Many people believe that because wages are lower in developing countries than in developed countries, competition from developing countries in goods traded internationally will soon eliminate large numbers of jobs in developed countries. Currently, developed countries' advanced technology results in higher productivity, which accounts for their higher wages. Advanced technology is being transferred ever more speedily across borders, but even with the latest technology, productivity and wages in developing countries will remain lower than in developed countries for many years because developed countries have better infrastructure and better-educated workers. When productivity in a developing country does catch up, experience suggests that wages there will rise. Some individual firms in developing countries have raised their productivity but kept their wages (which are influenced by average productivity in the country's economy) low. However, in a developing country's economy as a whole, productivity improvements in goods traded internationally are likely to cause an increase in wages. Furthermore, if wages are not allowed to rise, the value of the country's currency will appreciate, which (from the developed countries' point of view) is the equivalent of increased wages in the developing country. And although in the past a few countries have deliberately kept their currencies undervalued, that is now much harder to do in a world where capital moves more freely.
The passage suggests that if the movement of capital in the world were restricted, which of the following would be likely?
Advanced technology could move more quickly from developed countries to developing countries.
Developed countries could compete more effectively for jobs with developing countries.
A country's average wages could increase without significantly increasing the sophistication of its technology or the value of its currency.
A country's productivity could increase without significantly increasing the value of its currency.
Workers could obtain higher wages by increasing their productivity.
题目分析:
题目释义:
细节题目
考点:
推断(Inference)
旨在考察我们对文章的深度理解,以及逻辑推断能力。
这个题目的定位在文章的最后一句。从文章的最后一句可知,如果资金的转移被限制,那么就有可能自由的控制货币升值与否。这样就算产量上涨,还是有可能控制货币不升值的。
选项分析:
A选项:前沿的技术会从发达国家向发展中国家转移的更快。前沿技术会不会转移和资金是否能被限制无关。
B选项:发达国家的完成工作效率高于发展中国家。文中没有提到工作效率问题,这个选项属于无中生有。有些地方可能会有让人觉得暗含的意思说明工作效率高(比如受教育程度高啊等等),但是作者并没有明确的这么说。我们不能给予这样的擅自推论。
C选项:一个国家的平均工资可能会上升但原因不是显著的提高了技术的熟练度或是其货币的价值。文中作者没有提到过技术的熟练度。
D选项:Correct. 一个国家的产量可以提升而不因为货币价值的上升。考点中已经分析过了,此处不再赘述。
E选项:工人可以通过提升产量来拿到更高的工资。这句话可能是对的,但是和资金的流通性是否受限制无关。属于无关选项。
生产力上升—wage上升—如果wage不上升,则因为资本流动(海外投资增多资金涌入)导致货币汇率会上调。
但由于资本不再自由流动,不存在浮动汇率,因此生产力的上升可能会表现为wage的上升,而汇率会被政府调控至稳定水平。
资本市场不流通 --> 货币不升值;
生产力提高----工资提高
如果工资不提高----货币升值
And although in the past a few countries have deliberately kept their currencies undervalued, that is now much harder to do in a world where capital moves more freely.
尽管在过去一些国家刻意得压低了货币,这种做法在如今资本流动更自由的环境之下越来越难了。
资本市场不流通 --> 货币不升值;但货币不升值并不一定代表工人工资就会上涨,原文只是说了工人工资不上涨,但会因为货币升值被认为是涨了工资。
文章认为,整体生产力的提升=工资提升=货币价值的上升,前提是资本自由流动,如果不是,等号就不成立。