Conventional wisdom has it that large deficits in the United States budget cause interest rates to rise. Two main arguments are given for this claim. According to the first, as the deficit increases, the government will borrow more to make up for the ensuing shortage of funds. Consequently, it is argued, if both the total supply of credit (money available for borrowing) and the amount of credit sought by nongovernment borrowers remain relatively stable, as is often supposed, then the price of credit (the interest rate) will increase. That this is so is suggested by the basic economic principle that if supplies of a commodity (here, credit) remain fixed and demand for that commodity increases, its price will also increase. The second argument supposes that the government will tend to finance its deficits by increasing the money supply with insufficient regard for whether there is enough room for economic growth to enable such an increase to occur without causing inflation. It is then argued that financiers will expect the deficit to cause inflation and will raise interest rates, anticipating that because of inflation the money they lend will be worth less when paid back.

Unfortunately for the first argument, it is unreasonable to assume that nongovernment borrowing and the supply of credit will remain relatively stable. Nongovernment borrowing sometimes decreases. When it does, increased government borrowing will not necessarily push up the total demand for credit. Alternatively, when credit availability increases, for example through greater foreign lending to the United States, then interest rates need not rise, even if both private and government borrowing increase.

The second argument is also problematic. Financing the deficit by increasing the money supply should cause inflation only when there is not enough room for economic growth. Currently, there is no reason to expect deficits to cause inflation. However, since many financiers believe that deficits ordinarily create inflation, then admittedly they will be inclined to raise interest rates to offset mistakenly anticipated inflation. This effect, however, is due to ignorance, not to the deficit itself, and could be lessened by educating financiers on this issue.


Which of the following claims concerning the United States government's financing of the deficit does the author make in discussing the second argument?


The government will decrease the money supply in times when the government does not have a deficit to finance.

The government finances its deficits by increasing the money supply whenever the economy is expanding.

As long as the government finances the deficit by borrowing, nongovernment borrowers will pay higher interest rates.

The only way for the government to finance its deficits is to increase the money supply without regard for whether such an increase would cause inflation.

Inflation should be caused when the government finances the deficit by increasing the money supply only if there is not enough room for economic growth to support the increase.

考题讲解

题目分析:

题目释义:

细节题目

考点:

支持主题(Supporting ideas)
旨在考察我们对文章细节的认知

这道题目定位在第一段讲second argument的地方和第三段讲作者的观点的地方。具体讲什么在“七级八脉”中介绍过了,这里不做赘述。



选项分析:

A选项:当不需要弥补赤字时,政府将会减少钱款的供应。此选项较易错选,文章中提到了政府会增加供应钱款以应对赤字。但是反过来却不一定正确。即作者没有提到过没有赤字的情况,所以我们无从判断。

B选项:当经济增长时,政府才增加钱款的供应来填补赤字。在文中第一段找到这句话“The second argument supposes that the government will tend to finance its deficits by increasing the money supply with insufficient regard for whether there is enough room for economic growth to enable such an increase to occur without causing inflation.”。说明政府实际上是不管经济增长与否而加钱来填补赤字的。

C选项:只要政府通过借贷来填补赤字了,那么非政府的人就要支付更高的利息。第二个论点中没有提到关于非政府人员的问题。其次,如果在“enough room”的范围内的话,人们是不会立刻支付高额利率的。

D选项:
政府填补赤字的唯一方法是不论会不会产生通货膨胀,都要增加钱款供应。第二个论点没有提及“the only way”的问题。所以是错误的选项。

E选项:
Correct。通货膨胀只有在没有足够的经济增长空间时政府增大钱款的供应后才会发生。这句话基本是文中第三段这句话的翻版“Financing the deficit by increasing the money supply should cause inflation only when there is not enough room for economic growth.”

展开显示

登录注册 后可以参加讨论

Prep2007E1-RC