attention to these problems and continue discussing them with one another.
A:the contradiction between economists and the business community B:the present debate on economic growth C:the advantages and disadvantages of economic growth D:the importance of the debate on economic growth
Passage Three
There is much discussion today about whether economic growth is desirable. At an earlier period, our desire for material wealth may have been justified. Now, however, this desire for more than we need is causing serious problems. Even though we have good intentions, we may be producing too much, too fast.
Those who criticize economic growth argue that we must slow down. They believe that society is approaching certain limits on growth. These include the fixed supply of natural resources, the possible negative effects of industry on the natural environment, and the continuing inertease in the world’s population. As society reaches these limits, economic growth can no longer continue, and the quality of life will decrease.
People who want more economic growth, on the other hand, argue that even at the present growth rate there are still many poor people in the world. These proponents of economic growth believe that only more growth can create the capital needed to improve the quality of life in the world. Furthermore, they argue that only continued growth can provide the financial resources required to protect our natural surroudings from industrialization.
This debate over the desirability of continued economic growth is of vital importance to business and industry. If those who argue against economic growth are correct, the problems they mention cannot be ignored. To find a solution, economists and the business community must pay attention to these problems and continue discussing them with one another.
A:the author describes the case as it is B:the author is for economic growth C:the author is against continued economic growth D:the author is very much worried about the problems caused by continued economic growth
Passage Three
There is much discussion today about whether economic growth is desirable. At an earlier period, our desire for material wealth may have been justified. Now, however, this desire for more than we need is causing serious problems. Even though we have good intentions, we may be producing too much, too fast.
Those who criticize economic growth argue that we must slow down. They believe that society is approaching certain limits on growth. These include the fixed supply of natural resources, the possible negative effects of industry on the natural environment, and the continuing inertease in the world’s population. As society reaches these limits, economic growth can no longer continue, and the quality of life will decrease.
People who want more economic growth, on the other hand, argue that even at the present growth rate there are still many poor people in the world. These proponents of economic growth believe that only more growth can create the capital needed to improve the quality of life in the world. Furthermore, they argue that only continued growth can provide the financial resources required to protect our natural surroudings from industrialization.
This debate over the desirability of continued economic growth is of vital importance to business and industry. If those who argue against economic growth are correct, the problems they mention cannot be ignored. To find a solution, economists and the business community must pay attention to these problems and continue discussing them with one another.
A:the contradiction between economists and the business community B:the present debate on economic growth C:the advantages and disadvantages of economic growth D:the importance of the debate on economic growth
There is much discussion today about whether economic growth is desirable. At an earlier period, our desire for material wealth may have been justified. Now, however, this desire for more than we need is causing serious problems. Even though we have good intentions, we may be producing too much, too fast.
Those who criticize economic growth argue that we must slow down. They believe that society is approaching certain limits on growth. These include the fixed supply of natural resources, the possible negative effects of industry on the natural environment, and the continuing increase in the world’s population. As society reaches these limits, economic growth can no longer continue, and th9 quality of life will decrease.
People who want more economic growth, on the other hand, argue that even at the present growth rate there are still many poor people in the world. These proponents of economic growth believe that only more growth can create the capital needed to improve the quality of life in the world. Furthermore, they argue that only continued growth can provide the financial resources required to protect our natural surroudings from industrialization.
This debate over the desirability of continued economic growth is of vital importance to business and industry. If those who argue against economic growth are correct, the problems they mention cannot be ignored. To find a solution, economists and the business community must pay attention to these problems and continue discussing them with one another.
A:the contradiction between economists and the business community B:the present debate on economic growth C:the advantages and disadvantages of economic growth D:the importance of the debate on economic growth
Passage Three
There is much discussion today about whether economic growth is desirable. At an earlier period, our desire for material wealth may have been justified. Now, however, this desire for more than we need is causing serious problems. Even though we have good intentions, we may be producing too much, too fast.
Those who criticize economic growth argue that we must slow down. They believe that society is approaching certain limits on growth. These include the fixed supply of natural resources, the possible negative effects of industry on the natural environment, and the continuing inertease in the world’s population. As society reaches these limits, economic growth can no longer continue, and the quality of life will decrease.
People who want more economic growth, on the other hand, argue that even at the present growth rate there are still many poor people in the world. These proponents of economic growth believe that only more growth can create the capital needed to improve the quality of life in the world. Furthermore, they argue that only continued growth can provide the financial resources required to protect our natural surroudings from industrialization.
This debate over the desirability of continued economic growth is of vital importance to business and industry. If those who argue against economic growth are correct, the problems they mention cannot be ignored. To find a solution, economists and the business community must pay attention to these problems and continue discussing them with one another.
A:the contradiction between economists and the business community B:the present debate on economic growth C:the advantages and disadvantages of economic growth D:the importance of the debate on economic growth
