单选题 This is not a good time to be foreign. Anti-immigrant parties are gaining ground in Europe. Britain has been fretting this week over lapses in its border controls. In America Barack Obama has failed to deliver the immigration reform he promised, and Republican presidential candidates would rather electrify the border fence with Mexico than educate the children of illegal aliens. America educates foreign scientists in its universities and then expels them, a policy the mayor of New York calls "national suicide". This illiberal turn in attitudes to migration is no surprise. It is the result of cyclical economic gloom combined with a secular rise in pressure on rich countries" borders. But governments now weighing up whether or not to try to slam the door should consider another factor; the growing economic importance of Diasporas, and the contribution they can make to a country"s economic growth. Diaspora networks—of Huguenots, Scots, Jews and many others—have always been a potent economic force, but the cheapness and ease of modern travel has made them larger and more numerous than ever before. There are now 215m first-generation migrants around the world: that"s 3% of the world"s population. If they were a nation, it would be a little larger than Brazil. There are more Chinese people living outside China than there are French people in France. Some 22m Indians are scattered all over the globe. Small concentrations of ethnic and linguistic groups have always been found in surprising places—Lebanese in West Africa, Japanese in Brazil and Welsh in Patagonia , for instance—but they have been joined by newer ones, such as west Africans in southern China. These networks of kinship and language make it easier to do business across borders. Theyspeed the flow of information. Trust matters, especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak. So does a knowledge of the local culture. And modern communications make these networks an even more powerful tool of business. Diasporas also help spread ideas. Many of the emerging world"s brightest minds are educated at Western universities. An increasing number go home, taking with them both knowledge and contacts. Indian computer scientists in Bangalore bounce ideas constantly off their Indian friends in Silicon Valley. China"s technology industry is dominated by "sea turtles" (Chinese who have lived a-broad and returned). Diasporas spread money, too. Migrants into rich countries not only send cash to their families; they also help companies in their host country operate in their home country. A Harvard Business School study shows that, American companies that employ lots of ethnic Chinese people find it much easier to set up in China without a joint venture with a local firm. Such arguments are unlikely to make much headway against hostility towards immigrants in rich countries. Fury against foreigners is usually based on two (mutually incompatible) notions; that because so many migrants claim welfare they are a drain on the public purse; and that because they are prepared to work harder for less pay they will depress the wages of those at the bottom of the pile. The first is usually not true (in Britain, for instance, immigrants claim benefits less than indigenous people do) , and the second is hard to establish either way. Some studies do indeed suggest that competition from unskilled immigrants depresses the wages of unskilled locals. But others find this effect to be small or non-existent. Nor is it possible to establish the impact of migration on overall growth. The sums are simply too difficult. Yet there are good reasons for believing that it is likely to be positive. Migrants tend to be hard-working and innovative. That spurs productivity and company formation. A recent study carried out by Duke University showed that, while immigrants make up an eighth of America"s population , they founded a quarter of the country"s technology and engineering firms. And, by linking the West with emerging markets, Diasporas help rich countries to plug into fast-growing economies. Rich countries are thus likely to benefit from looser immigration policy; and fears that poor countries will suffer as a result of a "brain drain" are overblown. The prospect of working abroad spurs more people to acquire valuable skills, and not all subsequently emigrate. Skilled migrants send money home, and they often return to set up new businesses. One study found that unless they lose more than 20% of their university graduates, the brain drain makes poor countries richer.

单选题 The word " Diaspora" in this passage means______.

单选题 The author"s attitude towards "Diasporas" is that______.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】解析：文章多处提到移民为世界经济发展做出贡献。例如第六段提到在富裕国家的“Migrants”不仅“send cash to their families”；他们还会帮助公司“operate in their home country”；不仅如此，倒数第二段提到了移民为富裕国家也做出的贡献。最后一段也提到“Rich countries”将会从宽松的移民政策中获益。因此B项指出移民是世界经济中难得一见的亮点，富裕国家应该欢迎他们是符合作者对“diasporas”的态度的。A选项是一个事实，不是作者态度。因此不选A。文章最后一段“The prospect of working abroad spurs more people to acquire valuable skills，and not all subsequently emigrate”说明有些人只是到国外学习，并不移民；另外一些人才会回国开公司，因此担心不发达国家会“brain drain”是过分夸张的，故C选项错误。从文章第七段可以看出的确有一些研究表明来自“unskilled immigration”的竞争会压低“unskilled locals”的工资，但是其他研究发现，这种影响“to be small”或者“non—existent”，因此D项错误。

单选题 Which of the following is true?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】解析：文章第八段提到通过连接西方和“emerging markets”，“Diasporas”加速富裕国家经济发展。第六段提到移民帮助“companies in their host country operate in their home country”，而D项移民帮助富国在本国新兴市场发展业务正是结合了以上两句话，因此D为正确选项。虽然文章第七段提到“So many migrants claim welfare they are a drain on the public purse”。但是随后作者又提到这个观点“is usually not true”。而A项说许多移民要求比当地人获得更多福利是不正确的。C项后半句说移民已经成为“a drain on the public purse”也是错误的。文章第七段最后提到虽然一些研究表明来自“unskilled immigrants”的竞争压低了“unskilled locals”的工资，但是这种影响“to be small"或者“non-existent”，因此B项不正确。

单选题 It can be inferred from the passage that______

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】解析：从文章第五段中可知“An increasing number go home，taking with them both knowledge and contacts”，因此C选项说“要回国的技术移民数量正在增加”是正确的。A选项后半句“which can stimulate the locals to work harder”文中没有提供相关线索，无法推断，因此A项不正确。文中第三段只是提到如果这些移民组成一个国家，这个国家将“a little larger than Brazil”，而B项后半句说这些移民将成立一个新国家是没有判断依据的，因此B项不正确。D项旨在考查对第四段“Trust matters，especially in emerging markets where the rule of law is weak”的理解。它是指信任很重要，特别是在新兴市场，通常法制薄弱。而D项由此推断这种“The networks of kinship and language”通过利用法律漏洞来促进国际商务贸易是不正确的。