网友您好， 请在下方输入框内输入要搜索的题目：
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
This week's decision by the GMB union to bring a legal case against firms delivering for Amazon,the rcommerce giant,throws into sharp relief how much the modern economy has been stretched to benefit a monopolistic form of tech-capitalism.On the surface,the action is about employment law:it argues that couriers working for three delivery companies are not entrepreneurs working for themselves who contract their labour to anyone willing to pay,but are in fact employees of Amazon's latent delivery and logistics network.If the trade union is right,then these couriers should be treated as staff and paid the minimum wage,as well as sick and holiday pay.Amazon has established itself as an essential part of the internet economy and its dominance-its sheer scale and breadth-has been enabled in part by privatising profit and socialising losses.The firm seems to be firmly establishing a model of cheap-labour doorstep delivery by recognising an easily divided workforce is more easily conquered.This model may also one day compete with the Royal Mail;Amazon is reportedly planning to launch its own delivery service to rival the state-owned US Postal Service.Amazon's skill is not just in technology but also in finance.Last year it generated UK sales of￡9bn,a quarter more than the previous 12 months-while pre-tax profits halved to just￡24m.Its effective UK profit margin is just 0.3%.an indication perhaps of its low pricing strategy.In revolutionising e-commerce the company has delivered enormous benefits to consumers:but at what cost?Surely it is morally right that large employers are accountable for the treatment of workers down the supply chain,so long as they are economically dependent on them.Amazon might think differently.The tech giant wants privileged treatment because it thinks only corporate monopolies,with their economies of scale and ability to innovate,can promote growth.This view should be resisted.Amazon's service ensures consumers are better off,but undue focus on this neglects the interests of workers,rival entrepreneurs and voters.This is why the spirit of employment law must be honoured so Amazon shoulders the responsibility（and the cost）for contracted workers,or works out how to compel its suppliers to do so.Amazon clearly would like to control the pipes of capitalism,drawing off consumer demand for itself when it is lucrative to do so and charging others for use of its network.Amazon's website is the dominant platform for online retail sales.Whether it is cloud computing or what ebooks are published,Amazon wants business to be done in arenas where it sets the rules.This i.s bad for democracy.Commerce ought to reside in markets governed by regulations set by democratic political process not those chosen by the world's richest men.
According to Paragraph l,the GMB union
According to Paragraph l,the GMB union
A.hurts Amazon's regular employees.
B.actually encourages Amazon's monopoly.
C.is dissatisfied with employment law.
D.deems the couriers to be Amazon's staff.
B.actually encourages Amazon's monopoly.
C.is dissatisfied with employment law.
D.deems the couriers to be Amazon's staff.
参考答案
参考解析
解析：首段②句指出，工会认为亚马逊合作快递公司的快递员不是个体户，而是亚马逊快递物流网的雇员（in fact employees of Amazon's.…）；随后进一步说明：亚马逊应该把他们视为自己的员T（should be treated as staff）．给予与正式工同等的待遇，可见D.正确。[解题技巧]A.从末句“应给予快递员正式员工待遇”过度推断出“正式员工的利益受连累”。B.把首句throws into sharp relief how mucl1．benefit a monopolistic form.…（工会决议突显“现代经济催生技术企业垄断”）反向曲解为“工会助长垄断”。C.源于②句“表面看这是劳动法问题（其实更是垄断的负面影响问题）”，但此处并非表示“劳动法存争议”．相反．工会通过劳动法维护快递员权益。
更多 “This week's decision by the GMB union to bring a legal case against firms delivering for Amazon,the rcommerce giant,throws into sharp relief how much the modern economy has been stretched to benefit a monopolistic form of tech-capitalism.On the surface,the action is about employment law:it argues that couriers working for three delivery companies are not entrepreneurs working for themselves who contract their labour to anyone willing to pay,but are in fact employees of Amazon's latent delivery and logistics network.If the trade union is right,then these couriers should be treated as staff and paid the minimum wage,as well as sick and holiday pay.Amazon has established itself as an essential part of the internet economy and its dominance-its sheer scale and breadth-has been enabled in part by privatising profit and socialising losses.The firm seems to be firmly establishing a model of cheap-labour doorstep delivery by recognising an easily divided workforce is more easily conquered.This model may also one day compete with the Royal Mail;Amazon is reportedly planning to launch its own delivery service to rival the state-owned US Postal Service.Amazon's skill is not just in technology but also in finance.Last year it generated UK sales of￡9bn,a quarter more than the previous 12 months-while pre-tax profits halved to just￡24m.Its effective UK profit margin is just 0.3%.an indication perhaps of its low pricing strategy.In revolutionising e-commerce the company has delivered enormous benefits to consumers:but at what cost?Surely it is morally right that large employers are accountable for the treatment of workers down the supply chain,so long as they are economically dependent on them.Amazon might think differently.The tech giant wants privileged treatment because it thinks only corporate monopolies,with their economies of scale and ability to innovate,can promote growth.This view should be resisted.Amazon's service ensures consumers are better off,but undue focus on this neglects the interests of workers,rival entrepreneurs and voters.This is why the spirit of employment law must be honoured so Amazon shoulders the responsibility（and the cost）for contracted workers,or works out how to compel its suppliers to do so.Amazon clearly would like to control the pipes of capitalism,drawing off consumer demand for itself when it is lucrative to do so and charging others for use of its network.Amazon's website is the dominant platform for online retail sales.Whether it is cloud computing or what ebooks are published,Amazon wants business to be done in arenas where it sets the rules.This i.s bad for democracy.Commerce ought to reside in markets governed by regulations set by democratic political process not those chosen by the world's richest men. According to Paragraph l,the GMB unionA.hurts Amazon's regular employees. B.actually encourages Amazon's monopoly. C.is dissatisfied with employment law. D.deems the couriers to be Amazon's staff.” 相关考题
考题
Never before in China ________ for the farmers.
A.has so much been doneB.have so much been doneC.has been done so muchD.so much have been done
考题
It seems that now a country\'s economy depends much on _______ .A how welldeveloped it is electronicallyB whether it is prejudiced against immigrantsC whether it adopts America's industrial patternD how much control it has over foreign corporations
考题
The sharp hearing of a fish _______ by two scientists.
A.have been provedB.have provedC.has provedD.has been proved
考题
If at any time the officer in charge of the navigational watch is to be relieved when a manoeuvre or other action to avoid any hazard is taking place，______．A.the relief of that officer shall be made prior to such action has been completedB.the relief of that officer shall never be madeC.the relief of that officer shall be deferred until such action has been completedD.the relief of that officer shall be made by the captain
考题
Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its "one-click"online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.
Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bil-ski, as the case is known, is "a very big deal," says Dennis D．Crouch of the University of Mis-souri School of law. It "has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."
Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.
The Bilski ease involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should "reconsider" its State Street Bank ruling.
The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for "inventions" that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are "reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court," says Harold C． Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?A.Its ruling complies with the court decisions.
B.It involves a very big business transaction.
C.It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit.
D.It may change the legal practices in the U.S.
考题
Amazon is cutting hundreds of jobs at its Seattle headquarters in a rare set of layoffs for the online etailing giant,according to a media report The company will 1 cut hundreds more jobs in other parts of Amazon's operations,The Seattle Times reported on Monday,2 a person familiar with the eliminations An Amazon spokesman told Fortune that as part of our annual planning process,we are 3 head count adjustments across the company-4 reductions in a couple of places and aggressive hiring in many others 5 the Times,the Amazon layoffs are the result of the quick 6 of late that saw it end up with too much staff in some units.The paper also said managers are under pressure to 7 lower caliber employees and show more spending discipline.Amazon has a problem right now with 8 one un named engineer told the Times The layoffs are mostly 9 in Amazons consumer retail businesses,the Times reported.The move 10 recent layoffs at Amazon's e-commerce arch-rival Walmart.Walmart is in the process of cutting up to 500 or so jobs at its Bentonville,Arkansas headquarters 11 it looks to streamline its operations and be as nimble as it can to 12 with Amazon.For both companies,the cuts are modest in relation 13 staffing levels.Amazon employs about 566,000 people worldwide,according to its recently 14 annual report for 2017.That was up from 341,400 a year earlier.（15 its organic growth,Amazon has made some acquisitions in the last year,notably that of Whole Foods Market last summer.）Such has Amazons growth been that it is currently in the process of 16 locations for a second headquarters Earlier this month,Amazon reported 17 of 60.5 billion for the three months ended Dec.31.18 from$43.74 billilion a year earlier,fueleded by 19 sales during the holiday season It also reported a profit of 1.9 billion on the 20 of the popularity of its voice-activated Echo devices and jump in its Prime memberships.
7选？A.squeeze out
B.bring up
C.associate with
D.put up with
考题
This week's decision by the GMB union to bring a legal case against firms delivering for Amazon,the rcommerce giant,throws into sharp relief how much the modern economy has been stretched to benefit a monopolistic form of tech-capitalism.On the surface,the action is about employment law:it argues that couriers working for three delivery companies are not entrepreneurs working for themselves who contract their labour to anyone willing to pay,but are in fact employees of Amazon's latent delivery and logistics network.If the trade union is right,then these couriers should be treated as staff and paid the minimum wage,as well as sick and holiday pay.Amazon has established itself as an essential part of the internet economy and its dominance-its sheer scale and breadth-has been enabled in part by privatising profit and socialising losses.The firm seems to be firmly establishing a model of cheap-labour doorstep delivery by recognising an easily divided workforce is more easily conquered.This model may also one day compete with the Royal Mail;Amazon is reportedly planning to launch its own delivery service to rival the state-owned US Postal Service.Amazon's skill is not just in technology but also in finance.Last year it generated UK sales of￡9bn,a quarter more than the previous 12 months-while pre-tax profits halved to just￡24m.Its effective UK profit margin is just 0.3%.an indication perhaps of its low pricing strategy.In revolutionising e-commerce the company has delivered enormous benefits to consumers:but at what cost?Surely it is morally right that large employers are accountable for the treatment of workers down the supply chain,so long as they are economically dependent on them.Amazon might think differently.The tech giant wants privileged treatment because it thinks only corporate monopolies,with their economies of scale and ability to innovate,can promote growth.This view should be resisted.Amazon's service ensures consumers are better off,but undue focus on this neglects the interests of workers,rival entrepreneurs and voters.This is why the spirit of employment law must be honoured so Amazon shoulders the responsibility（and the cost）for contracted workers,or works out how to compel its suppliers to do so.Amazon clearly would like to control the pipes of capitalism,drawing off consumer demand for itself when it is lucrative to do so and charging others for use of its network.Amazon's website is the dominant platform for online retail sales.Whether it is cloud computing or what ebooks are published,Amazon wants business to be done in arenas where it sets the rules.This i.s bad for democracy.Commerce ought to reside in markets governed by regulations set by democratic political process not those chosen by the world's richest men.
Paragraph 2 shows that the moclel of cheap-labour delivery may help AmazonA.bridge the employee-employer divide.
B.improve its workforce management.
C.cooperate with state-owned enterprises.
D.move into delivery service market.
考题
Text 2 Over the past decade,thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods.Amazon.com received one for its"one-click"online payment system.Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy.One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents,which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago.In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S.court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents.In re Bilski,as the case is known,is"a very big deal",says DennisD.Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law.It"has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face,because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case,approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets.That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings,initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions.Later,more established companies raced to add such patents to their files,if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch.In 2005,IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them.Similarly,some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products,even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market.The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges,rather than a typical panel of three,and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should"reconsider"its state street Bank ruling.The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders.Last April,for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for"inventions"that are obvious.The judges on the Federal circuit are"reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court",says HaroldC.Wegner,a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.27.Which of the following is true of the Bilski case?A.Its ruling complies with the court decisions
B.It involves a very big business transaction
C.It has been dismissed by the Federal Circuit
D.It may change the legal practices in the U.S.
考题
While the technological advancements that have brought us tailor-made online shopping at the click of a button is worth celebrating,the delirium that surrounded Amazon's Prime Day this week has left a bad taste in my mouth.Technological progress brings its own challenges,and the concerns of my constituents who have worked at our local Amazon fulfilment centre have only served to reinforce this view.There is something deeply disturbing about the sheer number of accusations being levelled at Amazon's working conditions,and that its warehouses seem to be filled with staff who say they are afraid to take time off sick.As one of the most successful companies in the world,Amazon appears to be failing the staff who keep this retail behemoth operating smoothly on a day-to-day basis,and who are therefore the real driving force behind the world's iechnological revolution.With a shocking 600 ambulance calls made co Amazon warehouses in the United Kingdom over the last three years,it is no surprise that in a member's survey of workers conducted by GMB,one worker described employment there as akin to"living in a prison".The strict targets that,are apparently imposed on staff mean that 70%of staff feel like they are given disciplinary points unfairly,while 89%believe they are being exploited.Moreover,there have been reports of an employee in laLe pregnancy being forced to stand for 10 hours a day,and ambulance calls due to"eleclric shocks"and"major trauma".An expose by Vice said that one former employee claimed to be hauled in for disciplinary procedures"after failing to call in sick from hospital following an epileptic seizure at work".These extensive reports into working practices at Amazon are clearly alarming,and suggest that while companies like Amazon reap the financial rewards of technological progress,they appear to be neglecting the health and safety of their workforce.I have therefore written a letter to the prime minister urging her to take a stand and ensure furt,her regulation is put into place to see that,Amazon's working conditions are reasonable and humane.What we need is a government that actively intervenes in these workplace disputes,and can address the problems that come with technological change and the unashamed desire to save money at the expense of the weUbeing of the worUorce,Implementing Labour's 20-point plan for security and equality at work would be a welcome start.By empowering trade unions and enforcing regulation to ensure safe and healthy environments,we can take a stand against companies like Amazon,whose workforce consistenLly feels ex-ploited and afraid.While the government continues to flounder,it is important.for us to reflect on whether the convenience of websites such as Amazon are truly worth the cost to workers who claim to suffer from the inadequate facilities and awful environments that are pervasive in these warehouses.My hope is that the more we shine the light on these working conditions,the more pressure Amazon will face to finally act.
Which of the following could be the title of the text?A.Amazon Must Be Forced to Change for the Sake of Its Workers.
B.Amazon Encounters the Bottleneck in Technology Development
C.Amazon's Exploitation to Its Workers Has Deslructed Its Image.
D.Amazon's Developing Plan Has Mel the Public's Accusation.
考题
Text 2 Over the past decade,thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods.Amazon.com received one for its"one-click"online payment system.Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy.One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents,which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago.In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S.court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents.In re Bilski,as the case is known,is"a very big deal",says DennisD.Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law.It"has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face,because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case,approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets.That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings,initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions.Later,more established companies raced to add such patents to their files,if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch.In 2005,IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them.Similarly,some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products,even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market.The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges,rather than a typical panel of three,and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should"reconsider"its state street Bank ruling.The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders.Last April,for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for"inventions"that are obvious.The judges on the Federal circuit are"reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court",says HaroldC.Wegner,a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.29.We learn from the last two paragraphs that business-method patentsA.are immune to legal challenges
B.are often unnecessarily issued
C.lower the esteem for patent holders
D.increase the incidence of risks
考题
This week's decision by the GMB union to bring a legal case against firms delivering for Amazon,the rcommerce giant,throws into sharp relief how much the modern economy has been stretched to benefit a monopolistic form of tech-capitalism.On the surface,the action is about employment law:it argues that couriers working for three delivery companies are not entrepreneurs working for themselves who contract their labour to anyone willing to pay,but are in fact employees of Amazon's latent delivery and logistics network.If the trade union is right,then these couriers should be treated as staff and paid the minimum wage,as well as sick and holiday pay.Amazon has established itself as an essential part of the internet economy and its dominance-its sheer scale and breadth-has been enabled in part by privatising profit and socialising losses.The firm seems to be firmly establishing a model of cheap-labour doorstep delivery by recognising an easily divided workforce is more easily conquered.This model may also one day compete with the Royal Mail;Amazon is reportedly planning to launch its own delivery service to rival the state-owned US Postal Service.Amazon's skill is not just in technology but also in finance.Last year it generated UK sales of￡9bn,a quarter more than the previous 12 months-while pre-tax profits halved to just￡24m.Its effective UK profit margin is just 0.3%.an indication perhaps of its low pricing strategy.In revolutionising e-commerce the company has delivered enormous benefits to consumers:but at what cost?Surely it is morally right that large employers are accountable for the treatment of workers down the supply chain,so long as they are economically dependent on them.Amazon might think differently.The tech giant wants privileged treatment because it thinks only corporate monopolies,with their economies of scale and ability to innovate,can promote growth.This view should be resisted.Amazon's service ensures consumers are better off,but undue focus on this neglects the interests of workers,rival entrepreneurs and voters.This is why the spirit of employment law must be honoured so Amazon shoulders the responsibility（and the cost）for contracted workers,or works out how to compel its suppliers to do so.Amazon clearly would like to control the pipes of capitalism,drawing off consumer demand for itself when it is lucrative to do so and charging others for use of its network.Amazon's website is the dominant platform for online retail sales.Whether it is cloud computing or what ebooks are published,Amazon wants business to be done in arenas where it sets the rules.This i.s bad for democracy.Commerce ought to reside in markets governed by regulations set by democratic political process not those chosen by the world's richest men.
Which of the following is true about Amazon,according to Paragraph 3?A.It saw a sharp rise in profits last year.
B.lts revolution comes at the expense of consumers.
C.Its growth owes a lot to supply chain workers.
D.lts business declines due to the low price strategy.
考题
Text 2 Over the past decade,thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods.Amazon.com received one for its"one-click"online payment system.Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy.One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.Now the nation's top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents,which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago.In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S.court of Appeals for the federal circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents.In re Bilski,as the case is known,is"a very big deal",says DennisD.Crouch of the University of Missouri School of law.It"has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents."Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face,because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called state Street Bank case,approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets.That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings,initially by emerging internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions.Later,more established companies raced to add such patents to their files,if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch.In 2005,IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them.Similarly,some Wall Street investment films armed themselves with patents for financial products,even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market.The Federal circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court's judges,rather than a typical panel of three,and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should"reconsider"its state street Bank ruling.The Federal Circuit's action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders.Last April,for example the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for"inventions"that are obvious.The judges on the Federal circuit are"reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court",says HaroldC.Wegner,a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.30.Which of the following would be the subject of the text?A.A looming threat to business-method patents
B.Protection for business-method patent holders
C.A legal case regarding business-method patents
D.A prevailing trend against business-method patents
考题
This week's decision by the GMB union to bring a legal case against firms delivering for Amazon,the rcommerce giant,throws into sharp relief how much the modern economy has been stretched to benefit a monopolistic form of tech-capitalism.On the surface,the action is about employment law:it argues that couriers working for three delivery companies are not entrepreneurs working for themselves who contract their labour to anyone willing to pay,but are in fact employees of Amazon's latent delivery and logistics network.If the trade union is right,then these couriers should be treated as staff and paid the minimum wage,as well as sick and holiday pay.Amazon has established itself as an essential part of the internet economy and its dominance-its sheer scale and breadth-has been enabled in part by privatising profit and socialising losses.The firm seems to be firmly establishing a model of cheap-labour doorstep delivery by recognising an easily divided workforce is more easily conquered.This model may also one day compete with the Royal Mail;Amazon is reportedly planning to launch its own delivery service to rival the state-owned US Postal Service.Amazon's skill is not just in technology but also in finance.Last year it generated UK sales of￡9bn,a quarter more than the previous 12 months-while pre-tax profits halved to just￡24m.Its effective UK profit margin is just 0.3%.an indication perhaps of its low pricing strategy.In revolutionising e-commerce the company has delivered enormous benefits to consumers:but at what cost?Surely it is morally right that large employers are accountable for the treatment of workers down the supply chain,so long as they are economically dependent on them.Amazon might think differently.The tech giant wants privileged treatment because it thinks only corporate monopolies,with their economies of scale and ability to innovate,can promote growth.This view should be resisted.Amazon's service ensures consumers are better off,but undue focus on this neglects the interests of workers,rival entrepreneurs and voters.This is why the spirit of employment law must be honoured so Amazon shoulders the responsibility（and the cost）for contracted workers,or works out how to compel its suppliers to do so.Amazon clearly would like to control the pipes of capitalism,drawing off consumer demand for itself when it is lucrative to do so and charging others for use of its network.Amazon's website is the dominant platform for online retail sales.Whether it is cloud computing or what ebooks are published,Amazon wants business to be done in arenas where it sets the rules.This i.s bad for democracy.Commerce ought to reside in markets governed by regulations set by democratic political process not those chosen by the world's richest men.
Amazon holds it deserves privileged treatment in that corporate monopoliesA.can ensure consumers'demand.
B.are vital to innovation and growth.
C.can better guarantee workers'right.
D.can ultimately promote democracy.
考题
Text 4 The EU's faltering progress towards a common system of taxing the huge revenues of the new digital giants lurched forward this morning as Margrethe Vestager,the EU commissioner in charge of competition,declared that Amazon had received unfair state aid from Luxembourg through its tax arrangements,and demanded that it pay￡250m in back taxes.At the same time,Ms Vestager announced that the European commission would haul Ireland up before the European court of justice for its failure to demand￡13bn of unpaid tax from Apple,identi{ied in an earlier investigation.The lwo events illusrrate the gulf between the commission,together with some of the EU's iargest economies,and smaller members such as Ireland and Luxembourg.Both Ireland and Luxembourg defend their tax arrangements.Ireland in particular welcomes the thousands of goocl jobs that the tech giants bring and has no desire to find ways of extracting more tax from thcm in case it drives them away.The Irish government also insists that taxation is a sovereign matter,not an arena for EU interference.（ ）thers are under pressure from voters who are outraged that any company can make so much profit in their country and pay so little tax on it.Revenue from Facebook's UK operations,it has emerged,nearly quadrupled last year t0 842m,through growth in digital ad sales;its corporation tax bill crept up from 4.2m t0 5.Im.The US inland revenue service is also keen to find transparent ways of taxing the new digital economy,and is watching jealously as the European commission draws up its plans,suspicious of any move that might be used by the tech giants to offset their US tax bills.Already,companies such as Google and Amazon hold billions of dollars in offshore funds,where ihey are out of reach of the taxman.The US defensiveness about its own tax revenues points to the need for a global rather than a merely European solution to the question of how,what and whcre to tax the digital economy,but progress through the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development（OECD）is glacial,and would in any event only be advisory.The commission is still hoping to get agreement on a common corporate tax base that would help to identify the parameters of any new tax system,but progress has stalled because of complexities around double taxation.Meanwhile the American Chamber of Commerce in Europe（ACCE）is warning that any attempt to tax the tech giants more would threaten investment and expansion.But across most of the EU discontent is growing,not just over the failure to pay tax-which has already prompted some tech companies to become more transparent,and even pay more-but over many of their practices.The chief executive of the ride-hailing app Uber has been in London this week trying to patch up relations with Transport for London（TfL）.Margrethe Vestager is right:enforcing regulations works.
The U.S.'s close attention to EU's tax plan making is mentioned to stress_____A.the OECD's failure to fulfill its obligation
B.Google and Amazon's success outside the U.S.
C.U.S.'s jealousy in European progress in tax reform
D.the universality of digital economy taxation problem
考题
Text 2 America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy,the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.The General Data Protection Regulation（GDPR）is due to come into force next month.It is rules-heavy and has its flaws,but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to,and to correct,information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies'mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users'information,which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system,innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data,fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians'personal data.The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long,it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms,in particular,look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template,not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path,it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.
It can be inferred from Paragraph 4 that privacy legislation is likely to_____A.be opposed by tech companies
B.cause concerns among consumers
C.promote corporate innovation
D.hinder the popularity of apps
考题
Text 2 America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy,the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.The General Data Protection Regulation（GDPR）is due to come into force next month.It is rules-heavy and has its flaws,but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to,and to correct,information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies'mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users'information,which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system,innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data,fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians'personal data.The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long,it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms,in particular,look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template,not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path,it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.
Facebook is mentioned to show that_____.A.America needs a general data-protection law
B.online economy relies heavily on consumer data
C.online news can produce strong economic impact
D.America has benefited greatly from self-regulation
考题
Text 2 America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy,the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.The General Data Protection Regulation（GDPR）is due to come into force next month.It is rules-heavy and has its flaws,but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to,and to correct,information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies'mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users'information,which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system,innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data,fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians'personal data.The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long,it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms,in particular,look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template,not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path,it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.
The most suitable title for this text would be____A.American firms in Europe will have to comply with the GDPR
B.America should protect its citizens'privacy and its firms'health
C.America should borrow from Europe's data-privacy law
D.America's data economy is evolving into a new era
考题
Text 2 America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy,the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.The General Data Protection Regulation（GDPR）is due to come into force next month.It is rules-heavy and has its flaws,but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to,and to correct,information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies'mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users'information,which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system,innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data,fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians'personal data.The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long,it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms,in particular,look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template,not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path,it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.
Which of the following is true,according to Paragraph 5?A.The GDPR may result in fragmentation of international law.
B.America is restricting its firms from doing business in Europe.
C.American states have detected a need for greater data privacy.
D.California is considering legislation to protect personal data.
考题
Text 2 America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy,the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.The General Data Protection Regulation（GDPR）is due to come into force next month.It is rules-heavy and has its flaws,but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to,and to correct,information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies'mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users'information,which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system,innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data,fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians'personal data.The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long,it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms,in particular,look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template,not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path,it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.
According to Paragraphs l and 2,GDPR——.A.stresses commercial freedom over governmental control
B.aims to give citizens the control of their personal data
C.grants companies the right to collect user information
D.recognizes the legitimacy of data transfer among firms
考题
The economy of Ireland has been traditionally agricultural,but since （）country.sindustrial base has expanded.Athe mid-1950sBthe mid-1960sCthe 1970sDthe 1980s
考题
The economy of Ireland has been traditionally agricultural,but since （）country.sindustrial base has expanded.A、the mid-1950sB、the mid-1960sC、the 1970sD、the 1980s
考题
单选题The sentence “But this has rarely been a one-way street.” in the last paragraph means that _____.A
contemporary art has been nourished by modern scienceB
modern science has been nourished by artC
artists can become scientists and scientists can become artistsD
the impacts of modern art and science are actually mutual
考题
单选题Which of the following statements is true according to what was said in the recording?A
The dollar rose to a new high against the curd.B
The American economy has rebounded.C
Japan’s economy has not bottomed out yet.D
The performance of many economies in Latin America is less than expected.
考题
单选题This report ______.A
was commissioned by the governmentB
agrees new ways of workingC
aims to find out how much the universities in the UK have been affected by the economy crisisD
represents universities aiming to get more government funds on education
考题
问答题Practice 1That Old Greenspan Magic Seems to be Fading For the best part of 20 years, Alan Greenspan has been a symbol of the stupidity of ageism. He became chairman of the US Federal Reserve at 61, when plenty of workers have already been tossed on the scrapheap and many others are preparing to wind down for retirement. His golden years in charge of the US economy were when he was pushing 70 and he’s still there aged 78. Greenspan is the doyen of central bankers, still talked about in almost reverential terms by his peers. The fact that the Fed chairman rarely gives interviews and makes public pronouncements that are to economics what Finnegans Wake is to literature only adds to the mystique. It is, then, with some trepidation that the question has to be asked: has Big Alan finally lost the plot? At the start of last week, Greenspan presided over a meeting of the Fed which kept interest rates on hold at 1%, the level they have been pegged at for nearly a year. A statement accompanying the decision said the risks to inflation were balanced, which means the Fed thinks there is as much chance of the lost of living going up as going down. On Thursday, new joblessness claims in the US fell to their lowest level in getting on for four years, and the picture of a recovering labour market was underlined by Friday’s non-farm payrolls which showed an increase of 288,000, above what had been expected. The economy is expanding at an annual rate of 4.5%, surveys of both manufacturing and the service sector are strong, the housing market is booming, inflation has started to pick up. Hardly surprisingly, Greenspan’s call on inflation is now coming under the microscope, even by those on the Kenyesian left who tend to favor expansionary macroeconomic policies. “Show me something, other than computers, where the price is falling,” says Dean Baker of the Centre for Economic Policy Research in Washington. Baker is right. Clearly, risks to inflation are on the upside, and massively so. The economy has been injected with a cocktail of three growth-inducing drugs-negative real interest rates, a rising budget deficit and a falling currency. Oil prices have touched $40 a barrel and the labour market is tightening. It is hard to believe that Greenspan, a junkie for economic data no matter how seemingly trivial, has not spotted all this. Rates in the US are far below a neutral level, which would probably be around 5%, yet Greenspan is in no hurry to act.
考题
单选题The central government has been working hard to keep China’s economy _____.A
durableB
dubiousC
dramaticD
dynamic
热门标签
最新试卷
