2. 职称英语
  3. America’s more capitalist sports fans commonly acknowledge that their countr

America’s more capitalist sports fans commonly acknowledge that their countr

游客2023-12-30  20
问题     America’s more capitalist sports fans commonly acknowledge that their country’s most popular sports, like the National Football League and the National Basketball Association, have several rules that would please a Scandinavian social democrat. Salary caps and luxury taxes limit how much each team can spend on players, punish those that over-spend, and close the gap between rich and poor teams. In both sports, the top draft picks typically go to the worst-performing squads from the previous year. Revenue sharing redistributes wealth among the rich and poor teams. Overall, success is punished by design, misfortune is rewarded by design, and the power of wealth is circumscribed with spending caps.
    It’s a different story across the Atlantic, where many European soccer leagues have practices that would please an American conservative. There are few salary-cap rules, so a handful of rich teams tend to dominate annually. When a soccer team performs poorly, it is not rewarded with a high draft pick. Instead, the club is relegated to a less competitive league, a mighty blow to their revenue. Meanwhile the most successful teams from lower divisions are promoted to more competitive leagues where they can earn even more money.
    For years, economists have wondered why America doesn’t share Europe’s socialist approach to government. But maybe it’s worth flipping the question: Why don’t European sports share U.S.-style socialism? Why do European soccer leagues punish the downtrodden, while American sports are so soft on losers?
    In their famous 2001 paper, "Why Doesn’t The U.S. Have A European-Style Welfare State?" the economists Alberto Alesina, Edward Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote pointed out that public policies are an echo of national history. For example, in the U.S., the legacy of the 19th century’s "open frontier" made Americans skeptical of government intrusion, while the absence of an influential socialist party after World War II made it difficult for leftist policies to take root.
    By analogy, perhaps, one could look to history to see the origin of Europe’s surprisingly free-market approach to sports. The rules of today’s English Premier League can be traced to the late 19th century, when English soccer was in a period of rapid growth, with hundreds of English and Welsh clubs forming in several decades. Owners, players, and fans all recognized that the helter-skelter scheduling made it harder for people to plan their lives around soccer. In 1888, 12 teams banded together to form England’s first Football League. This provided a modicum of structure to the beautiful game, such as set schedules and guaranteed home games. In its original rules, the worst teams in the league had to apply for "reelection" to remain. Otherwise, one of England’s hundreds of other soccer teams could take their place. As the League grew in size and number of divisions, reelection evolved into a system of promotion and relegation — a model that has taken hold in soccer leagues in Europe and around the world. [br] According to the passage, which of the following statements mainly explains why the U.S. doesn’t have a European-style welfare state?
选项 A、Different national histories result in various public policies.
B、America has an influential socialism party.
C、Americans hold doubtful attitudes of government intrusion.
D、Leftist policies have difficulties in taking root in America.
答案 A
解析 第4段第一句中“《为什么美国没有欧洲式的福利制度》一文中表示，公共政策是国家历史的再现”的意思是由于历史的不同，美国和欧洲表现为截然不同的公共政策。因此A项正确。第4段第二句举例说明，在美国，19世纪“开放边疆”的遗产使得美国人对政府的干涉持怀疑态度，而由于二战后缺乏有影响力的社会主义政党，左派政策很难实现。因此B项错误。C、D项是针对A项举的例子，并不是美国没有欧洲式的福利制度的主要原因，因此C、D项错误。A项正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3319324.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)