2022年考研英语(一)章节习题14

　　1、"Welfare makes people lazy"is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory,which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance,partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance.Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong.Welfare isn't just a moral imperative to raise the Iiving standards of the poor.lt's also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.However,a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor.Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid.But this concern has little basis in reality.One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has"little if any"impact on employment or work hours.In research based in Canada and the U.S.,the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours,adults don't typically stay home to,say,play video games;instead,they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.But the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely.It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper:Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients.According to the paper,American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity,higher rates of high-school graduation,and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid."Welfare helps people work"may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some.But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households.Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical,psychological,and vocational burden for children.Poverty is a slow-motion trauma,and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior.It's self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and,indeed,relieved of these burdens,children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment,Republicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream.Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity.But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs,they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals.Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck.It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty,which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. Conservative economists hold that welfare

　　A should exclude the form of cash assistance.

　　B may merely be good for low-income kids.

　　C would undermine work incentives.

　　D should loosen its eligibility criteria.

　　正确答案：C  

　　答案解析：第二段末句指出，保守经济学家认为部分成人救助对象可能会为了达到医疗补助的资格要求，而拒不接受某类工作，或故意选择短时工作(reject certain jobs or longer work hours)，即医疗补助(福利)会削弱他们的工作动力，C.正确，该项同时契合开篇保守经济理论的观点“福利让人懒惰(makes people lazy)”。[解题技巧]A.将首段②句“减少现金资助”篡改为表述“彻底取消现金资助”.B.从首段④句作者看法“不仅有益穷人，还对低收入儿童的健康和未来很关键”臆断出保守派认为“只对低收入儿童有用”;D.与开篇以及cutting、fear等词传达出的保守经济学家的态度“收紧资格审查，限制福利”相悖。

　　2、For years,if not decades.banks,post office and pubs have been disappearing on the British high street.Still,the scale and pace of the current crop of casualties seems exceptional,as well as the shortage of replacement activities.Where once the ex-banks could be readily converted into pubs,and a variety of often innovative bars and restaurants promised to breathe life into streets abandoned by traditional shops.now even those hopeful trends have been reversed.The various companies have widely varied reasons for their problems,yet together they symbolise the crisis on the high street.And the word"crisis"is justified.There are common,ancl familiar,problems.The squeeze on household incomes,with near-stagnant wage levels and bouts of relatively high inflation,has lasted since the financial crisis began a decade ago.Even with the British shopper's ingenious way of defying financial logic,and clespite the Bank of Englancl's attempts to put cheap money into borrowers'pockets.sooner or later there was bound to be a correction.While the money flowing into the high street has hardly risen.the supply of everything from cupcake stands to sandwich outlels has been expanding.pushing rents and wages higher.Huge retail developments are sLill looked on by desperate development agencies and local councils as the quick fix for any clevastated post-industrial landscape.Once again,sooner or later this vast overcapacity was going to run into the reality of weak demand.No matter how smart the store or niche the outlet,whcn overheads aren't being covered by healthy sales,the future is bleak.Overarching all of that,however,is the digital revolution,with giants such as Amazon invading new retail sectors.Less well advertised is the simple trend among the British towards entertaining and making the most of their leisure time in their very expensive homes.Why go to a public house or a restaurant when your private house is just as entertaining and where virtually any pastime or product can be transmitted via satellite,web or cable technology,and a cheap takeaway delivery and a bottle of wine are just a couple of clicks away?Britain famously was once disparaged as"nation of shopkeepers",small-minded merchants with narrow cultural and political horizons.Then the British became notorious as a"nation of shoppers",small-minded consumers with narrow cultural and political horizons,as well as an almost reckless taste for debt and disregard for saving for the future.Now the British are becoming a nation of home-lovers,with pizzas arriving by moped and with a wireless hub for cosy nights in.For the sake of the high street,we need to get out more:either that,or local councils need to think hard about allowing more shops to be converted into flats.Then the British could become a nation of ex-shop dwellers,even if their cultural and political horizons remain as narrow as ever. According to Paragraph'l,what has happened to the British high street?

　　A Lots of banks have been converted to pubs.

　　B Innovative shops are replacing traditional ones.

　　C Some public services have losi their value,

　　D Retail and leisure are dying unprecedentedly.

　　正确答案：D  

　　答案解析：开篇首先指出近年状况——英国高街的银行、邮局和酒吧等逐渐消失，继而指出现今形势一一消失速度和规模非比寻常，后对此做出进一步说明。可见高街的零售和休闲场所正经历的消亡’D.中Reiail and Ieisure是对文中的banks，post office and pubs、bars and restaurants等的概括.dy:ng unprecedentedly对应文中的disappearing、casualties.…exceptional。[解题技巧]A.源自③句.…once ex-banks could be readily converLed into pubs，但此处意在指出“以往改建的方便可行性”，与当前现象无关。B.根据③句中碎片信息innovative和traditional shops臆断而来，但此处为更早之前的现象(高街已被传统商店所抛弃)，且不涉及创新型商店信息，其次选项体现的“良好势头”与文意“创新型酒吧和饭店曾有望使高街复兴，现在这种趋势也无望了”相反。C.将首句主体“高街的银行、邮局和酒吧”窜改为“公共服务”，并将其消失原因杜撰为“丧失了价值”。

　　3、"Welfare makes people lazy"is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory,which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance,partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance.Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong.Welfare isn't just a moral imperative to raise the Iiving standards of the poor.lt's also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.However,a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor.Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid.But this concern has little basis in reality.One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has"little if any"impact on employment or work hours.In research based in Canada and the U.S.,the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours,adults don't typically stay home to,say,play video games;instead,they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.But the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely.It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper:Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients.According to the paper,American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity,higher rates of high-school graduation,and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid."Welfare helps people work"may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some.But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households.Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical,psychological,and vocational burden for children.Poverty is a slow-motion trauma,and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior.It's self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and,indeed,relieved of these burdens,children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment,Republicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream.Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity.But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs,they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals.Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck.It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty,which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. The author holds that Republicans

　　A value equal opportunity for welfare.

　　B fail to understand the virtues of hard work and opportunity.

　　C are self-conflicting in the defense of the American Dream.

　　D are likely to cooperate with Democrats on welfare reform.

　　正确答案：C  

　　答案解析：第六段指出共和党人与美国梦的关系复杂：一面颂扬美国梦(人人都有机会凭借自身努力获得成功)，一面抨击为低收入儿童实现美国梦扫除障碍的福利制度，这种做法自相矛盾，故C.正确。[解题技巧]A.将第六段②句保守派政客(指代①句Republicans)颂扬的“实现美国梦的机会”篡改为“获得福利的机会”.B.由②③句共和党人的矛盾做法过度引申出他们存在思想局限，未真正理解两种美德;D.源自段末celebrated by both political parties，但此处指两党“皆希望每个孩子都获得发展的机会”，意在说服共和党人放弃“削减福利”的主张，而非“愿合作改革”。

　　4、"Welfare makes people lazy"is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory,which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance,partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance.Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong.Welfare isn't just a moral imperative to raise the Iiving standards of the poor.lt's also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.However,a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor.Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid.But this concern has little basis in reality.One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has"little if any"impact on employment or work hours.In research based in Canada and the U.S.,the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours,adults don't typically stay home to,say,play video games;instead,they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.But the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely.It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper:Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients.According to the paper,American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity,higher rates of high-school graduation,and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid."Welfare helps people work"may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some.But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households.Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical,psychological,and vocational burden for children.Poverty is a slow-motion trauma,and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior.It's self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and,indeed,relieved of these burdens,children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment,Republicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream.Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity.But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs,they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals.Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck.It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty,which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. It is suggested in Paragraphs 4 and 5 that impoverished children

　　A can hardly avoid exhibiting antisocial behavior.

　　B are more likely to work wonders than their peers.

　　C are doomed to fail in their study and future career.

　　D definitely need social welfare to grow and develop.

　　正确答案：D  

　　答案解析：第四、五段驳斥保守派未能认识到福利措施的重要作用，指出福利能在贫困儿童身上创造奇迹，福利计划对于儿童的成长和长远发展十分必要，故D.正确。[解题技巧]A.将第四段④句贫困儿童相对于中产阶级儿童而表现出的倾向“更可能反社会”篡改为倾向“几乎一定会反社会”;B.杂糅第四段②句work wonders与第五段④句more likely.，.than their.…peers，但文中是“福利计划创造的奇迹”，即让贫困儿童与其他同龄人一样成就人生;C.由第五段主要内容“贫穷对儿童生理、心理、职业产生长远影响”而来.但表达are doomed to所传达的笃定语气与该段复现的more likely传达的“可能、倾向”之意不符。

　　5、"Welfare makes people lazy"is an intellectual pillar of conservative economic theory,which recommends cutting programs like Medicaid and cash assistance,partly out of a fear that self-reliance degenerates in the face of government assistance.Many economists have for decades argued that this orthodoxy is simply wrong.Welfare isn't just a moral imperative to raise the Iiving standards of the poor.lt's also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.However,a core mission of the Republican Party is to reduce government aid to the poor.Many conservative economists argue that some adults might reject certain jobs or longer work hours because doing so would eliminate their eligibility for programs like Medicaid.But this concern has little basis in reality.One of the latest studies on the subject found that Medicaid has"little if any"impact on employment or work hours.In research based in Canada and the U.S.,the economist Ioana Marinescu has found that even when basic-income programs do reduce working hours,adults don't typically stay home to,say,play video games;instead,they often use the extra cash to go back to school or hold out for a more desirable job.But the standard conservative critique of Medicaid and other welfare programs is wrong on another plane entirely.It fails to account for the conclusion of a 2015 paper:Anti-poverty programs can work wonders for their youngest recipients.According to the paper,American adults whose families had access to prenatal coverage under Medicaid have lower rates of obesity,higher rates of high-school graduation,and higher incomes as adults than those from similar households in states without Medicaid."Welfare helps people work"may sound like a strange and counterintuitive claim to some.But it is perfectly obvious when the word people in that sentence refers to low-income children in poor households.Poverty and lack of access to health care is a physical,psychological,and vocational burden for children.Poverty is a slow-motion trauma,and impoverished children are more likely than their middle-class peers to suffer from chronic physiological stress and exhibit antisocial behavior.It's self-evident that relieving children of an ambient trauma improves their lives and,indeed,relieved of these burdens,children from poorer households are more likely to follow the path from high-school graduation to college and then full-time employment,Republicans have a complicated relationship with the American Dream.Conservative politicians praise the virtues of hard work and opportunity.But when they use these virtues to strongly criticize welfare programs,they ignore the overwhelming evidence that government aid relieves low-income children of the psychological and physiological stresses that get in the way of embracing those very ideals.Welfare is so much more than a substitute for a paycheck.It is a remedy for the myriad burdens of childhood poverty,which gives children the opportunity to become exactly the sort of healthy and striving adults celebrated by both political parties. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

　　A Shattering the Myth of"Welfare Makes People Lazy"

　　B Challenging the Dominance of Conservative Economccs

　　C Promoting Child Development Through Medicaid

　　D Defending the Equal Access to the American Dream

　　正确答案：A  

　　答案解析：前两段抛出保守派观点“福利使人懒惰”并具体解释，第三至五段初步驳斥，指出该主张既缺乏现实依据，又未能考虑到福利对于贫困儿童的奇迹般影响，第六段进一步驳斥“保守派自相矛盾”，并呼吁保守派放弃错误主张。可见，全文驳斥了“福利使人懒惰”的保守经济学观点.A.能准确概括文意。[解题技巧]B.由驳斥对象“保守经济学理论”引申而来，但原文并未提到保守经济学占主导地位;C.概括性不足.Promoting Child Development虽符合作者对社会福利作用的期待，但仅聚焦Medicaid.不同于文中“对福利问题的笼统探讨(各种形式的福利项目、现金资助等)”;D.利用末段the American Dream干扰，但文中提及美国梦是为证明保守派主张之谬误，并非文章主线。

　　☛☛☛进入2022年研究生考试练习题库>>>更多考研试题(每日一练、模拟试卷、历年真题、易错题)等你来做!