2. 职称英语
  3. Winston Churchill once moaned about the long, dishonourable tradition in pol

Winston Churchill once moaned about the long, dishonourable tradition in pol

游客2024-11-26  47
问题     Winston Churchill once moaned about the long, dishonourable tradition in politics that sees commerce as a cow to be milked or a dangerous tiger to be shot. Businesses are the generators of the wealth on which incomes, taxation and all else depends. No sane leader of a country would want businesspeople to think that he was against them, especially at a lime when confidence is essential for the recovery.
    From this perspective. Barack Obama already has a lot to answer for. A president who does so little to counter the idea that he dislikes business is, self-evidently. a worryingly negligent chief executive. No matter thai talk on the American right about Mr.Obama being a socialist is rot: no matter that Wall Street’s woes are largely of its own making. The evidence that American business thinks the president does not understand Main Street is mounting.
    A Bloomberg survey this week found that three-quarters of American investors believe he is against business. The bedrock of the tea-party movement is angry small-business owners. The Economist has lost count of the number of prominent chief executives, many of them Democrats, who complain privately that the president does not understand their trade that he treats them merely as adornments at photocalls and uses teleprompters to talk to them: that he shows scant interest in their views on which tax cuts would persuade them to hire people: that his team is woefully short of anyone who has had to meet a payroll(there are fewer businesspeople in this White House than in any recent administration): and that regulatory uncertainty is hampering their willingness to invest.
    That Mr.Obama has let it reach this stage is a worry. But negligence is not the same as opposition. True, he has some rhetorical form as an anti-business figure unlike the previous Democrat in the White House, Bill Clinton, who could comfortably talk the talk of business. Mr.Obama’s life story, as depicted in his autobiography and on the campaign, was one of a man once mired in the sinful private sector(at a company subsequently bought by The Economist), who redeemed himself only by becoming a community organiser: his wife had a similar trajectory. He remains a supporter of "card check", which would dispense with the need for secret ballots in establishing a trade union. The only businesses he has rescued are the huge union-dominated General Motors and Chrysler.
    Against this, it could have been much worse, especially given the opprobrium that now dogs Wall Street. A president who truly wanted to wage war on business would have hung onto GM, not rushed to return it to the private sector. Card check has not been pushed. The finance bill, though bureaucratic, is not a Wall Street killer. A lot of government cash has flowed to businesses, not least through the stimulus package. And above all his policies have helped pull the economy out of recession.
    So what should he do? The same advisers who have led Mr. Obama into his "anti-business" hole arc doubtless telling him that it is just a matter of public relations: have a few tycoons to stay in the Lincoln bedroom: celebrate Main Street’s successes, rather than just whining about bonuses: perhaps invite a chief executive to replace Larry Summers, the academic who announced this week that he was standing down as the president’s main economic adviser. Well, maybe. But once again this is advice from people who have never run a business. The main thing that is hurting business is uncertainty.
    Mr. Obama was right to tackle big subjects like health care and Wall Street, but too often the details were left to others. Why, for instance, should a small American firm hire more people when it still does not know the regulations on health care, especially when going above 50 workers will make it liable to insurance premiums or fines? Fiscal policy is even more uncertain, thanks to Mr.Obama’s refusal to produce a credible plan to rein in the deficit. Why should any entrepreneur plough money into a new factory when he has no idea what taxes he will eventually be asked to pay? These are questions that business needs answering in a businesslike way and so does America. Otherwise the horse will not pull the cart. [br] According to Churchill, it is wrong to
选项 A、believe commerce is beneficial to society.
B、be hostile to commerce.
C、depend on commerce too much.
D、trust commerce as a friend.
答案 B
解析 语义题。由题干定位至首段第一句。由此句可知，丘吉尔曾为政治对商业一向的可鄙的偏见而惋惜，政治总是把商业视为待挤的奶牛或待宰的猛虎。也就是说，政治对商业是存有偏见的，而丘吉尔反对这种偏见，“待挤的奶牛”说明商业的利润被政治盘剥，而“待宰的猛虎”说明商业的生存受政治的压制，因此可以总结为政治对商业的敌意，[B]正确。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3861614.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)