题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
(Although) the wages for all the members of the working staff (increase regularly), so (their expenses do); for the prices for everything (are increasing dramatically) at the same time.
A．Although
B．increase regularly
C．their expenses do
D．are increasing dramatically
安装简答题APP，拍照搜题省时又省心！
更多“（Although) the wages for all t…”相关的问题
(Although) the wages for all the members of the working staff (increase regular), so (their expenses do); for the prices for everything (are increasing dramatically) at the same time.
A．Although
B．increase regular
C．their expenses do
D．are increasing dramatically
(14)
Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place；although Japanese workers earn about the same as their U.S. counterparts，the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less．Extend your discussion from question 7 to explain this observation．(Hint：Think about wages and the implied prices of non-traded goods．)
Now ordinary experience tells us, beyond doubt, that a situation where labor stipulates (within limits) for a money-wage rather than a real wage, so far from being a mere possibility, is the normal case. Whilst workers will usually resist a reduction of money- wages, it is not their practice to withdraw their labor whenever there is a rise in the price of wage-goods. It is sometimes said that it would be illogical for labor to resist a reduction of money-wages but not to resist a reduction of real wages. For reasons given below, this might not be so illogical as it appears at first; and, as we shall see later, fortunately so. But, whether logical or illogical, experience shows that this is how labor in fact behaves.
Moreover, the contention that the unemployment which characterizes a depression is due to a refusal by labor to accept a reduction of money-wages is not clearly supported by the facts. It is not very plausible to assert that unemployment in the United States in 1932 was due either to labor obstinately refusing to accept a reduction of money-wages or to its obstinately demanding a real wage beyond what the productivity of the economic machine was capable of furnishing. Wide variations are experienced in the volume of employment without any apparent change either in the minimum real demands of labor or in its productivity. Labor is not more truculent in the depression than in the boom-far from it. Nor is its physical productivity less, These facts from experience are a prima facie ground for questioning the adequacy of the classical analysis.
"Labor is not prepared to work for a lower money-wage". The sentence means ______.
A．a fall in the value of the existing money-wage would lead to a withdrawal of labor
B．a rise in the price of wage-goods would lead to a withdrawal of labor
C．the demand of labor is for a rise of existing money-wage
D．the demand of labor is for reduction in the value of real wages
Why did David Bikowski leave his job？
A．He wanted a promotion.
B．He was fired.
C．He wanted more money.
D．He was laid off.
Now ordinary experience tells us, beyond doubt, that a situation where labor stipulates (within limits) for a money-wage rather than a real wage, so far from being a mere possibility, is the normal case. Whilst workers will usually resist a reduction of money-wages, it is not their practice to withdraw their labor whenever there is a rise in the price of wage-goods. It is sometimes said that it would be illogical for labor to resist a reduction of money-wages but not to resist a reduction of real wages. For reasons given below, this might not be so illogical as it appears at first; and, as we shall see later, fortunately so. But, whether logical or illogical, experience shows that this is how labor in fact behaves.
Moreover, the contention that the unemployment which characterizes a depression is due to a refusal by labor to accept a reduction of money-wages is not clearly supported by the facts. It is not very plausible to assert that unemployment in the United States in 1932 was due either to labor obstinately refusing to accept a reduction of money-wages or to its obstinately demanding a real wage beyond what the productivity of the economic machine was capable of furnishing. Wide variations are experienced in the volume of employment without any apparent change either in the minimum real demands of labor or in its productivity, labor is not more truculent in the depression than in the boom-fax from it. Nor is its physical productivity less. These facts from experience are a prima facie ground for questioning the adequacy of the classical analysis.
"Labor is not prepared to work for a lower money-wage". The sentence means ______.
A．a fall in the value of the existing money-wage would lead to a withdrawal of labor
B．a rise in the price of wage-goods would lead to a withdrawal of labor
C．the demand of labor is for a rise of existing money-wage
D．the demand of labor is for reduction in the value of real wages
Now ordinary experience tells us, beyond doubt, that a situation where labor stipulates (within limits) for a money-wage rather than a real wage, so far from being a mere possibility, is the normal case. Whilst workers will usually resist a reduction of money-wages, it is not their practice to withdraw their labor whenever there is a rise in the price of wage-goods. It is sometimes said that it would be illogical for labor to resist a reduction of money-wages but not to resist a reduction of real wages. For reasons given below, this might not be so illogical as it appears at first; and, as we shall see later, fortunately so. But, whether logical or illogical, experience shows that this is how labor in fact behaves.
Moreover, the contention that the unemployment which characterizes a depression is due to a refusal by labor to accept a reduction of money-wages is not clearly supported by the facts. It is not very plausible to assert that unemployment in the United States in 1932 was due either to labor obstinately refusing to accept a reduction of money-wages or to its obstinately demanding a real wage beyond what the productivity of the economic machine was capable of furnishing. Wide variations are experienced in the volume of employment without any apparent change either in the minimum real demands of labor or in its productivity. Labor is not more truculent in the depression than in the boom.... far from it. Nor is its physical productivity less. These facts from experience are a prima facie ground for questioning the adequacy of the classical analysis.
"Labor is not prepared m work for a lower money-wage". The sentence means ______.
A．a fall in the value of the existing money-wage would lead to a withdrawal of labor
B．a rise in the price of wage-goods would lead to a withdrawal of labor
C．the demand of labor is for a rise of existing money-wage
D．the demand of labor is for reduction in the value of real wages
See what I meant about politicians not liking it？
Economists will tell you that immigrants raise wages for the average native-born worker. They'll tell you that they make things cheaper for us to buy here, and that if we didn't have immigrants for some of these jobs, the jobs would move to other countries. They'll tell you that we should allow for much more highly skilled immigration, because that's about as close to a free lunch as you're likely to find. They'll tell you that the people who should most want a path to legal status for undocumented immigrants are the low-income workers who are most opposed to such plans. And about all this, the economists are right.
There are also noneconomic considerations, of course. Integrating cultures and nationalities is difficult. Undocumented immigrants raise issues of law and fairness. Border security is important. Those questions are important. They're just not the subject of this column.
The mistake we make when thinking about the effect immigrants have on our wages, says Giovanni Peri, an economist at the University of California at Davis who has studied the issue extensively, is we imagine an economy where the number of jobs is fixed. Then, if one immigrant comes in, he takes one of those jobs or forces a worker to accept a lower wage. But that's not how our economy works. With more labor—particularly more labor of different kinds—the economy grows larger. It produces more stuff. There are more workers buying things and that increases the total number of jobs. We understand perfectly well that Europe is in trouble because its low birth rates mean fewer workers, and that means less economic growth. We ourselves worry that we're not graduating enough scientists and engineers. But the economy doesn't care if it gets workers through birth rates or green cards.
In fact, there's a sense in which green cards are superior. Economists separate new workers into two categories: Those who "substitute" for existing labor—we're both construction workers, and the boss can easily swap you out for me; and those who "complement" existing labor—you're a construction engineer and I'm a construction worker. Immigrants, more so than U. S. -born workers, tend to be in the second category, as the jobs you want to give to someone who doesn't speak English very well and doesn't have many skills are different from the jobs you give to people who are fluent and have more skills.
But that's only half of their benefit. "Living standards are a function of two things," says Michael Greenstone, director of the Hamilton Project, which is hosting a Washington conference on the economics of immigration next week. "They're a function of our wages and the prices of the goods we purchase. " And immigrants reduce the prices of those goods. Patricia Cortes, an economist at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, found that immigrants lowered the prices in "immigrant-intensive industries" like housekeeping and gardening by about 10 percent. So our wages go up and the prices of the things we want to buy go down.
We should remember, though, that the average worker isn't every worker. A study by Harvard economists George Borjas and Lawrence Katz found that although immigrants raised native wages overall, they slightly hurt the 8 percent of workers without a high-school education and those with a college education. A subsequent study by Pe
A．Immigration is an economic policy as well as a politic policy.
B．Immigration will raise wages for the average native-born worker.
C．Immigration helps the economy and most American workers.
D．Immigration policy should be primarily oriented around the national goals.
Income tax policy is inevitably controversial because it rests essentially on judgments that must be constantly reconsidered as social values changes. The complex task of working out the many reductions and exclusions to be allowed from income because they either make for greater fairness among taxpayers or promote worthy social goals (such as charitable contributions) is one of the most difficult and politically sensitive problems faced by governments.
Another major area of dispute is whether wages and salaries should be taxed the same way as business profits or investment income. While some countries and a few U.S. states explicitly apply separate stets of roles to the measurement of different kinds of taxable income, others, like most U.S. state governments, seek to treat all sources of income in the same way. Even so, dissimilarities inevitably arise. Some costs of earning income are mom readily deducted(扣除) from business and self-employment earnings than they are from wages and salaries. Inflation, by eroding the value of capital, distorts the measurement of income from that source. Complex adjustments to the tax law could in principle eliminate these imbalance, but most countries have preferred simpler, more arbitrary solutions.
Most people accept income as a fair tax since ______.
A．every individual enjoys public welfare
B．every citizen of a country has the duty to pay taxes
C．it is within their capability to pay it
D．it is closely related to the individual's benefits
Income tax policy is inevitably controversial because it rests essentially on judgments that must be constantly reconsidered as social values changes. The complex task of working out the many reductions and exclusions to be allowed from income because they either make for greater fairness among taxpayers or promote worthy social goals (such as charitable contributions) is one of the most difficult and politically sensitive problems faced by governments.
Another major area of dispute is whether wages and salaries should be taxed the same way as business profits or investment income. While some countries and a few U.S. states explicitly apply separate sets of rules to the measurement of different kinds of taxable income, others, like most U.S. state governments, seek to treat all sources of income in the same way. Even so, dissimilarities inevitably arise. Some costs of earning income are more readily deducted(扣除) from business and self-employment earnings than they are front wages and salaries. Inflation, by eroding the value of capital, distorts the measurement of income from that source. Complex adjustments to the tax law could in principle eliminate these imbalance, but most countries have preferred simpler, more arbitrary solutions.
Most people accept income as a fair tax since ______.
A．every individual enjoys public welfare
B．every citizen of a country has the duty to pay taxes
C．it is within their capability to pay it
D．it is closely related to the individual's benefits
为了保护您的账号安全，请在“简答题”公众号进行验证，点击“官网服务”-“账号验证”后输入验证码“”完成验证，验证成功后方可继续查看答案！
微信搜一搜
简答题
微信搜一搜
简答题
如搜索结果不匹配，请 
