The majority of people around here are decent people．

A:honest B:rich C:good-looking D:high-ranking

The majority of people around here are decent people.

A:honest B:rich C:good-looking D:high-ranking

The majority of people around here are decent people.

A:honest B:rich C:good-looking D:high-ranking

　Reform on the Road 　　Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure　51　 this count? There are no reports 52 such an outcome although some local　governments have moved in that direction. 　　Hangzhou government 　　53　　 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips. Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 　　54 　　a large number of cars. 　　Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 　　55　　 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 56 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 57　　 government officials get monthly subsidies for business 　　The public have a right to 58 for transparency on the results of such reform 59 it is taxpayers’ money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 60 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests. 　　Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 61 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted. 　　Transparency alone can tell us 62 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 　　63 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy. 　　The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year. 　　A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 64 on subjects. 　　The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 65 audit of local finance.

A:such a B:as such C:such that D:such

　Reform on the Road 　　Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure　51　 this count? There are no reports 52 such an outcome although some local　governments have moved in that direction. 　　Hangzhou government 　　53　　 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips. Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 　　54 　　a large number of cars. 　　Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 　　55　　 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 56 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 57　　 government officials get monthly subsidies for business 　　The public have a right to 58 for transparency on the results of such reform 59 it is taxpayers’ money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 60 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests. 　　Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 61 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted. 　　Transparency alone can tell us 62 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 　　63 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy. 　　The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year. 　　A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 64 on subjects. 　　The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 65 audit of local finance.

A:by B:on C:through D:in

　Reform on the Road 　　Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure　51　 this count? There are no reports 52 such an outcome although some local　governments have moved in that direction. 　　Hangzhou government 　　53　　 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips. Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 　　54 　　a large number of cars. 　　Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 　　55　　 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 56 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 57　　 government officials get monthly subsidies for business 　　The public have a right to 58 for transparency on the results of such reform 59 it is taxpayers’ money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 60 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests. 　　Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 61 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted. 　　Transparency alone can tell us 62 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 　　63 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy. 　　The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year. 　　A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 64 on subjects. 　　The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 65 audit of local finance.

A:which B:whether C:in which D:that

　Reform on the Road 　　Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure　51　 this count? There are no reports 52 such an outcome although some local　governments have moved in that direction. 　　Hangzhou government 　　53　　 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips. Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 　　54 　　a large number of cars. 　　Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 　　55　　 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 56 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 57　　 government officials get monthly subsidies for business 　　The public have a right to 58 for transparency on the results of such reform 59 it is taxpayers’ money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 60 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests. 　　Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 61 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted. 　　Transparency alone can tell us 62 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 　　63 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy. 　　The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year. 　　A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 64 on subjects. 　　The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 65 audit of local finance.

A:providing B:offering C:supplying D:asking

　Reform on the Road 　　Will the reform on the use of government cars really reduce office expenditure　51　 this count? There are no reports 52 such an outcome although some local　governments have moved in that direction. 　　Hangzhou government 　　53　　 its reform last month. Officials below the level of deputy bureau chief cannot use official trips for business trips. Instead they get subsidies between 300 and 2,600 yuan a month according to their administrative rank. This reform is supposed to save the government the money involving in 　　54 　　a large number of cars. 　　Hangzhou in east China Zhejiang province is not the first to attempt 　　55　　 reform. Nanjing, capital of the neighboring Jiangsu province, did so five years ago, yet there is no report available of how much money the Nanjing government has saved 56 these measures. All that we know about is the fact 57　　 government officials get monthly subsidies for business 　　The public have a right to 58 for transparency on the results of such reform 59 it is taxpayers’ money that is being spent. Transparency is needed because people are 60 about policy-makers making policy against their own interests. 　　Obviously, the subsidies are not based on work needs. Lower level officials usually travel 61 than high-ranking officials. Therefore, the impact of reform appears to be diluted. 　　Transparency alone can tell us 62 the reform measures have indeed reduced government transport expenditure. If there is no disclosure of amounts saved by the reform, the public may have reason to suspect that the reform is actually a poly 　　63 the income of officials in the form of a transport subsidy. 　　The way government cars are used needs to be reformed. The government spending on purchase of cars was 80 billion yuan in 2008, and use and maintenance amounts to around 300 billion yuan a year. 　　A study of ancient Chinese dynasties shows that the more reforms of the tax system, the heavier the taxes eventually 64 on subjects. 　　The only way to prevent this vicious cycles from happening with government car reform today is for the higher authorities to have a strict and 65 audit of local finance.

A:satisfied B:pleased C:skeptical D:confused