Whereas United
States eco-
nomic productivity grew at an annual
rate of 3 percent from 1945 to 1965,
Line
it has grown at an annual rate of
(5)
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
(10)
1980, productivity improvements
in manufacturing have moved the
United States from a position of
acute decline in manufacturing
to one of world prominence.
(15)
Manufacturing, however, consti-
tutes a relatively small proportion
of the economy. In 1992, goods-
producing businesses employed
only 19.1 percent of American
(20)
workers, whereas service-producing
businesses employed 70 percent.
Although the service sector has
grown since the late 1970’s, its
productivity growth has declined.
(25)
Several explanations have been
Offered for this declined and for the
discrepancy in productivity growth
between the manufacturing and
service sectors. One is that tra-
(30)
ditional measures fail to reflect
service-sector productivity growth
because it has been concentrated
in improved quality of services.
Yet traditional measures of manu-
(35)
facturing productivity have shown
significant increases despite the
undermeasurement of quality,
whereas service productivity has
continued to stagnate. Others argue
(40)
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
(45)
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
(50)
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
(55)
of slow growth in demand for manu-
factured goods.
Yet another explanation
blames
the federal budget deficit: if it were
lower, interest rate would be lower
(55)
too, thereby increasing investment
in the development of new technol-
ogies, which would spur productivity
growth in the service sector. There
is, however, no dearth of techno-
(60)
logical resources, rather, managers
in the service sector fail to take
advantage of widely available skills
and machines. High productivity
growth levels attained by leading-
(65)
edge service companies indicate
that service sector managers
who wisely implement available
technology and choose skillful
workers can significantly improve
(70)
their companies’ productivity.
The culprits for service-sector
productivity stagnation are the
forces－such as
corporate
takeovers and unnecessary
(75)
governmental regulation－that
distract managers from the task
of making optimal use of available resources.
T-3-Q36
The author of the passage would be most
likely to agree with which of the following statements about productivity
improvements in United States
service companies?
A Such improvements would be
largely attributable to efficiencies resulting from corporate takeovers. B Such improvements would
depend more on wise implementation of technology than on managers’ choice
of skilled workers. C Such improvements would be
more easily accomplished if there were fewer governmental regulations of
the service sector.
D Such improvements would
require companies to invest heavily in the development of new
technologies.
Such improvements would be
attributable primarily to companies’ facing global competitive pressure.
答案给的C，指的是high budget dificit吗？多谢各位nn指教~~ | 
