Is it possible to decrease inflation without causing a recession and its concomitant increase in unemployment? The orthodox answer is "No." Whether they support the ''inertia" theory of inflation (that today's inflation rate is caused by yesterday's inflation, the state of the economic cycle, and external influences such as import prices) or the ''rational expectations" theory (that inflation is caused by workers' and employers' expectations, coupled with a lack of credible monetary and fiscal policies), most economists agree that tight monetary and fiscal policies, which cause recessions, are necessary to decelerate inflation. They point out that in the 1980's, many European countries and the United States conquered high (by these countries' standards) inflation, but only by applying tight monetary and fiscal policies that sharply increased unemployment. Nevertheless, some governments' policymakers insist that direct controls on wages and prices, without tight monetary and fiscal policies, can succeed in decreasing inflation. Unfortunately, because this approach fails to deal with the underlying causes of inflation, wage and price controls eventually collapse, the hitherto-repressed inflation resurfaces, and in the meantime, though the policymakers succeed in avoiding a recession, a frozen structure of relative prices imposes distortions that do damage to the economy's prospects for long-term growth.
The primary purpose of the passage is to
apply two conventional theories
examine a generally accepted position
support a controversial policy
explain the underlying causes of a phenomenon
propose an innovative solution
此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。
本文的主要目的是检验一般接受的立场,因此选项B是正确答案。文章提及了传统的通货膨胀理论,以及合理的预期理论,指出采取紧缩的财政和货币政策是抑制通货膨胀的必要手段,但有些政府政策制定者坚持认为在没有紧缩财政和货币政策的情况下,直接控制工资和物价可以降低通货膨胀。文章并不是在支持这种有争议的政策,而是检验这种普遍接受的立场,因此选项B“检验一个普遍接受的立场”是正确答案。
B - examine a generally accepted position
This is not directly stated but if you consider the Big Picture this is indeed the answer. The word orthodox (conventional, generally accepted beliefs) signals this.
D - explain the underlying causes of a phenomenon
The author is not giving his viewpoints and justifying/detailing them. He is just presenting some facts and viewpoints of the economists.
误选D,觉得可能是差别在examine和explain,examine检视完可能会表达一下立场(最后一段),explain貌似就是纯解释
错选D:原文并没有explain the causes(only present some facts and points of views of economists)the phenomenon(only an argument not an actual one)
当时不选A是觉得没有a generally accepted position (原文中某种程度说明是被大家接受的结论:The orthodox answer is "No."),examine(some facts and points)也是正确的
我认为主线句是全文最后一句Unfortunately,表明了作者态度,应用了这个理论之后结果Unfortunately,反驳了或者质疑了或者削弱了这种负面的态度,对于文中两种理论中的rational expectations理论。
most economists agree 这个理论 = a generally accepted position,B虽然没有表面态度,但是examine=应用这个理论,为正解。
主旨题的正解里通常不直接带作者态度不能以此作为排除标准。
D 文章主旨不是在解釋現象,而是在表達立場
错选D…这不是一个人现象…是一种类论
examine是不是和evaluate的意思差不多?
误选D