Arboria is floundering in the global marketplace,incurring devastating losses in market position and profits. The problem is not Arboria’s trade policy. Arboria faces the prospect of continuing economic loss until Arborian business and political leaders recognize the fundamental differences between Arboria and foreign economic systems. Today the key trade issue is not free trade versus protectionism but diminishing trade versus expanding trade.

Arboria is operating with an obsolete trade policy, an artifact of the mid-1940s when Arboria and Whorfland dominated the global economy, tariffs were the principal obstacle to trade, and Arborian supremacy was uncontested in virtually all industries. In the intervening decades, economic circumstances have shifted radically. Arborian trade policy has not.

Today, Arbona's trade policy seems paralyzed by the relentless conflict between proponents of “free” and “fair” trade. The free traders argue that Arbonian markets should be open, and the movement of goods and services across national borders unrestrained. The fair traders assert that access to Arborian markets should be restricted until Arborian businesses are granted equal access to foreign markets. They contend that free trade is impossible whlie other nations erect barriers to Arborian exports.

Both are correct: fair trade requires equal access and equal access leads to free trade. But both sides base their positions on the same two outdated premises:

1.Global commerce is conducted under the terms of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (IGAT) and dominated by Arboria and similar economic systems abroad.

2.Multilateral negotiations are the most effective way to resolve pressing trade issues. 

Both assumptions are wrong. The 40-year-old GATT now covers less than 7 percent of global commerce. World trade is no longer dominated by the free-trade economies; nearly 75 percent is conducted by economic systems operating with principles at odds with those of Arboria. Forging a multilateral trade policy consensus among so many diverse economic systems has become virtually impossible. And while multilateral talks drag on, Arboria misses opportunities for trade expansion.


In presenting the argument in the passage, the author uses all of the following EXCEPT:


statistical information about global commerce

definitions of terms concerning world trade

generalizations about Arboria's economic system

historical background of Arborian trade policy

an example of an economic system whose principles differ from those of Arboria

考题讲解

题目分析:

文章细节题:在陈述论据的时候,作者用了以下哪点除了?


选项分析:

A选项:关于全球商业的数据信息:最后一段的7%、75%…。

B选项:关于全球贸易的术语的定义:对free trade和fair trade的解释。

C选项:对Arboria的经济体系的概括:文章描述了Arboria在1940s称霸全球经济的情况。

D选项:
Arboria外贸政策的历史背景:描述了1940s的情况。

E选项:正确。
举了一个关于和Arboria的原则不相同的经济体系的例子:文章除了提到Whorfland(和Arboria相同)这一个例子,没有举别的和Arboria不同的例子。

展开显示

登录注册 后可以参加讨论

OG2020-RC