Most economists in the United States seem captivated by the spell of the free market. Consequently, nothing seems

good or normal that does not accord with the requirements of the free market. A price that is determined by the seller

or, for that matter (for that matter: so far as that is concerned), established by anyone other than the aggregate of

consumers seems pernicious. Accordingly, it requires a major act of will to think of price-fixing
(the determination of prices by the seller) as both “normal” and having a valuable economic function. In fact,

price-fixing is normal in all industrialized societies because the industrial system itself provides, as an effortless consequence

of its own development, the price-fixing that it requires. Modern industrial planning requires and rewards great size. Hence, a comparatively small number

of large firms will be competing for the same group of consumers. That each large firm will act with consideration of its

own needs and thus avoid selling its products for more than its competitors charge is commonly recognized by advocates

of free-market economic theories. But each large firm will also act with full consideration of the needs that it has in common with

the other large firms competing for the same customers. Each large firm will thus avoid significant price-cutting, because price-cutting would be prejudicial to the common interest in a stable demand for products. Most economists do not see price-

fixing when it occurs because they expect it to be brought about by a number of explicit agreements among large firms;

Moreover, those economists who argue that allowing the free market to operate without interference is the most efficient

method of establishing prices have not considered the economies of non-socialist countries other than the United states. These economies employ intentional price-fixing, usually in an overt fashion. Formal price-fixing by cartel and informal price-fixing by agreements covering the members of an industry are commonplace. Were there something peculiarly efficient

about the free market and inefficient about price-fixing, the countries that have avoided the first and used the second would have suffered drastically in their economic

Socialist industry also works within a framework of controlled prices. In the early 1970’s, the Soviet Union began to give firms and industries some of the flexibility in adjusting prices that a more informal

evolution has accorded the capitalist system. Economists in the United States have hailed the change as a return to

the free market. But Soviet firms are no more subject to prices established by a free market over which they exercise

little influence than are capitalist firms; rather, Soviet firms have been given the power to fix prices.

of its own development, the price-fixing that it requires.

应该是这里

我觉得这道题应该就是靠同义转换吧

问题问的是The suggestion in the passage that price-fixing in industrialized societies is normal arises from the author’s statement that price-fixing is

就是问。。。is normal是由作者的the price-fixing is。。。。那句话得出的（大概意思就是这个）

其中绿色部分就是B

你对文章的大概框架把握应该还不够 你去搜下 有个nn人把这篇稍微分析了下 思路还蛮清晰的

一点点浅见

还请各位xdjm多多支持吖