Before, whenever we had wealth, we started discussing poverty. Why not now?

游客2025-02-02 53

问题 Before, whenever we had wealth, we started discussing poverty. Why not now? Why is the current politics of wealth and poverty seemingly about wealth alone? Eight years ago, when Bill Clinton first ran for president, the Dow Jones average was under 3,500, yearly federal budget deficits were projected at hundreds of billions of dollars forever and beyond, and no one talked about the "permanent boom" or the "new economy." Yet in that more straitened time, Clinton made much of the importance of "not leaving a single person behind." It is possible that similar "compassionate" rhetoric might yet play a role in the general election.
But it is striking how much less talk there is about the poor than there was eight years ago, when the country was economically uncertain, or in previous eras, when the country felt flush. Even last summer, when Clinton spent several days on a remarkable, Bobby Kennedy-like pilgrimage through impoverished areas from Indian reservations in South Dakota to ghetto neighborhoods in East St. Louis, the administration decided to refer to the effort not as a poverty tour but as a "new market initiative."
What is happening is partly a logical, policy-driven reaction. Poverty really is lower than it has been in decades, especially for minority groups. The most attractive solution to it — a growing economy — is being applied. The people who have been totally left out of this boom often have medical, mental or other problems for which no one has an immediate solution. "The economy has sucked in anyone who has any preparation, any ability to cope with modem life," says Franklin D. Raines, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget who is now head of Fannie Mae. When he and other people who specialize in the issue talk about solutions, they talk analytically and on a long-term basis: education, development of work skills, shifts in the labor market, adjustments in welfare reform.
But I think there is another force that has made this a rich era with barely visible poor people. It is the unusual social and imaginative separation between prosperous America and those still left, out... It’s simple invisibility, because of increasing geographic, occupational, and social barriers that block one group from the other’s view. [br] After reading this passage, you can conclude that ______.

选项 A、the relationship between the rich and the poor has changed
B、the good economy will soon end
C、poverty will be obliterated as a result of increased wealth
D、all people benefit from good economic conditions

答案 A

解析推断题型参照第93题的注解。另见第一段的例子中说：在那困难时刻(八年前)，克林顿更关注“不要将任何一人丢在后面”；第二段例子中提及：去年夏天，克林顿花了几天的时间穿过人烟稀少的地区去少数民族居住区旅行，政府没将这次努力算作一个贫困之旅，而是决定将之称为一个“新的市场首创”；而第三段谈及贫困率现在确实比几十年前低了，尤其是对少数民族裔而言，现在仍被完全排除在经济繁荣圈之外的人通常是在医疗、精神或其它方面有问题的人，对他们而言目前还没有一个立竿见影的解决方案；第四段作者谈及自己认为几乎看不见穷人的原因；因此可推断出现在富人和穷人间的关系已有了改变。所以答案为A。

转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3940232.html

相关试题推荐

随机试题

最新回复(0)

Before, whenever we had wealth, we started discussing poverty. Why not now?

ThegeneralmanagerdemandedthejobwillbecompletedbeforetheNationalDay.A

Hefeltcheapaboutrushingtogetinlinebeforetheoldladycarryingheavypa

Picasso’s______abilitywasapparentinhisearlyyouthwhenhestarteddrawing