《(NEW)南京农业大学外国语学院《626基础英语》历年考研真题汇编》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《(NEW)南京农业大学外国语学院《626基础英语》历年考研真题汇编（115页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、目录 2009年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2008年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2007年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2006年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2005年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2004年南京农业大学626基础英语考研 真题 2009年南京农业大学626基础英语考研真题 2008年南京农业大学626基础英语考研真题 2007年南京农业大学626基础英语考研真题 2006年南京农业大学626基础英语考研真题 试题编号：326 试题名称：基础英语 注意：答题（含填空）一律答在答题纸上，答在草稿纸或试卷上一律无 效 试 卷 一 Pa
2、rt I Reading Comprehension (two points each ,40 points) Directions: In this section there are four passages followed by twenty multiple-choices. Read the passages carefully and then mark your answer in your Answer Sheet. Text A “Partnership” between government and private business is much in vogue.
3、Bill Clinton, for one, is all for it. Government should not seek to displace private enterprise, he says, but strive to help it work better. And government has much to learn from business: if bureaucracies can be confronted with some of the incentives and disciplines that work in the private sector,
4、 they too can become more efficient. Britains Conservative government has said similar things for years- admittedly, with more emphasis on what government learn from private enterprise than on what the state can do for business. So widely has this notion of partnership spread that Britains Labour Pa
5、rty, which has traditionally seen the private sector as an obstacle to success, is suddenly an enthusiastic believer. It has published a document on “promoting a partnership between public and private finance”, arguing that private capital should be used, to an even greater extent than already envis
6、aged by the Tory government, to pay for investment in public infrastructurewhich, in the Labour Partys view, means not merely roads and bridges but also “social infrastructure” such as “Child care facilities.” In Britain, as in America and many other industrial countries, this particular form of par
7、tnership-the use of private capital for public investmentis proving especially beguiling. Unfortunately, this is so mainly for bad reasons. Before a suspiciously broad consensus moves too far from speech-making to action, and a policy that seems to offer something to everyone goes wrong, some carefu
8、l thinking is called for. The main bad reason for proposing this new financial partnership is that it makes for convenient bookkeeping-so much so that all sorts of apparently worthwhile investments start to look costless. The argument, at its crudest, goes as follows. The country plainly needs a new
9、 road. The government could build it-but how would it meet the cost? Higher taxes would be unpopular. That leaves borrowing. There are good reasons to pay for an investment-which yields its benefits over many years-by borrowing over a span of time. But another difficulty arises: most industrial-coun
10、try governments are already borrowing too much. The governments of Britain and America are both struggling to cut their financial deficits. Adding to public borrowing looks out of the question. The solution seems obvious: let private finance meet the cost. That way, public borrowing does not rise. A
11、 needed investment goes ahead. Banks and other private lenders win new business. The construction and child-care industries take on new workers. Taxpayers are spared. Everybody gains. It looks too good to be true-and it is. The crucial fact this argument overlooks is the most fundamental economic re
12、ality of all: resources are scarce. Because of that, public-sector decisions to commit resources, to whatever end, preclude their being used for other purposes. This s why too much public spending is a bad thing: in one way or another, it crowds out private spending. Dressing up public spending and
13、borrowing as private spending and borrowing may spare governments their fiscal blushes, but it does not alter that economic fact. What matters most is the decision to commit resources to a certain purposedoes the decision make the best use of the economys resources? Once the public sector has made t
14、hat decision, the choice of how to raise the moneywhether through “public borrowing” or “private borrowing” is secondary. In blurring this distinctionwhich all the current talk of partnership does there are several dangers. Chief among them is that the allimportant decision to commit resources is it
15、self muddied. Private choices are subject to familiar incentives and disciplinese.g. a firm that makes an unwise investment risks losing money or going bust. That concentrates managers minds. Public-sector decisions face a much weaker discipline: the political accountability of the ministers and off
16、icials concerned. Mixing the twoso that neither side feels responsible for the decision, or so that it is unclear when the projects commercial risk, if any, really liescan easily means no discipline at all. That will mean more bad investment and, since resources are scarce, less good investment. 1.It can be inferred from the second paragraph that in Britain A.the Tories are mot in power. B.the Labour Party is not in power.
