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。
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
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论