Most economists in the United States seem excited 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, established by anyone other than the aggregate of consumers seems harmful. 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; it is not. 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 development. There is no indication that they have. 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 Unites 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.Notes: spell魔力;一阵。aggregate总体
单选题 The primary purpose of the text is to
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:综合归纳题。本题问:本文的主要目的是什么?作者在第1段中开宗明义地提出"价格控制在工业化社会中是正常的,也是有益的",此后文中自始至终论述价格控制对工业化社会的重要意义。
单选题 The suggestion in the text that price-fixing in industrialized societies is normal arises from the author"s statement that price-fixing is
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:细节理解题。本题问:文中有关工业化社会中价格制定是正常的说法是根据作者的哪一表述提出的?参阅第1段第5句:"实际上,在工业化社会中价格控制是很正常的,因为工业制度本身就提供了它所需要的价格控制,这是工业发展本身很容易产生的结果"。
单选题 According to the author, what is the result of the Soviet Union"s change in economic policy, in the 1970"s?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析:细节理解题。本题问:根据作者的看法,苏联70年代经济政策变化的结果是什么?作者在最后一段中写道:"在20世纪70年代初,苏联开始让公司和工业适当地灵活掌握价格的调整…但是苏联公司与资本主义公司一样不受自由市场所确定的价格支配,苏联公司对自由市场几乎没有什么影响。而且,苏联公司被授权确定价格"。
单选题 With which of the following statements regarding the behavior of large firms in industrialized societies would the author agree?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】解析:推理判断题。本题问:作者最有可能同意下面哪一点关于工业化社会大公司的行为的说法?参阅第1段倒数第2句。在第1段中作者谈到在工业化社会中大公司的做法。大公司在对产品的稳定需求中有它们的共同利益。由此可以推理,作者认为,大公司的经理们会不断预测对产品的需求。
单选题 In the text, the author is primarily concerned with
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:总结归纳题。本题问:本文中作者主要讨论什么?本文第1段中作者提出,美国许多经济学家认为自由市场是最好的,价格控制是有害的。而作者认为,价格控制在工业化国家中是正常的,在其他资本主义国家和社会主义苏联均如此。可见,作者旨在批判经济学家的一种观点。