[单选题]Text 4 Many Americans regard the jury system as a concrete expression of crucial democratic values,including the principles that all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy are equally competent to serve on juries;that jurors should be selected randomly from a representative cross section of the community;that no citizen should be denied the right to serve on a jury on account of race,religion,sex,or national origin;that defendants are entitled to trial by their peers;and that verdicts should represent the conscience of the community and not just the letter of the law.The jury is also said to be the best surviving example of direct rather than representative democracy.In a direct democracy,citizens take turns governing themselves,rather than electing representatives to govern for them.But as recently as in 1968,jury selection procedures conflicted with these democratic ideals.In some states,for example,jury duty was limited to persons of supposedly superior intelligence,education,and moral character.Although the Supreme Court of the United States had prohibited intentional racial discrimination in jury selection as early as the 1880 case of Strauder v.West Virginia,the practice of selecting socalled elite or blueribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination laws.The system also failed to regularly include women on juries until the mid20th century.Although women first served on state juries in Utah in 1898,it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made women eligible for jury duty.Even then several states automatically exempted women from jury duty unless they personally asked to have their names included on the jury list.This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed at home,and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.In 1968,the Congress of the United States passed the Jury Selection and Service Act,ushering in a new era of democratic reforms for the jury.This law abolished special educational requirements for federal jurors and required them to be selected at random from a cross section of the entire community.In the landmark 1975 decision Taylor v．Louisiana,the Supreme Court extended the requirement that juries be representative of all parts of the community to the state level.The Taylor decision also declared sex discrimination in jury selection to be unconstitutional and ordered states to use the same procedures for selecting male and female jurors. The practice of selecting socalled elite jurors prior to 1968 showed______
A.the inadequacy of antidiscrimination laws
B.the prevalent discrimination against certain races
C.the conflicting ideals in jury selection procedures
D.the arrogance common among the Supreme Court judges

[单选题]Text 4 Many Americans regard the jury system as a concrete expression of crucial democratic values,including the principles that all citizens who meet minimal qualifications of age and literacy are equally competent to serve on juries;that jurors should be selected randomly from a representative cross section of the community;that no citizen should be denied the right to serve on a jury on account of race,religion,sex,or national origin;that defendants are entitled to trial by their peers;and that verdicts should represent the conscience of the community and not just the letter of the law.The jury is also said to be the best surviving example of direct rather than representative democracy.In a direct democracy,citizens take turns governing themselves,rather than electing representatives to govern for them.But as recently as in 1968,jury selection procedures conflicted with these democratic ideals.In some states,for example,jury duty was limited to persons of supposedly superior intelligence,education,and moral character.Although the Supreme Court of the United States had prohibited intentional racial discrimination in jury selection as early as the 1880 case of Strauder v.West Virginia,the practice of selecting socalled elite or blueribbon juries provided a convenient way around this and other antidiscrimination laws.The system also failed to regularly include women on juries until the mid20th century.Although women first served on state juries in Utah in 1898,it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made women eligible for jury duty.Even then several states automatically exempted women from jury duty unless they personally asked to have their names included on the jury list.This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed at home,and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.In 1968,the Congress of the United States passed the Jury Selection and Service Act,ushering in a new era of democratic reforms for the jury.This law abolished special educational requirements for federal jurors and required them to be selected at random from a cross section of the entire community.In the landmark 1975 decision Taylor v．Louisiana,the Supreme Court extended the requirement that juries be representative of all parts of the community to the state level.The Taylor decision also declared sex discrimination in jury selection to be unconstitutional and ordered states to use the same procedures for selecting male and female jurors. In discussing the US jury system,the text centers on____
A.its nature and problems
B.its characteristics and tradition
C.its problems and their solutions
D.its tradition and development

[单选题]Text 4 Many people talked of the 288,000 new jobs the Labor Department reported for June,along with the drop in the unemployment rate to 6.1 percent,as good news.And they were right.For now it appears the economy is creating jobs at a decent pace.We still have a long way to go to get back to full employment,but at least we are now finally moving forward at a faster pace.However,there is another important part of the jobs picture that was largely overlooked.There was a big jump in the number of people who report voluntarily working part-time.This figure is now 830,000（4.4 percent）above its year ago level.Before explaining the connection to the Obamacare,it is worth making an important distinction.Many people who work part-time jobs actually want full-time jobs.They take part-time work because this is all they can get.An increase in involuntary part-time work is evidence of weakness in the labor market and it means that many people will be having a very hard time making ends meet.There was an increase in involuntary part-time in June,but the general direction has been down.Involuntary part-time employment is still far higher than before the recession,but it is down by 640,000（7.9percent）from its year ago level.We know the difference between voluntary and involuntary part-time employment because people tell us.The survey used by the Labor Department asks people if they worked less than 35 hours in the reference week.If the answer is“yes”,they are classified as working part-time.The survey then asks whether they worked less than 35 hours in that week because they wanted to work less than full time or because they had no choice.They are only classified as voluntary part-time workers if they tell the survey taker they chose to work less than 35 hours a week.The issue of voluntary part-time relates to Obamacare because one of the main purposes was to allow people to get insurance outside of employment.For many people,especially those with serious health conditions or family members with serious health conditions,before Obamacare the only way to get insurance was through a job that provided health insurance.However,Obamacare has allowed more than 12 million people to either get insurance through Medicaid or the exchanges.These are people who may previously have felt the need to get a full-time job that provided insurance in order to cover themselves and their families.With Obamacare there is no longer a link between employment and insurance. Which part of the jobs picture was neglected?
A.The prospect of a thriving job market.
B.The increase of voluntary parttime jobs.
C.The possibility of full employment.
D.The acceleration of job creation.

[单选题]Text3 Mention price cartels and many people will think of big,overt ones like the one OPEC runs for oil and the now-extinct one for diamonds.But at least as damaging are the many secret cartels in sucb unglamorous areas as ball-bearings and cargo rates,which go on unnoticed for years,quietly bumping up the end cost to consumers of all manner of goods and services.Collusion among producers to rig prices and carve up markets is thriving,with the cartels growing ever more intricate and global in scope.Competition authorities have uncovered several whopping conspiracies in recent years,including one in which more than 20 airlines worldwide had fixed prices on perhaps 20 billion of freight shipments.They were fined a total of 3 billion;and so far the compensation claims from ripped-off customers comfortably exceed l billion.One academic study found that the typical cartel raised the price of the goods or services in question by 20%.Another suggested that cartels were robbing poor countries'consumers of tens of billions ofdollars a year:if so,negating all the aid that rich countries'governments send them.Investigators are still unravelling a huge global network of cartels among suppliers of a wide range of car parts.Makers of seat belts,radiators and foam seat-stuffing have had hefiy fines slapped on them.Earlier this month the European Commission fined five makers of automotive bearings a total of 953m（1.32 billion）.This week its investigators raided a bunch of makers of car exhausts.Also in recent days,Brazilian prosecutors have charged executives from a dozen foreign train-makers accused ofrigging bids for rail and subway contracts in the country's main cities.Price-fixing has infected high finance,too.Some of banking's biggest names stand accused offiddling interest-rate and foreign-exchange benchmarks.The good news is that enforcement has got tougher,smarter and more coordinated.Gone are the days when price-fixers got a slap on the wrist.Firms can expect swingeing fines,and bosses can go to jail.Since many cartels now operate across borders,so do investigators:American and Japanese trustbusters joined forces to flush out the car-parts cartels.And incentives for whistleblowers have also increased:around 50 countries now offer immunity or reduced penalties for snitches.That is all for the better,but the penalties for price-fixing remain too mild.The best study of the issue so far concluded that,given the still-low risk of detection,collusion pays.Yet beyond a certain point-which the fines now imposed by American and European regulators have probably reached-fines inflict so much damage on guilty companies that they undermine competition instead of enhancing it.The answer is stiffer prison sentences,particularly for senior executives.American courts,only too ready to lock up other types of miscreants for a long time,have rarely jailed egregious price-fixers for anything like the maximum of ten years that the law allows.Other countries have even more scope to increase sentences. What kind of supplementary conditions can help control unfair monopoly?
A.More tougher enforcement can be made.
B.Let companies operate in cross trade condition,
C.The mechanism of rewards whistleblowers.
D.Wiser measures can be provided.

[单选题]Text 3 Over the past decade,many companies had perfected the art of creating automatic behaviors—habits—among consumers.These habits have helped companies earn billions of dollars when customers eat snacks or wipe counters almost without thinking,often in response to a carefully designed set of daily cues.“There are fundamental public health problems,like dirty hands instead of a soap habit,that remain killers only because we can't figure out how to change people's habits，”said Dr.Curtis,the director of the Hygiene Center at the London School of Hygiene&Tropical Medicine.“We wanted to learn from private industry how to create new behaviors that happen automatically.”The companies that Dr.Curtis turned to—Procter&Gamble,ColgatePalmolive and Unilever—had invested hundreds of millions of dollars finding the subtle cues in consumers'lives that corporations could use to introduce new routines.If you look hard enough,you'll find that many of the products we use every day—chewing gums,skin moisturizers,disinfecting wipes,air fresheners,water purifiers,health snacks,teeth whiteners,fabric softeners,vitamins—are results of manufactured habits.A century ago,few people regularly brushed their teeth multiple times a day.Today,because of shrewed advertising and public health campaigns,many Americans habitually give their pearly whites a cavitypreventing scrub twice a day,often with Colgate,Crest or one of the other brands.A few decades ago,many people didn't drink water outside of a meal.Then beverage companies started bottling the production of faroff springs,and now office workers unthinkingly sip bottled water all day long.Chewing gum,once bought primarily by adolescent boys,is now featured in commercials as a breath freshener and teeth cleanser for use after a meal.Skin moisturizers are advertised as part of morning beauty rituals,slipped in between hair brushing and putting on makeup.“Our products succeed when they become part of daily or weekly patterns,”said Carol Berning,a consumer psychologist who recently retired from Procter&Gamble,the company that sold$76 billion of Tide,Crest and other products last year.“Creating positive habits is a huge part of improving our consumers'lives,and it's essential to making new products commercially viable.”Through experiments and observation,social scientists like Dr.Berning have learned that there is power in tying certain behaviors to habitual cues through relentless advertising.As this new science of habit has emerged,controversies have erupted when the tactics have been used to sell questionable beauty creams or unhealthy foods. Which of the following does NOT belong to products that help create people's habits?
A.Tide.
B.Crest.
C.Colgate.
D.Unilever.

[单选题]Text l For more than two centuries,many people have tr/ed to shake that peculiar branch of the tree of knowledge called economics.Perhaps no one has done it better than Richard Thaler,a University of Chicago professor who has challenged the traditional idea that free markets reflect the self-interests of rational individuals.On Oct.9 he was awarded the 2017 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for recognizing that human behavior is very complex.Economic models cannot be easily simplified and must be"more human"by admitting that theories based on sel{-interest are not always correct.Indeed,the field of economics has long been overdue for a humility check.Mr.Thaler showed his own lack of arrogance in his response to the question of how he would spend the$1.1 million that comes with the Nobel Prize:"I will try to spend it as irrationally as possible."In other fields of knowledge,the fact that people do not always act in their own self-interest is pretty obvious.Yet most economists still rely on Adam Smith's 18th-century notion of markets being guided by"the invisible hand"of forces driven by people seeking their own well-being.What is often overlooked is that Smith himself was more complex.He also took a noble view of human behavior.He wrote:"How selfish soever man may be supposed,there are evidently some principles in his nature,which interest him in the fortune of others,and render their happiness necessary to him,though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it."Thaler's work largely focuses on why humans often do things contrary to their own good,such as not saving money for retirement.His theories have created a whole new field called behavioral economics,which looks for ways that either governments or companies can,by using suggestions and positive reinforcement,"nudge"people to take action in their long-term interests.Even this new field is subject to a similar critique.Can governments and corporate officials operate any more rationally in trying to"nudge"people whom they deem too irrational?Scholars Richard Reeves and Dimitrios Halikias argue that trying to influence people's actions is the wrong approach.They suggest that society and its economy are best developed through sel{-effective attributes of character,not paternalistic nudges to change behavior.A humane society,they write,"is one in which men and women possess the discipline,self-command and personal autonomy needed to live with a sense of purpose and direction."Unlike other Nobel Prizes,the one for economics has been given only since 1969.The field remains fluid in its theories.Perhaps a future prize can go to an economist who can take Thaler's ideas even further and show how prosperity relies on traits of character in a society.Models of economics are best built on models of thought. The last paragraph implies that Thaler's work_____
A.doesn't deserve the Nobel Prize for economics
B.fails to base models of economics on models of thought
C.succeeds in showing how prosperity relies on traits of character
D.opens the potential for greater insights on the role of character in economics.