单选题 The horns have sounded and the hounds are baying. Across the developed world the hunt for more taxes from the wealthy is on. Recent austerity budgets in France and Italy slapped 3% surcharges on those with incomes above 500, 000 ($680, 000) and 300, 000 respectively. Now Barack Obama has produced a new deficit-reduction plan that aims its tax increases squarely at the rich, including a "Buffett rule" to ensure that no household making more than $1m a year pays a lower average tax rate than "middle-class" families do. Tapping the rich to close the deficit is "not class warfare", argues Mr. Obama. "It's math."
Actually, it's not simply math. The question of whether to tax the wealthy more depends on political judgments about the right size of the state and the appropriate role for redistribution. The math says deficits could technically be tamed by spending cuts alone—as Mr. Obama's Republican opponents advocate. Class warfare may be a loaded term, but it captures a fundamental debate in Western societies: who should suffer for righting public finances?
There are three good reasons why the wealthy should pay more tax—though not, by and large, in the ways that the rich world's governments currently propose. First, the West's deficits should not be closed by spending cuts alone. Public spending should certainly take the brunt. But experience also argues that higher taxes should be part of the mix. In America the tax take is historically low after years of rate reductions. There, and elsewhere, tax rises need to bear some of the burden.
Second, there is a political argument for raising this new revenue from the rich. Spending cuts fall disproportionately on the less well-off; and, even before the crunch, median incomes were stagnating. Meanwhile, globalization has been rewarding winners ever more generously. Voters' support for ongoing austerity depends on a disproportionate share of any new revenue coming from the wealthy. Given the rich world's need for faster growth, governments should be wary of sharp tax increases—especially since they are unnecessary. Indeed, the third argument for raising more money from the rich is that it can be done not by increasing marginal tax rates, but by making the tax code more efficient.
The scope for doing so is most obvious in America, which relies far more than other countries on income taxes and has a mass of deductions on everything from interest payments on mortgages to employer-provided health care, so taxes are levied on a very narrow base. Since the main beneficiaries of the deductions are the wealthy, richer folk would pay most of that. And since marginal rates would be untouched (or reduced), such a reform would do less to discourage them from creating wealth.

单选题 The word "austerity"(Para. 1) most probably means
A. unpredictability. B. shortage. C. notoriety. D. urgency.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[解析] 含义题。根据题干定位到第一段。该词位于第三句中，前一句指出，发达国家开始向富人征收更多的税(the hunt for more taxes from the wealthy is on)，接着第三、四句举了一些发达国家的例子，即最近法国和意大利实行的预算(Recent austerity budgets in France and Italy)，向收入超过50万欧元(68万美元)和30万欧元的人分别多征收了3%的税，而奥巴马也制定了向富人加税的新的赤字削减计划(new deficit-reduction plan that aims its tax increases squarely at the lich)。可见，法国和意大利实行的预算同奥巴马实行的赤字削减计划性质相同，都是通过向富人征收更多的税来补贴有限的财政预算，由此可推知，目前的财政预算政策是紧缩的财政政策，可知B项最符合题意，故为答案。

单选题 It can be learned from the first paragraph that
A. hunting for more taxes from the rich can reduce the class differences.
B. the low-income families do not need to pay income tax.
C. Obama's plan is designed to narrow the deficit by taxing the rich.
D. Buffett sets a good example for tax payers.

单选题 Which of the following is the reason for taxing more from the rich in the U.S.?
A. The tax rate in the U.S. is lower than that in other countries.
B. The rich suffer little from spending cuts.
C. Spending cut is not enough to settle financial problems.
D. The rich are not influenced by the increasing marginal tax rates.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[解析] 细节题。根据题于关键词the reason for taxing mote from the rich可定位至文章第三、四段。这两段说明了向富人多征税的三点原因(three good reasons why the wealthy should pay more tax)。其中，第三段第二句指出原因之一：西方国家的赤字不能仅通过削减开销来缩小(the West's deficits should not be closed by spending cuts alone)，第三、四句还指出，公共开支理应首当其冲。但经验表明增加税收也应该是众多措施的一部分(higher taxes should be part of the mix)，C项与文意相符，故正确。

单选题 The author's attitude towards America's higher taxes on the rich is one of
A. positiveness. B. skepticism.
C. objectiveness. D. indifference.

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】[解析] 态度题。本题就作者对向富人征收更多税的态度提问，由于文中并没有文字能直接表明作者的态度，故需分析全文得知。文章前两段首先说明了讨论的主题：发达国家为了削减财政赤字开始向富人征收更多的税。接着第三、四段集中说明了对富人征收更多税的三点原因，这几点原因颇具说服力，表明作者是支持向富人征税的。最后一段首句又提到，在美国，对富人多征税的可能性最明显(the scope for doing so is most obvious in America)，接着后文具体解释了原因。由此可知，作者是支持向富人征收更多税的，故A项符合文中作者的态度，故为答案。

单选题 Which of the following is the text mainly about?
A. U.S. government should make special tax rules for the rich.
B. More taxes should be hunted for from the rich.
C. Many countries need new tax policies to handle financial problems.
D. Obama's new plan will save the country's economy.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[解析] 主旨题。文章第一段开门见山地提出了文章的主题：向富人征收更多的税，接着第一段围绕这一主题介绍了发达国家，尤其是美国实施这一措施的情况。第二段承接第一段，继续指出向富人多征税引发了“谁该为平衡公共财政埋单”的争议(Who should suffer for righting public finances)。接着第三、四段给出了向富人多征税的理由。第五段作者则特别说明了这一做法在美国实施的可能性及其原因。由以上分析可知，本文主要围绕着向富人征税这一问题展开论述，说明了这一措施的目的、原因以及在美国的可行性，B项准确且全面地概括了原文主旨，故正确。