国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA

标题: 請教 TN-11 Q-33 [打印本页]

作者: ChinaHawk 时间: 2011-4-2 19:35 标题: 請教 TN-11 Q-33

(This passage is excerpted from material published in 1997)

Whereas United States economic productivity grew at an annual rate of 3 percent from 1945 to 1965, it has grown at an annual rate of only about 1 percent since the early 1970’s. What might be preventing higher productivity growth? Clearly, the manufacturing sector of the economy cannot be blamed. Since 1980, productivity improvements in manufacturing have moved the United States from a position of acute decline in manufacturing to one of world prominence. Manufacturing, however, constitutes a relatively small proportion of the economy. In 1992, goods-producing businesses employed only 19.1 percent of American workers, whereas service-producing businesses employed 70 percent. Although the service sector has grown since the late 1970’s, its productivity growth has declined. Several explanations have been offered for this declined and for the discrepancy in productivity growth between the manufacturing and service sectors. One is that traditional measures fail to reflect service-sector productivity growth because it has been concentrated in improved quality of services. Yet traditional measures of manufacturing productivity have shown significant increases despite the under measurement of quality, whereas service productivity has continued to stagnate. Others argue that since the 1970’s, manufacturing workers, faced with strong foreign competition, have learned to work more efficiently in order to keep their jobs in the United States, but service workers, who are typically under less global competitive pressure, have not. However, the pressure on manufacturing workers in the United States to work more efficiently has generally been overstated, often for political reasons. In fact, while some manufacturing jobs have been lost due to foreign competition, many more have been lost simply because of slow growth in demand for manufactured goods.

Yet another explanation blames the federal budget deficit: if it were lower, interest rate would be lower too, thereby increasing investment in the development of new technologies, which would spur productivity growth in the service sector. There is, however, no dearth of technological resources, rather, managers in the service sector fail to take advantage of widely available skills and machines. High productivity growth levels attained by leading edge service companies indicate that service sector managers who wisely implement available technology and choose skillful workers can significantly improve their companies’ productivity. The culprits for service-sector productivity stagnation are the forces－such as corporate takeovers and unnecessary governmental regulation－that distract managers from the task of making optimal use of available resources. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the budget deficit explanation for the discrepancy mentioned in line 27?

A.
Research shows that the federal budget deficit has traditionally caused service companies to invest less money in research and development of new technologies.

B.
New technologies have been shown to play a significant role in companies that have been able to increase their service productivity.

C.
In both service sector and manufacturing, productivity improvements are concentrated in gains in quality.

D.
The service sector typically requires larger investments in new technology in order to maintain productivity growth than dose manufacturing

E.
High interest rates tend to slow the growth of manufacturing productivity as much as they slow the growth of service-sector productivity in the United States.

ANS:E 想請問為甚麼 E 選項有weaken呢?? 我感覺有支持耶~?!~~因為文章提到低利率會導致比較多的投資會有好結果~~而E選項是說高利率的會處~~請問是我哪裡理解錯了嗎???

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the budget deficit explanation for the discrepancy mentioned in line 27?

A.
Research shows that the federal budget deficit has traditionally caused service companies to invest less money in research and development of new technologies.

B.
New technologies have been shown to play a significant role in companies that have been able to increase their service productivity.

C.
In both service sector and manufacturing, productivity improvements are concentrated in gains in quality.

D.
The service sector typically requires larger investments in new technology in order to maintain productivity growth than dose manufacturing

E.
High interest rates tend to slow the growth of manufacturing productivity as much as they slow the growth of service-sector productivity in the United States.

作者: arthurman 时间: 2011-4-4 16:04

同问....

真巧～我也是今天看到，一样的疑问

作者: mop000 时间: 2011-4-5 08:40

我也是，有人解释一下吗？

作者: cckjenius 时间: 2011-4-5 20:46

High interest rates tend to slow the growth of manufacturing productivity as much as they slow the growth of service-sector productivity in the United States.
文中说造成discrepancy的原因是traditional measures & foreign competition, E选项给出了他因，high interest rates

作者: legnawen 时间: 2011-4-6 06:39

Yet another explanation blames the federal budget deficit: if it were lower, interest rate would be lower too, thereby increasing investment in the development of new technologies, which would spur productivity growth in the service sector.

deficit解释slow in service sector。说如果deficit地点，利率也会低，高科技的投入就搞（所以service productivity就会提高）。说明事实上deficit很高，利率也很高，所以service sector就没有像manufacturing improve that much.但是选项E说high interest rate反而是同时降低两个sector,与事实不符合。所以错误。

欢迎光临国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/)