题目内容
Conventional wisdom says that if you want to be richer, a useful thing to do is to get married. Life is cheaper when there’s only one 1 to pay and someone else can do certain tasks--cooking or car repair--more 2 than you. Research by Ohio State University’s Jay Zagorsky shows that married baby boomers increase their 3 an average 16% a year, 4 those who are single increase their net 5 at half that rate. Yet the economic 6 of marriage isn’t what it used to be. In a chapter of a book newly out from the Russell Sage Foundation, Changing Poverty, Changing Policies, two social scientists show that the marriage premium has subsided since 1969. They 7 to study how the changing makeup of American families has affected the number of people below the poverty line. 8 how the rate of marriage has fallen and the rate of divorce has 9 , the researchers expected the number of people living below the poverty line to grow 2.6%. But when they looked at the data, poverty had increased by less than half that 10 . Why In a 11 , because single women, even those with kids, have an easier time supporting themselves outside marriage than they used to. More women are working, increasingly for wages that are 12 with those of men. Women are having children later in life, and 13 of them. On top of that, a growing percentage of women who have children but aren’t married don’t live on their own. In 1970, 62% of single mothers were the only adult in their 14 , but by 2006, just 55% were living without another means of support— 15 more women cohabitating with a male partner or grandparent. Now, that’s not to say marriage doesn’t 16 with significant economic benefits. As research by Zagorsky and others illustrates, it does. A child in a single-parent family, for instance, is five times as 17 to live below the poverty line. What the two social scientists try to illustrate, though, is that marriage wouldn’t necessarily 18 more per-person wealth. Marrying someone who is chronically 19 might 20 not be an economic step up.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
女婴，6个月。腹泻4天，大便呈蛋花汤样，每天约十几次，半天无尿，查体：前囟眼窝明显凹陷，皮肤弹性极差，有花纹，呼吸深，四肢凉。血清钠136mmol/L，血钾3.8mmol/L，BE20mmoL/L。 首批液体应输入量
Any secondary school pupils not planning to go to university would be given a clearer "route into work" under Labour party plans for a new education contract between the individual and the state. Andy Burnham, the shadow education secretary, will this week reveal plans which would aim to give every secondary school pupil a path to employment if they met a set of required standards under a revised curriculum more geared to the world of work. The idea, one of the first to emerge from Labour’s policy commissions, reflects its view that current thinking is geared too much to those heading to university and leaves the "forgotten half" depressed, having studied subjects that are too often unsuited to modern working life. Burnham’s idea would involve a radical reshaping of the curriculum so that it offered a much wider choice of subjects than those included in education secretary-Michael Gove’s English baccalaureate (中学毕业考试). More vocational subjects would be included, such as engineering, business studies and information and communications technology. While stressing the ideas were still in the planning stage, he made clear that a further expansion of apprenticeships in the public and private sectors would be needed if the government was to meet its obligations under the contract. Burnham admitted that Labour lost sight of the needs of the millions of young people who would not go to university: "The whole political class has failed the young people not planning to go to university by failing to come up with clear, structured routes to succeed in life. I want to put that right. " A contract would engage young people and drive them to higher levels of achievement. It is also linked to how you raise standards, because, if young people see there is something there at the end for them, that will engage them and make school relevant to them. That is part of what is missing at the moment. With rising costs in higher education, the education maintenance allowance scrapped and youth unemployment at record levels, he will argue that education must be "inspiring, relevant and help those who work hard to get on in life". lf young people finally could see something there for them under the contract, they would be engaged and driven to______。
Conventional wisdom says that if you want to be richer, a useful thing to do is to get married. Life is cheaper when there’s only one 1 to pay and someone else can do certain tasks--cooking or car repair--more 2 than you. Research by Ohio State University’s Jay Zagorsky shows that married baby boomers increase their 3 an average 16% a year, 4 those who are single increase their net 5 at half that rate. Yet the economic 6 of marriage isn’t what it used to be. In a chapter of a book newly out from the Russell Sage Foundation, Changing Poverty, Changing Policies, two social scientists show that the marriage premium has subsided since 1969. They 7 to study how the changing makeup of American families has affected the number of people below the poverty line. 8 how the rate of marriage has fallen and the rate of divorce has 9 , the researchers expected the number of people living below the poverty line to grow 2.6%. But when they looked at the data, poverty had increased by less than half that 10 . Why In a 11 , because single women, even those with kids, have an easier time supporting themselves outside marriage than they used to. More women are working, increasingly for wages that are 12 with those of men. Women are having children later in life, and 13 of them. On top of that, a growing percentage of women who have children but aren’t married don’t live on their own. In 1970, 62% of single mothers were the only adult in their 14 , but by 2006, just 55% were living without another means of support— 15 more women cohabitating with a male partner or grandparent. Now, that’s not to say marriage doesn’t 16 with significant economic benefits. As research by Zagorsky and others illustrates, it does. A child in a single-parent family, for instance, is five times as 17 to live below the poverty line. What the two social scientists try to illustrate, though, is that marriage wouldn’t necessarily 18 more per-person wealth. Marrying someone who is chronically 19 might 20 not be an economic step up.
Whenever I hear a weather report declaring it’s the hottest June 10 on record or whatever, I can’t take it too seriously, because "ever" really means "as long as the records go back," which is only as far as the late 1800s. Scientists have other ways of measuring temperatures before that, though-- not for individual dates, but they can tell the average temperature of a given year by such proxy measurements as growth marks in corals, deposits in ocean and lake sediments, and cores drilled into glacial ice. They can even use drawings of glaciers as there were hundreds of years ago compared with today. And in the most comprehensive compilation of such data to date, says a new report from the National Research Council, it looks pretty certain that the last few decades have been hotter than any comparable period in the last 400 years. That’s a blow to those who claim the current warm spell is just part of the natural up and down of average temperatures-- a frequent assertion of the global-warming-doubters crowd. The report was triggered by doubts about past-climate claims made last year by climatologist Michael Mann, of the University of Virginia (he’s the creator of the "hockey stick" graph Al Gore used in "An Inconvenient Truth" to dramatize the rise in carbon dioxide in recent years). Mann claimed that the recent warming was unprecedented in the past thousand years-- that led Congress to order up an assessment by the prestigious Research Council. Their conclusion was that a thousand years was reasonable, but not overwhelmingly supported by the data. But the past 400 was-- so resoundingly that it fully supports the claim that today’s temperatures are unnaturally warm, just as global warming theory has been predicting for a hundred years. And if there’s any doubt about whether these proxy measurements are really legitimate, the NRC scientists compared them with actual temperature data from the most recent century, when real thermometers were in widespread use. The match was more or less right on. In the past nearly two decades since TIME first put global warming on the cover, then, the argument against it has gone from "it isn’t happening" to "it’s happening, but it’s natural," to "it’s mostly natural"-- and now, it seems, that assertion too is going to have to drop away. Indeed, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, the New York Republican who chairs the House Science Committee and who asked for the report declared that it did nothing to support the notion of a controversy over global warming science-- a controversy that opponents keep insisting is alive. Whether President Bush will finally take serious action to deal with the warming, however, is a much less settled question. What is the author’s attitude towards global warming theory
微信支付 
支付宝支付