题目内容
When workers become more efficient, it’s normally a good thing. But lately, it has acted as a powerful brake on job creation. And the question of whether the recent surge in productivity has run its course is the key to whether job growth is finally poised to take off.One of the great surprises of the economic downturn that began 27 months ago is this.. Businesses are producing only 3 percent fewer goods and services than they were at the end of 2007, yet Americans are working nearly 10 percent fewer hours because of a mix of layoffs and cutbacks in the workweek.(46) That means high-level gains in productivity--which in the long run is the key to a higher standard of living but in the short run contributes to sky-high unemployment. So long as employers can squeeze dramatically higher output from every worker, they won’t need to hire again despite the growing economy.(47) On Friday, the Labor Department will release a closely watched March employment report expected to show the strongest job growth in three years, driven by stabilization in the economy and a rebound from February snowstorms.A strong March job-growth number-at a time when the economy is growing at only a middling pace--would suggest that the productivity boom has largely run its course. (48) Regardless, the question of what caused the burst in workers’ efficiency is one of the great unanswered questions of the expansion and has huge stakes for the economy over the coming year."It is an episode that we’re going to--we, economists in general--are going to want to understand better and look at for a long time," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said at a hearing last week in which he described the productivity gains as "extraordinary" and acknowledged he had not foreseen them.(49) Businesses have certainly not been investing in new equipment that might enable workers to be more efficient-capital expenditures plummeted during the recession and are rebounding slowly. (50) And the structural shifts occurring in the economy are so profound that one would expect productivity to be lower, rather than higher, as people need new training to work in parts of the economy that are growing, such as exports and the clean-energy sector.So what’s happening As best as anyone can guess, the crisis that began in 2007 and deepened in 2008 caused both businesses and workers to panic. On Friday, the Labor Department will release a closely watched March employment report expected to show the strongest job growth in three years, driven by stabilization in the economy and a rebound from February snowstorms.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
The promise of finding long-term technological solutions to the problem of world food shortages seems difficult to fulfill Many innovations that were once heavily supported and publicized have since fallen by the wayside. The proposals themselves were technically feasible, but they proved to be economically unenviable and to yield food products culturally unacceptable to their consumers.One characteristic common to unsuccessful food innovations has been that, even with extensive government support, they often have not been technologically adapted or culturally acceptable to the people for whom they had been developed. A successful new technology, therefore, must fit the entire sociocultural system in which it is to find a place Security of crop yield, practicality of storage, and costs are much more significant than what had previously been realized by the advocates of new technologies.The adoption of new food technologies depends on more than these technical and cultural considerations; economic factors and governmental policies also strongly influence the ultimate success of any innovation. Economists in the Anglo-American tradition have taken the lead in investigating the economics of technological innovation. Although they exaggerate in claiming that profitability is the key factor guiding technical change -- they completely disregard the substantial effects of culture—they are correct in stressing the importance of profits. Most technological innovations in agriculture can be fully used only by large landowners and are only adopted if these profit-oriented business people believe that the innovation will increase their incomes, Thus innovations that carry high rewards for big agribusiness groups will be adopted even if they harm segments of the population and reduce the availability of food in a country. Further, should s new technology promise to alter substantially the profits and losses associated with any production system, those with economic power will strive to maintain and improve their own positions. Therefore, although technical advances in food production and processing will perhaps be needed to ensure food availability, meeting food needs will depend much more on equalizing economic power among the various segments of the populations within the developing countries themselves. The author appears to tell us().
The promise of finding long-term technological solutions to the problem of world food shortages seems difficult to fulfill Many innovations that were once heavily supported and publicized have since fallen by the wayside. The proposals themselves were technically feasible, but they proved to be economically unenviable and to yield food products culturally unacceptable to their consumers.One characteristic common to unsuccessful food innovations has been that, even with extensive government support, they often have not been technologically adapted or culturally acceptable to the people for whom they had been developed. A successful new technology, therefore, must fit the entire sociocultural system in which it is to find a place Security of crop yield, practicality of storage, and costs are much more significant than what had previously been realized by the advocates of new technologies.The adoption of new food technologies depends on more than these technical and cultural considerations; economic factors and governmental policies also strongly influence the ultimate success of any innovation. Economists in the Anglo-American tradition have taken the lead in investigating the economics of technological innovation. Although they exaggerate in claiming that profitability is the key factor guiding technical change -- they completely disregard the substantial effects of culture—they are correct in stressing the importance of profits. Most technological innovations in agriculture can be fully used only by large landowners and are only adopted if these profit-oriented business people believe that the innovation will increase their incomes, Thus innovations that carry high rewards for big agribusiness groups will be adopted even if they harm segments of the population and reduce the availability of food in a country. Further, should s new technology promise to alter substantially the profits and losses associated with any production system, those with economic power will strive to maintain and improve their own positions. Therefore, although technical advances in food production and processing will perhaps be needed to ensure food availability, meeting food needs will depend much more on equalizing economic power among the various segments of the populations within the developing countries themselves. The text indicates that ().
Angela Rogers is describing a boat trip which she took with her husband down the Nile.It was the summer of last year when we went, It was a special package holiday which included three days in Cairo, and a week cruising down the Nile. It sounded lovely in the brochure. Relaxing. luxurious, delicious food—all the unusual things. And the boat looked nice in the picture. In fact when we got there, and on the boat, it was exactly the opposite of luxurious. It was positively uncomfortable. It was too small to be comfortable. And too hot. The only air-conditioning was from the wind and inside, in the cabins, it was too hot to sleep, and the dining room was stifling.My husband and I paid the special rate for the best cabin. I’m glad we didn’t have to stay in the worst one. The cabins were very poorly equipped; there wasn’t even a mirror, or a socket for a hair drier, or even a point for the electric razor. There was a shower, but the water pressure wasn’t high enough to use it. The cabin was badly designed as well. There wasn’t enough room to move. The beds took up three quarters of the space.The brochure also talked about the mouth-watering French cuisine available on board, but you could hardly call it food It was boring, and practically inedible. There was nothing to do, really. There was a table-tennis table, but one bat was broken. In the daytime the decks were so crowded, there wasn’t even enough room to sit, We did stop now and then for a swim, but who wants to swim in that filthy river I certainly didn’t. What kind of cabin did the speaker stay in
To be successful in a job interview, you should take care to appear modestly dressed, avoiding the extremes of too elaborate or too casual attire. On the positive side, clothes may be a good leveller, putting you on a bar with other applicants. On the other hand, clothes which are too informal may convey the impression that you are not serious about the job or that you may be casual about your work as well as your dress. Clothes which are too elaborate, too colorful, or too expensive suggest that you don’t understand what behaviour is appropriate for the job. The right clothes at the fight time, however, gain the respect of the interviewer and his confidence in your judgement. It may be not true that "clothes make the than", but the first and often lasting impression of you is determined by the clothes you wear.Besides care for personal appearance, you should pay close attention to the manner of speaking. You should speak in a clear voice, loud enough to be heard without being aggressive or overpowering. Your speech should not can attention to itself, but it should reveal your individuality and ability. Obviously you must speak without grammatical mistakes or dialect differences.You should be prepared to talk knowledgeably about the requirements of the position you are applying for in relation to your own experiences and interests. Knowing something about the position enables you to ask intelligent questions about the work and the requirements for the job. The interviewer can decide from the questions asked whether you are interested or knowledgeable. You can comment on your own training, experience, and other qualifications. The interviewer can determine whether your background and potential seem to fit the position. The position for which you are applying is not only the safest: topic for discussion; it is essential that you demonstrate your understanding of the requirements and your abilities in meeting these requirements.Finally, you must convey a sense of self-confidence and enthusiasm for work. You can demonstrate self- confidence by your manner of speech and dress. You further show it by being prepared for the interview. In addition, the way you enter the room, sit, look at the interviewer, and fill out application forms and other papers may express self-confidence The eagerness with which you discuss the job rather than the salary may re- veal your enthusiasm for work You may express it through your questions and comments about working conditions and facilities. And your previous experience and success will tell the interviewer about your enthusiasm for work. Self-confidence and enthusiasm for work are valued highly by all interviewers. When you have a job interview, you should ().
微信支付 
支付宝支付