中华文化之所以能够在世界古代文明中硕果仅存、_____，一个重要原因就是中华文化不但具有_____的广阔胸襟，善于学习不同民族文化的优长，而且具有与时俱进的创新精神，不断_____、跟随时代前进。

填入画横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

窗外景色盎然，层层叠叠的剪秋箩，在清晨_____的阳光里开得一派欢腾，七八朵小花蕊，拖着密密麻麻细齿尾羽的花瓣，在风中轻轻颤抖，千娇百媚，透过阔大的落地窗。他用目光_____儿童般稚嫩的生灵，眼角沾满了晨露。

依次填入划横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

道德楼宇的重建，除了靠制度地基，更要靠个体道德践履的“_____”。因为，道德构筑，需要你我他的身体力行，在公德的修复链中，没人能_____。

依次填入横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

诚然，在相当长一段时间里，对抗或叛逆确实是中国当代诗歌完成自我_____的法则之一，以真实取代虚假，以个人反抗群体，以感性抵制理性，以平面消除深度，中国当代诗歌正是在这种不断地反叛中实行着某种_____。

依次填入横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

当前的中国，利益多元、观念多样、思想多变，这让道德领域呈现复杂_____，也让人们面临更艰难的选择，在扶起跌倒老人或许惹上官司、爱心捐赠恐被挪作他用的疑虑中，善念在负面的想象中_____，善行因利益的考量而_____，一个经历着深刻转型的社会，有这样的道德困惑可以理解，但更应主动正视、积极引导。

依次填入横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

中国六十年的经济发展历程，是一个在以发达国家为主导的全球资本主义体系当中，如何在农业人口大国的基础上，艰苦地完成工业化原始积累，进入产业资本扩张阶段，并开始向金融资本阶段_____的过程。

填入横线部分最恰当的一项是（　）。

空气发电技术现在还少有人问津，原因是目前矿物能源的价格太低，以至人们还无需去考虑。一旦矿物能源耗尽，政府对二氧化碳排放标准严加限制，对洁净能源的需求就会骤然而升。当然，空气发电也并非零排放，但与热力发电相比，仅是它的二十分之一，每度电的二氧化碳排放量为10至15克。如果该技术能投入使用，那么它将是生态能源领域的一项新突破。

这段文字意在说明（　）。

据日本社会保障规定，失业完全无收入者，每月可领到一定数额的失业补助金。丧失劳动能力及无人赡养的老人除每月可领取补助以外，房租减收，用水、看病免费，市内交通费70岁以上全免、以下减半，若有未成年的子女，还另外增加补助金。凭这样几条，足可以维持基本的生活，根本无需上街去“流浪”。

这段文字意在说明（　）。

我们身处的社会是由无数人组成的，不管是大学生村官，还是白领实习生，都得和不同的人、不同的事情打交道，也必然会遭遇各种挫折、挑战。在这个过程中，采取什么态度来对待这些挫折、挑战，往往对最终结果具有决定性作用，而情商又决定了人们采取何种态度。从这个角度来看，情商极其重要，如果用一句话加以概括的话，那就是_____。

填入横线处最恰当的一项是（　）。

当今世界，科技与文化的融合互动已成为推进文化发展的强大动力，科技创新为当代文化的发展创造了新的文化形态，提高了文化产品的科技含量。作为全国政治中心、文化中心和国际交往中心，北京文化底蕴丰厚，拥有创新人才优势和高新技术优势。因此，当前推动北京文化大发展大繁荣，则要从战略发展高度研究北京文化建设的战略目标，寻求首都文化发展的战略支撑。

这段文字意在说明的是（　）。

22，24，39，28，（　），16

0.25，0.5，2，16，（　）。

3，3，6，18，72，（　）。

1，4，3，1，1/5，1/36，（　）。

2012²⁰¹²的尾数是（　）。

34，-6，14，4，9，13/2，（　）。

176，178，198，253，（　）。

现有16张不同的卡片，其中红色、黄色、蓝色、绿色卡片各4张。从中任取3张，要求这3张卡片不能是同一种颜色，且红色卡片至多1张。不同取法的种数为（　）。

一群人坐车旅游，每辆车坐22人，剩5人没有座位，每辆坐26人，空出15个座位，问每两车坐25人，空出多少座位？（　）

如图，有一个边长为20厘米的大正方体，分别在它的角上、棱上、面上各挖掉一个大小相同的小立方体后，表面积变为2454平方厘米，那么挖掉的小立方体的边长是多少厘米？（　）

从所给的四个选项中，选择最合适的一个填入问号处，使之呈现一定的规律性（　）。

下列选项中，与左边四个图形规律相同的是（　）。

下列选项中，与左边四个图形规律相同的是（　）。

把下面的六个图形分为两类，使每一类图形都有各自的共同特征或规律，分类正确的一项是（　）。

（　）对于动物，相当于（　）对于星座。

根据心理学家的一项研究，人要想有所成就，必须与周围的朋友建立亲密的关系，然而很多发明家都是在孤独中度过了他们的大部分时光，与其他朋友并没有非常亲密的关系。所以该结论是错误的。

要得出上述结论所必需的假设是（　）。

广告，指为了商业目的，由商品经营者或服务提供者承担费用，通过一定媒介或一定形式，如通过报刊、电视、路牌、橱窗等，直接或间接地对自己推销的商品或者所提供的服务所进行的公开的宣传活动。

根据上述定义，下列属于广告活动的是（　）。

连续犯，是指行为人基于数个同一的犯罪故意，连续多次实施数个性质相同的犯罪行为，触犯同一罪名的犯罪形态。

根据上述定义，下列属于连续犯的是（　）。

盖亚假说认为地球生命体与非生命体形成了一个可相互作用的复杂系统。该假说又分为强盖亚假说和弱盖亚假说。其中弱盖亚假说认为地球上的各种生物有效地调节着大气的温度和化学构成，在生物体影响生物环境的同时，环境又反过来影响生物进化的过程。强盖亚假说更进一步认为地球是一个巨大的有机体，具有自我调节的能力，为了这个有机体的健康，甚至可以自行消除那些有害的因素。

根据上述定义，下列选项中属于弱盖亚假说的是（　）。

地方政府在拍卖土地时，有一个基本的价格，叫作“土地基价”；拍卖所得超出土地基价的金额与土地基价之比，叫作“溢价率”。溢价率的高低标志着土地市场和楼市的热度。B市有一块地，今年第一次上市过程中，因溢价率将创新高而被临时叫停。第二次上市最终以低于第一次上市的溢价率成交，但成交的总金额却超出了第一次可能达到的数额。

如果以下陈述为真，哪一项最好地解释了上述看似不一致的现象？（　）

2012年国内生产总值比2011年增长（　）。

2011年交通运输、仓储和邮政业增加值为（　）。

2011年第二产业增加值占国内生产总值的比重为（　）。

2012年，第三产业中占比较上年同期有所上升的行业有几个？（　）

下列说法正确的是（　）。

我国已经成为全球最大的留学输出国之一，出国留学人数年平均增长率超过25%，2013年累计出国留学人数比1978年规模扩大了375倍。留学群体低龄化趋势明显，2012年我国出国留学高中及以下学历学生占当年留学总人数的19.8%。据2013年美国统计数字显示，2012年赴美留学人数约占当年中国出国留学总人数的45%，2013年赴美留学人数为15.76万人，且仍将保持20%～30%的年增长速度。

截至2013年，我国半数以上出国留学人员是从（　）开始出国的。

我国已经成为全球最大的留学输出国之一，出国留学人数年平均增长率超过25%，2013年累计出国留学人数比1978年规模扩大了375倍。留学群体低龄化趋势明显，2012年我国出国留学高中及以下学历学生占当年留学总人数的19.8%。据2013年美国统计数字显示，2012年赴美留学人数约占当年中国出国留学总人数的45%，2013年赴美留学人数为15.76万人，且仍将保持20%～30%的年增长速度。

2012年我国大学及以上学历留学人员人数大约是（　）。

我国已经成为全球最大的留学输出国之一，出国留学人数年平均增长率超过25%，2013年累计出国留学人数比1978年规模扩大了375倍。留学群体低龄化趋势明显，2012年我国出国留学高中及以下学历学生占当年留学总人数的19.8%。据2013年美国统计数字显示，2012年赴美留学人数约占当年中国出国留学总人数的45%，2013年赴美留学人数为15.76万人，且仍将保持20%～30%的年增长速度。

2013年当年出国留学人数较1978年翻了（　）。

我国已经成为全球最大的留学输出国之一，出国留学人数年平均增长率超过25%，2013年累计出国留学人数比1978年规模扩大了375倍。留学群体低龄化趋势明显，2012年我国出国留学高中及以下学历学生占当年留学总人数的19.8%。据2013年美国统计数字显示，2012年赴美留学人数约占当年中国出国留学总人数的45%，2013年赴美留学人数为15.76万人，且仍将保持20%～30%的年增长速度。

2013年赴美留学人数比2012年增长约（　）。

我国已经成为全球最大的留学输出国之一，出国留学人数年平均增长率超过25%，2013年累计出国留学人数比1978年规模扩大了375倍。留学群体低龄化趋势明显，2012年我国出国留学高中及以下学历学生占当年留学总人数的19.8%。据2013年美国统计数字显示，2012年赴美留学人数约占当年中国出国留学总人数的45%，2013年赴美留学人数为15.76万人，且仍将保持20%～30%的年增长速度。

从上述资料肯定可以推出的是（　）。

《银行业从业人员职业操守》的“惩戒措施”中规定，对违反本职业操守的银行业从业人员，所在机构应当视情况给予相应惩戒，情节严重的，应（　）。

人们往往会用“我用的是10M宽带上网”来说明自己计算机联网的性能，这里的“10M”指的是数据通信中的（　）指标。

采取扩张性财政政策时，政府支出_____，税收_____。（　）

“公民在行使自由和权利的时候，不得损害国家的、社会的、集体的利益和其他公民的合法的自由和权利。”下列违背这项法律规定的行为是（　）。

（　）是建设银行客户交易结算资金第三方存管，是建设银行根据《中华人民共和国证券法》和相关法律、法规的规定，通过为投资者开立管理账户并建立资金账户、管理账户与银行结算账户的一一对应关系，履行客户交易结算资金出纳和保管职责。

国家主席习近平于2013年10月4日，在马来西亚国家皇宫会见马来西亚最高元首哈利姆。马来西亚已成为中国在东盟第（　）大贸易伙伴，两国合作日益紧密，共同利益日益扩大。

按照《巴塞尔协议》的规定，商业银行的附属资本不得超过（　）。

当今世界，文化与经济、政治相互交融，在综合国力竞争中的地位和作用越来越突出。加大政府对文化事业建设的投入力度是“十二五”时期文化改革的重要内容。“十二五”规划时期，我国对待文化的政策是（　）。

市盈率是反映企业（　）的指标。

货币乘数等于存款准备金率与（　）之和的倒数。

巴西的金融监管体制，由国家货币委员会牵头，负责协调对不同金融行业监管机构的监管活动。这属于（　）的监管体制。

银监会依法对银行业金融机构予以撤销是指对经其批准设立的，具有法人资格的金融机构依法釆取的（　）的行政强制措施。

根据《中华人民共和国物权法》，下列物品中，可以使用善意取得制度的是（　）。

在中央银行的资产负债表中，可列入资产方的项目是（　）。

根据目前我国个人汽车贷款在贷款额度方面的相关规定，对自用车、商用车、二手车贷款金额占所购汽车价格的比例上限分别是（　）。

下列关于礼仪，说法正确的是（　）。

中国反洗钱检测分析中心设在（　）。

低档品价格上升导致需求下降的主要原因是（　）。

下列处理属于无损压缩的是（　）。

下列关于商业银行对同一贷款人贷款比例限制的说法，不正确的是（　）。

在国际货币市场上比较典型、有代表性的同业拆借利率是指（　）。

某商场利用指数体系分析2011年和2010年相比价格和销售量变动对销售额的影响，已知销售额指数为156.98%，销售量指数为135.8%，那么由于价格的变动使销售额提高了（　）。

“从群众中来，到群众中去”的认识论依据是（　）。

在金银复本位制下，当金币与银币的实际价值相背离，致使实际价值高于名义价值的货币被收藏、熔化而退出流通，而实际价值低于名义价值的货币则充斥市场，这是（　）。

中央银行为控制通货膨胀风险，如果提高法定存款准备金率，将（　）。

下列属于金融工具的风险来源的是（　）。

从业务运作实质来看，福费廷就是（　）。

按金融工具的交易程序划分，金融市场可分为（　）。

假定某机器原来生产产品A，利润收入为300元，现在改为生产产品B，所花的人工、材料费为220元，则生产产品B的机会成本是（　）。

对于一个垄断厂商来说，其供给曲线（　）。

下列属于中国建设银行2013年获得的荣誉的有（　）。

在完全竞争市场上，厂商的需求曲线（　）。

公司信贷营销中，目标市场的选择需满足（　）。

物权法的基本原则包括（　）。

通常情况下，影响某种商品的供给价格弹性大小的因素有（　）。

按财政支出能否直接得到等价补偿，可以把财政支出分为（　）。

下列选项中，导致合同无效的原因有（　）。

从短期来看，属于企业固定成本的项目有（　）。

完全竞争市场具有的特征有（　）。

关于蒙代尔——弗莱明模型下的政策作用，说法正确的有（　）。

银行承兑汇票一级市场上，主要涉及的交易行为有（　）。

根据《中华人民共和国合同法》，下列合同中，属于无效合同的有（　）。

根据《中华人民共和国公司法》，下列公司人员中，对公司负有忠实义务和勤劳义务的有（　）。

国内银行的（　）存款种类只要不超过中国人民银行同期限档次的存款利率上限，计结息规则由各银行自己把握。

下列属于企业经营风险的有（　）。

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist),and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.

Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.

The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare－the average multiplied by the number of people－is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.

The first paragraph is mainly about_____.

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist),and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.

Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.

The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare－the average multiplied by the number of people－is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.

_____, we owe nothing to the future generations.

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist),and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.

Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.

The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare－the average multiplied by the number of people－is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.

Population policy we take should be considered_____.

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist),and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.

Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.

The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare－the average multiplied by the number of people－is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.

According to this passage,optimum population_____.

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist),and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.

Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.

The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare－the average multiplied by the number of people－is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.

The proper title for this passage should be_____.

Imagine waking up and finding the value of your assets has been halved. No, you're not an investor in one of those hedge funds that failed completely. With the dollar slumping to a 26-year low against the pound, already-expensive London has become quite unaffordable. A coffee at Starbucks, just as unavoidable in England as it is in the United States, runs about $8.

The once all-powerful dollar isn't doing a Titanic against just the pound. It is sitting at a record low against the euro and at a 30-year low against the Canadian dollar. Even the Argentine peso and Brazilian real are thriving against the dollar.

The weak dollar is a source of humiliation, for a nation's self-esteem rests in part on the strength of its currency. It's also a potential economic problem, since a declining dollar makes imported food more expensive and exerts upward pressure on interest rates. And yet there are substantial sectors of the vast U.S. economy-from giant companies like Coca-Cola to mom-and-pop restaurant operators in Miami-for which the weak dollar is most excellent news.

Many Europeans may view the U.S. as an arrogant superpower that has become hostile to foreigners. But nothing makes people think more warmly of the U.S. than a weak dollar. Through April, the total number of visitors from abroad was up 6.8 percent from last year. Should the trend continue, the number of tourists this year will finally top the 2000 peak? Many Europeans now apparently view the U.S. the way many Americans view Mexico-as a cheap place to vacation, shop and party, all while ignoring the fact that the poorer locals can't afford to join the merrymaking.

The money tourists spend helps decrease our chronic trade deficit. So do exports, which thanks in part to the weak dollar, soared 11 percent between May 2006 and May 2007. For first five months of 2007, the trade deficit actually fell 7 percent from 2006.

If you own shares in large American corporations, you're a winner in the weak-dollar gamble. Last week Coca-Cola's stick bubbled to a five-year high after it reported a fantastic quarter. Foreign sales accounted for 65 percent of Coke's beverage business. Other American companies profiting from this trend include McDonald's and IBM.

American tourists, however, shouldn't expect any relief soon. The dollar lost strength the way many marriages break up-slowly, and then all at once. And currencies don't turn on a dime. So if you want to avoid the pain inflicted by the increasingly pathetic dollar, cancel that summer vacation to England and look to New England. There, the dollar is still treated with a little respect.

Why do Americans feel humiliated?（　）

Imagine waking up and finding the value of your assets has been halved. No, you're not an investor in one of those hedge funds that failed completely. With the dollar slumping to a 26-year low against the pound, already-expensive London has become quite unaffordable. A coffee at Starbucks, just as unavoidable in England as it is in the United States, runs about $8.

The once all-powerful dollar isn't doing a Titanic against just the pound. It is sitting at a record low against the euro and at a 30-year low against the Canadian dollar. Even the Argentine peso and Brazilian real are thriving against the dollar.

The weak dollar is a source of humiliation, for a nation's self-esteem rests in part on the strength of its currency. It's also a potential economic problem, since a declining dollar makes imported food more expensive and exerts upward pressure on interest rates. And yet there are substantial sectors of the vast U.S. economy-from giant companies like Coca-Cola to mom-and-pop restaurant operators in Miami-for which the weak dollar is most excellent news.

Many Europeans may view the U.S. as an arrogant superpower that has become hostile to foreigners. But nothing makes people think more warmly of the U.S. than a weak dollar. Through April, the total number of visitors from abroad was up 6.8 percent from last year. Should the trend continue, the number of tourists this year will finally top the 2000 peak? Many Europeans now apparently view the U.S. the way many Americans view Mexico-as a cheap place to vacation, shop and party, all while ignoring the fact that the poorer locals can't afford to join the merrymaking.

The money tourists spend helps decrease our chronic trade deficit. So do exports, which thanks in part to the weak dollar, soared 11 percent between May 2006 and May 2007. For first five months of 2007, the trade deficit actually fell 7 percent from 2006.

If you own shares in large American corporations, you're a winner in the weak-dollar gamble. Last week Coca-Cola's stick bubbled to a five-year high after it reported a fantastic quarter. Foreign sales accounted for 65 percent of Coke's beverage business. Other American companies profiting from this trend include McDonald's and IBM.

American tourists, however, shouldn't expect any relief soon. The dollar lost strength the way many marriages break up-slowly, and then all at once. And currencies don't turn on a dime. So if you want to avoid the pain inflicted by the increasingly pathetic dollar, cancel that summer vacation to England and look to New England. There, the dollar is still treated with a little respect.

How does the current dollar affect the life of ordinary Americans?（　）

Imagine waking up and finding the value of your assets has been halved. No, you're not an investor in one of those hedge funds that failed completely. With the dollar slumping to a 26-year low against the pound, already-expensive London has become quite unaffordable. A coffee at Starbucks, just as unavoidable in England as it is in the United States, runs about $8.

The once all-powerful dollar isn't doing a Titanic against just the pound. It is sitting at a record low against the euro and at a 30-year low against the Canadian dollar. Even the Argentine peso and Brazilian real are thriving against the dollar.

The weak dollar is a source of humiliation, for a nation's self-esteem rests in part on the strength of its currency. It's also a potential economic problem, since a declining dollar makes imported food more expensive and exerts upward pressure on interest rates. And yet there are substantial sectors of the vast U.S. economy-from giant companies like Coca-Cola to mom-and-pop restaurant operators in Miami-for which the weak dollar is most excellent news.

Many Europeans may view the U.S. as an arrogant superpower that has become hostile to foreigners. But nothing makes people think more warmly of the U.S. than a weak dollar. Through April, the total number of visitors from abroad was up 6.8 percent from last year. Should the trend continue, the number of tourists this year will finally top the 2000 peak? Many Europeans now apparently view the U.S. the way many Americans view Mexico-as a cheap place to vacation, shop and party, all while ignoring the fact that the poorer locals can't afford to join the merrymaking.

The money tourists spend helps decrease our chronic trade deficit. So do exports, which thanks in part to the weak dollar, soared 11 percent between May 2006 and May 2007. For first five months of 2007, the trade deficit actually fell 7 percent from 2006.

If you own shares in large American corporations, you're a winner in the weak-dollar gamble. Last week Coca-Cola's stick bubbled to a five-year high after it reported a fantastic quarter. Foreign sales accounted for 65 percent of Coke's beverage business. Other American companies profiting from this trend include McDonald's and IBM.

American tourists, however, shouldn't expect any relief soon. The dollar lost strength the way many marriages break up-slowly, and then all at once. And currencies don't turn on a dime. So if you want to avoid the pain inflicted by the increasingly pathetic dollar, cancel that summer vacation to England and look to New England. There, the dollar is still treated with a little respect.

How do many Europeans feel about the U. S. with the devalued dollar?（　）

Imagine waking up and finding the value of your assets has been halved. No, you're not an investor in one of those hedge funds that failed completely. With the dollar slumping to a 26-year low against the pound, already-expensive London has become quite unaffordable. A coffee at Starbucks, just as unavoidable in England as it is in the United States, runs about $8.

The once all-powerful dollar isn't doing a Titanic against just the pound. It is sitting at a record low against the euro and at a 30-year low against the Canadian dollar. Even the Argentine peso and Brazilian real are thriving against the dollar.

The weak dollar is a source of humiliation, for a nation's self-esteem rests in part on the strength of its currency. It's also a potential economic problem, since a declining dollar makes imported food more expensive and exerts upward pressure on interest rates. And yet there are substantial sectors of the vast U.S. economy-from giant companies like Coca-Cola to mom-and-pop restaurant operators in Miami-for which the weak dollar is most excellent news.

Many Europeans may view the U.S. as an arrogant superpower that has become hostile to foreigners. But nothing makes people think more warmly of the U.S. than a weak dollar. Through April, the total number of visitors from abroad was up 6.8 percent from last year. Should the trend continue, the number of tourists this year will finally top the 2000 peak? Many Europeans now apparently view the U.S. the way many Americans view Mexico-as a cheap place to vacation, shop and party, all while ignoring the fact that the poorer locals can't afford to join the merrymaking.

The money tourists spend helps decrease our chronic trade deficit. So do exports, which thanks in part to the weak dollar, soared 11 percent between May 2006 and May 2007. For first five months of 2007, the trade deficit actually fell 7 percent from 2006.

If you own shares in large American corporations, you're a winner in the weak-dollar gamble. Last week Coca-Cola's stick bubbled to a five-year high after it reported a fantastic quarter. Foreign sales accounted for 65 percent of Coke's beverage business. Other American companies profiting from this trend include McDonald's and IBM.

American tourists, however, shouldn't expect any relief soon. The dollar lost strength the way many marriages break up-slowly, and then all at once. And currencies don't turn on a dime. So if you want to avoid the pain inflicted by the increasingly pathetic dollar, cancel that summer vacation to England and look to New England. There, the dollar is still treated with a little respect.

What is the author's advice to Americans?（　）

Imagine waking up and finding the value of your assets has been halved. No, you're not an investor in one of those hedge funds that failed completely. With the dollar slumping to a 26-year low against the pound, already-expensive London has become quite unaffordable. A coffee at Starbucks, just as unavoidable in England as it is in the United States, runs about $8.

The once all-powerful dollar isn't doing a Titanic against just the pound. It is sitting at a record low against the euro and at a 30-year low against the Canadian dollar. Even the Argentine peso and Brazilian real are thriving against the dollar.

The weak dollar is a source of humiliation, for a nation's self-esteem rests in part on the strength of its currency. It's also a potential economic problem, since a declining dollar makes imported food more expensive and exerts upward pressure on interest rates. And yet there are substantial sectors of the vast U.S. economy-from giant companies like Coca-Cola to mom-and-pop restaurant operators in Miami-for which the weak dollar is most excellent news.

Many Europeans may view the U.S. as an arrogant superpower that has become hostile to foreigners. But nothing makes people think more warmly of the U.S. than a weak dollar. Through April, the total number of visitors from abroad was up 6.8 percent from last year. Should the trend continue, the number of tourists this year will finally top the 2000 peak? Many Europeans now apparently view the U.S. the way many Americans view Mexico-as a cheap place to vacation, shop and party, all while ignoring the fact that the poorer locals can't afford to join the merrymaking.

The money tourists spend helps decrease our chronic trade deficit. So do exports, which thanks in part to the weak dollar, soared 11 percent between May 2006 and May 2007. For first five months of 2007, the trade deficit actually fell 7 percent from 2006.

If you own shares in large American corporations, you're a winner in the weak-dollar gamble. Last week Coca-Cola's stick bubbled to a five-year high after it reported a fantastic quarter. Foreign sales accounted for 65 percent of Coke's beverage business. Other American companies profiting from this trend include McDonald's and IBM.

American tourists, however, shouldn't expect any relief soon. The dollar lost strength the way many marriages break up-slowly, and then all at once. And currencies don't turn on a dime. So if you want to avoid the pain inflicted by the increasingly pathetic dollar, cancel that summer vacation to England and look to New England. There, the dollar is still treated with a little respect.

What does the author imply by saying "currencies don't turn on a dime"(Line 2, Para 7)?（　）

Rising wages-together with currency fluctuations and high fuel costs-are eating away the once-formidable "China price" advantage, prompting thousands of factory owners to flee the Pearl River Delta. Much has been written about the more than doubling of wages at the Shenzhen factory of Foxconn, the world's largest electronics contract manufacturer, which produces Apple iPhones and iPads and employs 920,000 people in China alone. "One can talk about a world pre-and post-Foxconn," says Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung, the world's biggest sourcing company and a supplier of Wal-Mart. "Foxconn is as important as that."

Foxconn's wage increases are only the most dramatic. Our analysis suggests that, since February, minimum wages have climbed more than 20 percent in 20 Chinese regions and up to 30 percent in some, including Sichuan. At a Guangdong Province factory supplying Honda, wages have risen an astonishing 47 percent. All this is bad news for companies operating in the world's manufacturing hub, and chief executives should assume that double-digit annual rises-if not on the scale witnessed this year-are here to stay.

Looked at another way, however, wage inflation provides companies with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink radically the way they approach global production-and they should do so sooner rather than later.

Why the urgency? After all, wage hikes in China are nothing new. Since 1990, they have risen by an average of 13 percent a year in U.S. dollar terms and 19 percent annually in the past five years.

There are two big reasons the situation is different now. The first has to do with productivity. Over the past 20 years, productivity increases have broadly matched wage increase, negating their impact. The pay rises came from a very low base, so while average wages grew 19 percent a year from 2005 to 2010, this amounted to only $260 a month per employee, a sum that could be offset by more efficient production or switching to cheaper sources of parts and materials.

If labor costs continue, however, to increase at 19 percent a year for another five years, monthly wages would grew $623 per month, according to BCG estimates. Such an increase would ripple through the economy in the form of higher prices for components, business services, cargo- handling and office staff.

The second reason relates to societal change. Until now, it has been easy to lure a seemingly unlimited number of young, low-wage workers to the richer coastal regions and house them cheaply in dormitories until they saved enough to return home to their families in the interior provinces. In the future, though, young workers will be harder to recruit. This is partly because there will be fewer of them: Largely because of the country's one-child policy, the number of Chinese aged 15 to 29 will start declining in 2011. Moreover, with living standards rising across China, fewer of today's rural youth will want to go to coastal regions to toil for 60 hours a week on an assembly line and live in a cramped dormitory.

So what can CEOs do in this fast-changing environment? An instinctive reaction is to search for cheaper labor elsewhere. But this is short-sighted and would provide-at best-a short-term fix. Another option is to stay in China and try to squeeze out greater productivity gains.

According to paragraph 1 and 2, we can summarize that_____.

Rising wages-together with currency fluctuations and high fuel costs-are eating away the once-formidable "China price" advantage, prompting thousands of factory owners to flee the Pearl River Delta. Much has been written about the more than doubling of wages at the Shenzhen factory of Foxconn, the world's largest electronics contract manufacturer, which produces Apple iPhones and iPads and employs 920,000 people in China alone. "One can talk about a world pre-and post-Foxconn," says Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung, the world's biggest sourcing company and a supplier of Wal-Mart. "Foxconn is as important as that."

Foxconn's wage increases are only the most dramatic. Our analysis suggests that, since February, minimum wages have climbed more than 20 percent in 20 Chinese regions and up to 30 percent in some, including Sichuan. At a Guangdong Province factory supplying Honda, wages have risen an astonishing 47 percent. All this is bad news for companies operating in the world's manufacturing hub, and chief executives should assume that double-digit annual rises-if not on the scale witnessed this year-are here to stay.

Looked at another way, however, wage inflation provides companies with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink radically the way they approach global production-and they should do so sooner rather than later.

Why the urgency? After all, wage hikes in China are nothing new. Since 1990, they have risen by an average of 13 percent a year in U.S. dollar terms and 19 percent annually in the past five years.

There are two big reasons the situation is different now. The first has to do with productivity. Over the past 20 years, productivity increases have broadly matched wage increase, negating their impact. The pay rises came from a very low base, so while average wages grew 19 percent a year from 2005 to 2010, this amounted to only $260 a month per employee, a sum that could be offset by more efficient production or switching to cheaper sources of parts and materials.

If labor costs continue, however, to increase at 19 percent a year for another five years, monthly wages would grew $623 per month, according to BCG estimates. Such an increase would ripple through the economy in the form of higher prices for components, business services, cargo- handling and office staff.

The second reason relates to societal change. Until now, it has been easy to lure a seemingly unlimited number of young, low-wage workers to the richer coastal regions and house them cheaply in dormitories until they saved enough to return home to their families in the interior provinces. In the future, though, young workers will be harder to recruit. This is partly because there will be fewer of them: Largely because of the country's one-child policy, the number of Chinese aged 15 to 29 will start declining in 2011. Moreover, with living standards rising across China, fewer of today's rural youth will want to go to coastal regions to toil for 60 hours a week on an assembly line and live in a cramped dormitory.

So what can CEOs do in this fast-changing environment? An instinctive reaction is to search for cheaper labor elsewhere. But this is short-sighted and would provide-at best-a short-term fix. Another option is to stay in China and try to squeeze out greater productivity gains.

In Paragraph 5,the author discusses that_____.

Rising wages-together with currency fluctuations and high fuel costs-are eating away the once-formidable "China price" advantage, prompting thousands of factory owners to flee the Pearl River Delta. Much has been written about the more than doubling of wages at the Shenzhen factory of Foxconn, the world's largest electronics contract manufacturer, which produces Apple iPhones and iPads and employs 920,000 people in China alone. "One can talk about a world pre-and post-Foxconn," says Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung, the world's biggest sourcing company and a supplier of Wal-Mart. "Foxconn is as important as that."

Foxconn's wage increases are only the most dramatic. Our analysis suggests that, since February, minimum wages have climbed more than 20 percent in 20 Chinese regions and up to 30 percent in some, including Sichuan. At a Guangdong Province factory supplying Honda, wages have risen an astonishing 47 percent. All this is bad news for companies operating in the world's manufacturing hub, and chief executives should assume that double-digit annual rises-if not on the scale witnessed this year-are here to stay.

Looked at another way, however, wage inflation provides companies with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink radically the way they approach global production-and they should do so sooner rather than later.

Why the urgency? After all, wage hikes in China are nothing new. Since 1990, they have risen by an average of 13 percent a year in U.S. dollar terms and 19 percent annually in the past five years.

There are two big reasons the situation is different now. The first has to do with productivity. Over the past 20 years, productivity increases have broadly matched wage increase, negating their impact. The pay rises came from a very low base, so while average wages grew 19 percent a year from 2005 to 2010, this amounted to only $260 a month per employee, a sum that could be offset by more efficient production or switching to cheaper sources of parts and materials.

If labor costs continue, however, to increase at 19 percent a year for another five years, monthly wages would grew $623 per month, according to BCG estimates. Such an increase would ripple through the economy in the form of higher prices for components, business services, cargo- handling and office staff.

The second reason relates to societal change. Until now, it has been easy to lure a seemingly unlimited number of young, low-wage workers to the richer coastal regions and house them cheaply in dormitories until they saved enough to return home to their families in the interior provinces. In the future, though, young workers will be harder to recruit. This is partly because there will be fewer of them: Largely because of the country's one-child policy, the number of Chinese aged 15 to 29 will start declining in 2011. Moreover, with living standards rising across China, fewer of today's rural youth will want to go to coastal regions to toil for 60 hours a week on an assembly line and live in a cramped dormitory.

So what can CEOs do in this fast-changing environment? An instinctive reaction is to search for cheaper labor elsewhere. But this is short-sighted and would provide-at best-a short-term fix. Another option is to stay in China and try to squeeze out greater productivity gains.

The reasons why young worker will be harder to recruit exclude_____.

Rising wages-together with currency fluctuations and high fuel costs-are eating away the once-formidable "China price" advantage, prompting thousands of factory owners to flee the Pearl River Delta. Much has been written about the more than doubling of wages at the Shenzhen factory of Foxconn, the world's largest electronics contract manufacturer, which produces Apple iPhones and iPads and employs 920,000 people in China alone. "One can talk about a world pre-and post-Foxconn," says Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung, the world's biggest sourcing company and a supplier of Wal-Mart. "Foxconn is as important as that."

Foxconn's wage increases are only the most dramatic. Our analysis suggests that, since February, minimum wages have climbed more than 20 percent in 20 Chinese regions and up to 30 percent in some, including Sichuan. At a Guangdong Province factory supplying Honda, wages have risen an astonishing 47 percent. All this is bad news for companies operating in the world's manufacturing hub, and chief executives should assume that double-digit annual rises-if not on the scale witnessed this year-are here to stay.

Looked at another way, however, wage inflation provides companies with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink radically the way they approach global production-and they should do so sooner rather than later.

Why the urgency? After all, wage hikes in China are nothing new. Since 1990, they have risen by an average of 13 percent a year in U.S. dollar terms and 19 percent annually in the past five years.

There are two big reasons the situation is different now. The first has to do with productivity. Over the past 20 years, productivity increases have broadly matched wage increase, negating their impact. The pay rises came from a very low base, so while average wages grew 19 percent a year from 2005 to 2010, this amounted to only $260 a month per employee, a sum that could be offset by more efficient production or switching to cheaper sources of parts and materials.

If labor costs continue, however, to increase at 19 percent a year for another five years, monthly wages would grew $623 per month, according to BCG estimates. Such an increase would ripple through the economy in the form of higher prices for components, business services, cargo- handling and office staff.

The second reason relates to societal change. Until now, it has been easy to lure a seemingly unlimited number of young, low-wage workers to the richer coastal regions and house them cheaply in dormitories until they saved enough to return home to their families in the interior provinces. In the future, though, young workers will be harder to recruit. This is partly because there will be fewer of them: Largely because of the country's one-child policy, the number of Chinese aged 15 to 29 will start declining in 2011. Moreover, with living standards rising across China, fewer of today's rural youth will want to go to coastal regions to toil for 60 hours a week on an assembly line and live in a cramped dormitory.

So what can CEOs do in this fast-changing environment? An instinctive reaction is to search for cheaper labor elsewhere. But this is short-sighted and would provide-at best-a short-term fix. Another option is to stay in China and try to squeeze out greater productivity gains.

On which of the following would the author most probably agree?（　）

Rising wages-together with currency fluctuations and high fuel costs-are eating away the once-formidable "China price" advantage, prompting thousands of factory owners to flee the Pearl River Delta. Much has been written about the more than doubling of wages at the Shenzhen factory of Foxconn, the world's largest electronics contract manufacturer, which produces Apple iPhones and iPads and employs 920,000 people in China alone. "One can talk about a world pre-and post-Foxconn," says Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung, the world's biggest sourcing company and a supplier of Wal-Mart. "Foxconn is as important as that."

Foxconn's wage increases are only the most dramatic. Our analysis suggests that, since February, minimum wages have climbed more than 20 percent in 20 Chinese regions and up to 30 percent in some, including Sichuan. At a Guangdong Province factory supplying Honda, wages have risen an astonishing 47 percent. All this is bad news for companies operating in the world's manufacturing hub, and chief executives should assume that double-digit annual rises-if not on the scale witnessed this year-are here to stay.

Looked at another way, however, wage inflation provides companies with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rethink radically the way they approach global production-and they should do so sooner rather than later.

Why the urgency? After all, wage hikes in China are nothing new. Since 1990, they have risen by an average of 13 percent a year in U.S. dollar terms and 19 percent annually in the past five years.

There are two big reasons the situation is different now. The first has to do with productivity. Over the past 20 years, productivity increases have broadly matched wage increase, negating their impact. The pay rises came from a very low base, so while average wages grew 19 percent a year from 2005 to 2010, this amounted to only $260 a month per employee, a sum that could be offset by more efficient production or switching to cheaper sources of parts and materials.

If labor costs continue, however, to increase at 19 percent a year for another five years, monthly wages would grew $623 per month, according to BCG estimates. Such an increase would ripple through the economy in the form of higher prices for components, business services, cargo- handling and office staff.

The second reason relates to societal change. Until now, it has been easy to lure a seemingly unlimited number of young, low-wage workers to the richer coastal regions and house them cheaply in dormitories until they saved enough to return home to their families in the interior provinces. In the future, though, young workers will be harder to recruit. This is partly because there will be fewer of them: Largely because of the country's one-child policy, the number of Chinese aged 15 to 29 will start declining in 2011. Moreover, with living standards rising across China, fewer of today's rural youth will want to go to coastal regions to toil for 60 hours a week on an assembly line and live in a cramped dormitory.

So what can CEOs do in this fast-changing environment? An instinctive reaction is to search for cheaper labor elsewhere. But this is short-sighted and would provide-at best-a short-term fix. Another option is to stay in China and try to squeeze out greater productivity gains.

Which of the following would be the best title for text?（　）