找考题网-背景图
单项选择题

The Economic Situation of Japan in the 18th Century
In the eighteenth century, Japan’s feudal overlords, from the shogun to the humblest samurai, found themselves under financial stress. In part, this stress can be attributed to the overlords’ failure to adjust to a rapidly expanding economy, but the stress was also due to factors beyond the overlords’ control. Concentration of the samurai in castletowns had acted as a stimulus to trade. Commercial efficiency, in turn, had put temptations in the way of buyers. Since most samuri had been reduced to idleness by years of peace, encouraged to engage in scholarship and martial exercises or to perform administrative tasks that took little time, it is not surprising that their tastes and habits grew expensive. Overlords’ income, despite the increase in rice production among their tenant farmers, failed to keep pace with their expenses. Although shortfalls in overlords’ income resulted almost as much from laxity among their tax collectors (the nearly invitable outcome of hereditary officeholding) as from their higher standards of living, a misfortune like a fire or flood, bringing an increase in expenses or a drop in revenue, could put a domain in debt to the city rice - brokers who handled its finances. Once in debt, neither the individual samurai nor the shogun himself found it easy to recover.
It was difficult for individual samurai overloads to increase their income because the amount of rice that farmers could be made to pay in taxes was not unlimited, and since the income of Japan’s central government consisted in part of taxes collected by the shogun from his huge domain, the government too was constrained. Therefore, the Tokugawa shoguns began to look to other sources for revenue. Cash profits from government - owned mines were already on the decline because the most easily worked deposits of silver and gold had been exhausted, although debasement of the coinage had compensated for the loss. Opening up new farmland was a possibility, but most of what was suitable had already been exploited and further reclamation was technically unfeasible. Direct taxation of the samurai themselves would be politically dangerous. This left the shoguns only commerce as a potential source of government income.
Most of the country’s wealth, or so it seemed, was finding its way into the hands of city merchants. It appeared reasonable that they should contribute part of that revenue to ease the shogun’s burden of financing the state. A means of obtaining such revenue was soon found by levying forced loans, known as goyo - kin; although these were not taxes in the strict sense, since they were irregular in timing and arbitrary in amount, they were high in yield. Unfortunately, they pushed up prices. Thus, regrettably, the Tokugawa shoguns’ search for solvency for the Government made it increasingly difficult for individual Japanese who lived on fixed stipends to make ends meet.
The passage suggests that, in eighteenth - century Japan, the office of tax collector ______.

A. remained within families
B. took up most of the officeholder’s time
C. was regarded with derision by many Japanese
D. was a source of personal profit to the officeholder
热门试题

单项选择题All of the following can be inferred from the passage EXCEPT that [A] Harry Blackmun used to support affirmative action. [B] in Lyndon Johnson’s tenure, segregation haunted the US. [C] Ed Sarpolis is generally in favor of affirmative action. [D] African-Americans are main movers behind the Michigan proposal.

All of which raises a question: why are we still wrestling with this stuff Why, more than a quarter of a century after the high court ruled race had a legitimate place in university admissions decisions, are we still fighting over whether race should play a role
One answer is that the very idea of affirmative action--that is, systematically treating members of various groups differently in the pursuit of diversity or social justice--strikes some people as downright immoral. For to believe in affirmative action is to believe in a concept of equality turned upside down. It is to believe that "to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently, " as the idea was expressed by U. S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun.
That argument has never been an easy sell, even when made passionately by President Lyndon B. Johnson during an era in which prejudice was thicker than L. A. smog. Now the argument is infinitely more difficult to make. Even those generally supportive of affirmative action don’t like the connotations it sometimes carries. "No one wants preferential treatment, including African-Americans, "observed Ed Sarpolis, vice president of EPIC-MRA, a Michigan polling firm.
In 2003, the Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan’s right to use race in the pursuit of "diversity," even as it condemned the way the undergraduate school had chosen to do so. The decision left Jennifer Gratz, the named plaintiff, fuming. "I called Ward Connerly... and I said, ’We need to do something about this’, " recalled Gratz, an animated former cheerleader. They decided that if the Supreme Court wouldn’t give them what they wanted, they would take their case--and their proposition--directly to the people.
Californians disagree about the impact of Connerly’s proposition on their state. But despite some exceedingly grim predictions, the sky did not fall in. Most people went about their lives much as they always had.
In a sane world, the battle in Michigan, and indeed the battle over affirmative action writ large, would offer an opportunity to seriously engage a question the enemies and defenders of affirmative action claim to care about: how do you go about creating a society where all people--not just the lucky few--have the opportunities they deserve It is a question much broader than the debate over affirmative action. But until we begin to move toward an answer, the debate over affirmative action will continue--even if it is something of a sideshow to what should be the main event.

单项选择题Before assembly line was introduced, the price of a Ford’s car was [A] $260. [B] $130. [C] $520. [D] $1040.

A revolutionary manufacturing process made it possible for anyone to own a car. Henry Ford is the man who put the world on wheels.
When it comes to singling out those who have made a difference in all our lives, you cannot overlook Henry Ford. A historian a century from now might well conclude that it was Henry Ford who most influenced all manufacturing everywhere, even to this day, by introducing a new way to make cars—one, strange to say, that originated in slaughter houses.
Back in the early 1900s, slaughter houses used what could have been called a "disassembly line." That is, the carcass of a slain steer or a pig was moved past various meat-cutters, each of whom cut off only a certain portion. Ford reversed this process to see if it would speed up production of a part of an automobile engine called a magneto. Rather than have each worker completely assemble a magneto, one of its elements was placed on a conveyer, and each worker, as it passed, added another component to it, the same one each time. Professor David Hounshell, of The University of Delaware, an expert on industrial development tells what happened: "The previous day, workers carrying out the entire process had averaged one magneto every 20 minutes. But on that day, on the line, the assembly team averaged one every 13 minutes and 10 seconds per person."
Within a year, the time had been reduced to five minutes. In 1913, Ford went all the way. Hooked together by ropes, partially assembled vehicles were towed past workers who completed them one piece at a time. It wasn’t long before Ford was turning out several hundred thousand cars a year, a remarkable achievement then. And so efficient and economical was this new system that he cut the price of his cars in half, to $260, putting them within reach of all those who, up until that time, could not afford them. Soon, auto makers over the world copied him. In fact, he encouraged them to do so by writing a book about all of his innovations, entitled Today and Tomorrow. The Age of the Automobile had arrived. Today, aided by robots and other forms of automation, everything from toasters to perfumes is made on assembly lines.
Edsel Ford, Henry’s great-grandson, and a Ford vice president: “I think that my great-grandfather would just be amazed at how far technology has come."
Many of today’s innovations come from Japan. Norman Bodek, who publishes books about manufacturing processes, finds this ironic. On a recent trip to Japan he talked to two of the top officials of Toyota. "When I asked them where these secrets came from, where their ideas came from to manufacture in a totally different way, they laughed, and they said. ’Well. We just read it in Henry Ford’s book from 1926: Today and Tomorrow.’\