生產率是評估未來最好的指標
朱偉老師
戀詞/考研/經驗/真題
關注
Text
The start of a new year is a good time to take stock, and there are few better indicators of our long-term economic prospects—and also our prospects for political and social peace—than productivity. As anyone who"s taken basic college economics should know, productivity is simply jargon for efficiency. It"s also what most people think of as economic progress. The good news is that productivity has been growing strongly; the bad news is that it may slow down.
To see why that matters, consult a fascinating government report, "100 Years of U. S. Consumer Spending." A century ago, Americans spent 43 percent of their incomes on food and another 14 percent on clothing. By 2002, those shares were 13 percent and 4 percent. Meanwhile, family incomes (after inflation) had tripled. Filling the spending gap are all the things we take for granted—cars, TVs, travel, telephones, the Internet. Home ownership has zipped from about 20 percent to almost 70 percent-of households.
This triumph of mass consumption is usually credited to technological breakthroughs, from the assembly line to computer chips. But the whole process is also described as productivity improvement. In 1900, 41 percent of Americans worked on farms. If mechanization，new seeds and fertilizers hadn"t meant that fewer people could produce more food, we"d still be paying two fifths of our income to eat. Labor productivity is measured as output per hour worked. Whatever enables people to produce more in a given time (machinery, skills, organization) boosts productivity.
That in turn raises our incomes—or gives us more leisure. It also promotes domestic tranquility by muffling the competition between government and personal spending. Slow future productivity growth virtually ensures a collision between the heavy costs of retiring baby boomers—mostly for Social Security and Medicare—and younger workers" living standards. Higher taxes will bite deeply into sluggish incomes. The reason: what seem to be tiny productivity shifts have huge consequences.
Consider. In 2005, the U.S. economy produced $12.5 trillion of goods and services, or gross domestic product (GDP) . Per capita income—the average for individuals—was $35,000. If productivity growth averages 2.5 percent a year, the economy reaches $34 trillion in 2035 (in constant "2005 dollars"), estimates Moody"s Economy.com. Per capita income rises to $73,000.
Unfortunately, productivity growth has recently decreased. In the past year, it"s been only 1.4 percent. By contrast, it averaged about 3 percent from 2000 to 2005. The falt-off partly reflects a mature business cycle. As project that the poor performance will continue. In Moddy"s Economy.com"s outlook, productivity growth averages 1.4 percent a year from 2005 to 2035. The main reason: stunted business investment in new machine, technologies and buildings, says chief economist Mark Zandi.
小試牛刀
1.Which of the following statements of productivity is NOT true?
A.Productivity is the best indicator of the economic, political and social prospects.
B.In general, productivity is simply for efficiency.
C.It runs through the economic progress.
D.Productivity improvement is that people can produce more products.
2.Statistics used in the second paragraph are intended to.
A.show us that the life standard of the Americans has improved
B.tell us that the service industry has developed rapidly
C.explain that people always pay a certain of income to eat
D.illustrate that technology has made breakthroughs
3.According to paragraph 4, the productivity improvement has not contributed to.
A.the increase of our income
B.technological development
C.more spare time for us
D.peace and unity of the country
4.We can infer from the passage that the author favors.
A.the productivity is always keeping growing rapidly
B.the development of the productivity isn"t good for the society
C.the productivity may influence the political reformation
D.every small change of productivity will cause huge change of society
5.The author"s main purpose to write this article is.
A.to tell us that productivity is growing strongly and rapidly
B.to explain what productivity is and how it functions in our society
C.to show that productivity plays a very important role in our society
D.to illustrate the growth of productivity seems to slow down
核心辭彙
（向上滑動查看核心辭彙）
assembly[ a"sembli ]
n.集合，裝配，集會，集結，彙編
boost[bu:st]
v.推進
breakthrough[?brek?θru]
n.突破.
collision[k??l???n]
n.碰撞，衝突
indicator[??nd??ket?]
n.指示器，[化]指 示劑
inflation[?n?fle??n]
n.脹大，誇張，通貨 膨脹，（物價）暴漲
jargon[?d?ɑ:rg?n]
n.行話
mechanization[?m?k?n??ze??n]
n.機械 化，機動化
productivity[?prɑ:d?k?t?v?ti]
n.生產力
stunted[?st?nt?d]
adj.成長受妨礙的
triumph[?tra??mf]
n.勝利，成功 獲得 勝利
virtually[?v?:rt?u?li]
adv.事實上，實質上
zip[zip]
n.拉鏈vt. 拉開或拉上
長難句解析
1.Filling the spending gap are all the things we take for granted—cars, TVs, travel, telephones, the Internet.
結構分析：本句是一個複合句。主句是Filling the spending gap are all the things; Filling the spending gap是動名詞短語作are的主語；we take for granted實除上是一個省略關係代詞的定語從句，來修飾all the things。
參考譯文：填補消費差額的東西我們理所當然地認為是——汽車、電視、旅遊、電話以及網路。
2.If mechanization, new seeds and fertilizers hadn"t meant that fewer people could produce more food, we"d still be paying two fifths of our income to eat.
結構分析：本句是一個複合句。if引導的是一個條件狀語從句；that引導一個賓語從句，來做meant的賓語。
參考譯文：在機械化時代，新的種子和肥料並不意味著更少的人可以生產出更多的食品。我們在食品上面的花費仍然要佔收入的2/5。
怎麼樣？你覺得今天的文章難嗎？
小貼士：
解析&參考譯文。
END
2019最新題源報刊
掃碼報名
已經報名19考研簽約全程班的同學無需購買，《新版題源報刊泛讀100篇》&《新版題源報刊精讀30篇》已包含在直通車裡。
TAG:朱偉老師 |