单选题 Public companies have been the {{U}}locomotives{{/U}} of capitalism since they were invented in the mid-19th century. They have installed themselves at the heart of the world's largest economy, the United States. In the 1990s they looked as if they would spread round the world, shunting aside older forms of corporate organisation such as partnerships, and newer rivals such as state-owned enterprises (SOEs). China's former president, Jiang Zemin, described NASDAQ as "the crown jewel of all that is great about America". Russia rejected five-year plans in favour of stockmarket listings and Wall Street banks abandoned cosy partnerships in favour of public equity: Goldman Sachs, the last big holdout, went public as the decade came to an end.
Public companies triumphed because they provided three things that make for durable success: limited liability, which encourages the public to invest, professional management, which boosts productivity, and "corporate personhood", which means businesses can survive the removal of a founder. In 1997 the number of American companies reached an all-time high of 7,888. Even now, American listed companies are as profitable as they have been for 60 years.
But during the past decade, the title of a 1989 essay, "Eclipse of the Public Corporation", by Michael Jensen of Harvard Business School, has turned out to be prescient. In 2001-2002 some of America's most prominent public companies imploded. They included Enron, Tyco, WorldCom and Global Crossing, which, before their demise, were admired. Six years later Lehman Brothers collapsed and Citigroup and General Motors turned to the government for salvation. Meanwhile, SOEs were growing in emerging markets, challenging the idea that public companies are the biggest fishes in the sea. Private-equity firms flourished in the West, challenging the idea that public companies are the best managed. And the rise of the Asian economies, with their legions of family-owned conglomerates, challenged the idea that they are best equipped to advance capitalism's geographical frontier.
So, even though public companies are flush with cash (American firms are sitting on $2.23 trillion, see Free Exchange) and even though the world's most talked-about entrepreneur, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, is due to take his company public on May 18th, the signs of health are misleading. Public companies are in danger of becoming like a fading London club. Their membership is falling. They spend their time fussing over club rules. And, as they peer out of the window, they see the bright young things heading elsewhere.
The number of public companies has dropped dramatically in the Anglo-Saxon world—by 38% since 1997 in America and by 48% in Britain's main markets. The number of initial public offerings (IPOs) in America dropped from an average of 311 a year in 1980-2000 to just 81 in 2011.
Going public no longer has the glamour it once had. Entrepreneurs have to wait longer—an average of ten years for companies backed by venture capital, compared with four in 1985—and must jump through more hoops. Lawyers and accountants are increasingly specialized and expensive; bankers are less willing to take them public; qualified directors are harder to find, since even "non-execs" can go to prison if they sign false accounts.

单选题 What is the meaning of "locomotive" in Paragraph 1?

A. Engine.
B. Core.
C. Part.
D. Fuel.

单选题 What's the main idea of this article?

A. The public companies are the locomotives of capitalism.
B. The public company is endangered now.
C. Facebook is changing the outlook of the public companies.
D. Many companies are reluctant to go public.

单选题 Which of the following statements is NOT true?

A. Public companies are no longer as successful as 60 years ago.
B. Michael Jensen's essay seems to be prophetic.
C. Public companies are still ascending safely.
D. Companies find going public more challenging.

单选题 Public companies succeed because of ______.

A. limited liability, professional management and corporate personhood
B. the galloping science and technology
C. their abandoning cozy partnerships
D. their outmatching state-owned enterprises

单选题 Those public companies wane because ______.

A. the government favored SOEs
B. there are divergences within their club
C. new start-ups bring challenges
D. they are tied up by regulations and challenged by alternative corporate forms