For good or ill, globalization has become the economic buzz-word of the 1990s. National economies are undoubtedly becoming steadily more integrated as cross-border flows of trade, investment and financial capital increase. Consumers are buying more foreign goods, a growing number of firms now operate across national borders, and savers are investing more than ever before in far-flung places.
Whether all of this is for good or ill is a topic of heated debate. One positive view is that globalization is an unmixed blessing, with the potential to boost productivity and living standards everywhere. This is because a globally integrated economy can lead to a better division of labor between countries, allowing low-wage countries to specialize in labor-intensive tasks while highwage countries use workers in more productive ways. It will allow firms to exploit bigger economies of scale. And with globalization, capital can be shifted to whatever country offers the most productive
A. allow low-wage countries to use workers in more productive ways
B. help low-wage countries get rid of labor-intensive economy
C. enable firms to exploit bigger economies of scale
D. cause capital to shift to countries where there is greatest fund shortage
For good or ill, globalization has become the economic buzz-word of the 1990s. National economies are undoubtedly becoming steadily more integrated as cross-border flows of trade, investment and financial capital increase. Consumers are buying more foreign goods, a growing number of firms now operate across national borders, and savers are investing more than ever before in far-flung places.
Whether all of this is for good or ill is a topic of heated debate. One positive view is that globalization is an unmixed blessing, with the potential to boost productivity and living standards everywhere. This is because a globally integrated economy can lead to a better division of labor between countries, allowing low-wage countries to specialize in labor-intensive tasks while highwage countries use workers in more productive ways. It will allow firms to exploit bigger economies of scale. And with globalization, capital can be shifted to whatever country offers the most productive
A. increasing flows of cross-border trade, investment and financial capital
B. more and more consumers going abroad to buy goods
C. many companies establishing new businesses
D. savers investing more in developed areas than in developing countries
Whether a large population is good or not has long been a subject of discussion among economists. It has been argued that the supply of good land is limited. To feed a large population, even poorer land must be made use of and the good land is worked too much. Thus, each person produces less and this means a lower average income that could only be dealt with by a smaller population. Other economists have argued that a large population gives more good ideas for plans and the development of ports, roads and railways, which are not likely to be built unless there are more people who want to use them.
One of the difficulties in carrying out a world-wide birth control program lies in the fact that official attitudes to population growth change from country to country. In the developing country where a greatly growing population is pressing hard upon the limits of food and space, the government will try to limit birthrate. In a highly industrialized society a decreasing birthra
A. higher productivity, but a lower average income
B. lower productivity, but a higher average income
C. lower productivity, but a lower average income
D. higher productivity, and a higher average income
Never has a straitjacket seemed so ill-fitting or so insecure. The Euro area’s "stability and growth pact" was supposed to stop irresponsible member states running excessive budget deficits, defined as 3% of GDP or more. Chief among the restraints was the threat of large fines if member governments breached the limit for three years in a row. For some time now, no one has seriously believed those restraints would hold. In the early hours of Tuesday November 25th, the Euro’s fiscal straitjacket finally came apart at the seams.
The pact’s fate was sealed over an extended dinner meeting of the Euro area’s 12 finance ministers. They chewed over the sorry fiscal record of the Euro’s two largest members, France and Germany. Both governments ran deficits of more than 3% of GDP last year and will do so again this year. Both expect to breach the limit for the third time in 2004. Earlier this year the European Commission, which polices the pa
A. the enforcement of Eurogroup’s prescriptions.
B. the hypocrisy of some Euro’s members on deficit.
C. the Euro’s dilemma in solving deficit problems.
D. the implementation of Euro’s monetary policies.
我来回答:
