首页
登录
职称英语
A hundred years ago,it was assumed and scientifically "proved" by economists
A hundred years ago,it was assumed and scientifically "proved" by economists
游客
2023-08-20
30
管理
问题
A hundred years ago,it was assumed and scientifically "proved" by economists that the laws of society made it necessary to have a vast army of poor and jobless people in order to keep the economy going. Today, hardly anybody would dare to voice this principle. It is generally accepted that nobody should be excluded from the wealth of nation, either by laws of nature or by those of society. The opinions, which were current a hundred years ago, that the poor owed their conditions to their ignorance, lack of responsibility, are outdated. In all Western industrialized countries, a system of insurance has been introduced which guarantees everyone a minimum of existence in case of unemployment, sickness and old age. I would go one step further and argue that, even if these conditions are not present, everyone has the right to receive the means to survive, in other words, he can claim this existence minimum without having to have any "reason". I would suggest, however, that it should be limited to a definite period of time, let’s say two years, so as to avoid the encouraging of an abnormal attitude which refuses any kind of social obligation.
This may sound like a fantastic proposal, but so, I think, would our insurance system have sounded to people a hundred years ago. The main objection to such a scheme would be that if each person were entitled to receive minimum support, people would not work. This assumption rests on the fallacy of the inherent laziness in human nature, actually, aside from abnormally lazy people, there would be very few who would not want to earn more than the minimum and who would prefer to do nothing rather than work.
However, the suspicions against a system of guaranteed existence minimum are not groundless from the standpoint of those who want to use ownership of capital for the purpose of forcing others to accept the work conditions they offer. If nobody were forced to accept work in order not to starve, work would have to be sufficiently interesting and attractive to induce one to accept it. Freedom of contract is possible only if both parties are free to accept and reject it; in the present capitalist system this is not the case.
But such a system would not only be the beginning of real freedom of contract between employers and employees, its principal advantage would be the improvement of freedom in interpersonal relationships in every sphere of daily life. [br] Which of the following can be the best title for the passage?
选项
A、On a System of Guaranteed Existence Minimum
B、On Government Support
C、Improving the Poor’s Conditions
D、Inherent Laziness in Human Nature
答案
A
解析
纵观全文可知,本文围绕最基本的生活保障系统展开评论,故A)正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2943266.html
相关试题推荐
Americansgavealmosttwohundredfiftythousandmilliondollarstocharity
Americansgavealmosttwohundredfiftythousandmilliondollarstocharity
Americansgavealmosttwohundredfiftythousandmilliondollarstocharity
Americansgavealmosttwohundredfiftythousandmilliondollarstocharity
Americansgavealmosttwohundredfiftythousandmilliondollarstocharity
Ahundredyearsago,itwasassumedandscientifically"proved"byeconomists
Ahundredyearsago,itwasassumedandscientifically"proved"byeconomists
Ahundredyearsago,itwasassumedandscientifically"proved"byeconomists
MostvolcanoesarequietTheyrestpeacefullyforhundredsofyears.Noone
MostvolcanoesarequietTheyrestpeacefullyforhundredsofyears.Noone
随机试题
Theeconomystoppedshrinkingayearago,butAmerica’sunemploymentproblem
Lifeasawomaninthecolonial(殖民的)Americaseemsquitedifferentfromitis
[originaltext]Thanksalotforyourhelp.[/originaltext][originaltext]Whydid
Maryhadan______;she’sbeenknockeddownbyataxi.A、eventB、occurrenceC、acc
Itisallverywelltoblametrafficjams,thecostofpetrolandthequick
小明同学留守儿童,任课老师认为他脏,班主任应该怎么做?
展示空间需设置的结构柱数量为:() A.0 B.4 C.8 D
下列各项中,不包括航摄设计书的内容的是( )。A.航摄因子计算表 B.航摄材
患者,女性,55岁。糖尿病10年。今因糖尿病酮症酸中毒、脑血栓、半身不遂、尿失禁
按Steiner头影测量法,我国汉族正常∠SNA的平均角度为A.79°±1。
最新回复
(
0
)