单选题 Before whenever we had wealth, we started discussing poverty. Why not now? Why is the current politics of wealth and poverty seemingly about wealth alone? Eight years ago, when Bill Clinton first ran for president, the Dow Jones average was under 3,500, yearly federal budget deficits were projected at hundreds of billions of dollars forever and beyond, and no one talked about the "permanent boom" or the "new economy". Yet in that more straitened time, Clinton made much of the importance of "not leaving a single person behind". It is possible that similar "compassionate" rhetoric might yet play a role in the general election.
But it is striking how much less talk there is about the poor than there was eight years ago, when the country was economically uncertain, or in previous eras, when the country felt flush . Even last summer, when Clinton spent several days on a remarkable, Bobby Kennedy-like pilgrimage through impoverished areas from Indian reservations in South Dakota to ghetto neighborhoods in East St. Louis, the administration decided to refer to the effort not as a poverty tour but as a "new markets initiative".
What is happening is partly a logical, policy-driven reaction. Poverty really is lower than it has been in decades, especially for minority groups. The most attractive solution to it—a growing economy—is being applied. The people who have been totally left out of this boom often have medical, mental or other problems for which no one has an immediate solution, "The economy has sucked in anyone who has any preparation, any ability to cope with modem life." Says Franklin D. Raines, the former director of the Office of Management and Budget who is now head of Fannie Mae. When he and other people who specialize in the issue talk about solutions, they talk analytically and long-term: education. Development of work skills, shifts in the labor market, adjustments in welfare reform.
But I think there is another force that has made this a rich era with barely visible poor people. It is the unusual social and imaginative separation between prosperous America and those still left out... It"s simple invisibility, because of increasing geographic, occupational, and social barriers that block one group from the other"s view.
单选题 The main idea of the passage is that ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 本文开篇头两句就点明了文章的大意,指出人们以前只要富裕了就会开始谈论贫困问题。结合下文的意思,可以得出C的结论。
单选题 In Line 2 of the 2nd paragraph, the word "flush" means ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 本句中,economically uncertain(经济运行状况不好)显然与flush是一种对比关系,因此,flush应该是“运行良好、繁荣”等意思。答案应该选C。
单选题 From this passage, we can conclude that ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 本题的解题思路可以按照判断对错的方法来,即逐一判定选项是否符合文意。选项A讲的是富人和穷人之间的关系发生了变化,这与文章的大意是一致的。文章主要讲的是过去和现在人们对待贫困问题的态度发生了什么变化,最后一段的头两句也说明当前富人和穷人之间的疏离关系是导致穷人越来越不受关注的原因,暗示以前并非如此,从此可以推出A的结论。而B、C、D三项均不符合文意,因此可以排除。
单选题 According to the author, one important reason that we do not talk much about poverty is that ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 第三段第一句话说“What is happening is partly a logical, policy-driven reaction.”,即贫困问题得不到关注从某种意义上是一种符合逻辑的政策考量。接着又在第四句指出“The people who have been totally left out of this boom often have medical, mental or other problems for which no one has an immediate solution.”这实际上是作者对第一句话解释,认为人们不谈论贫困问题的原因之一是没有人能找到切实有效的方法,故A为答案。
单选题 The main purpose of writing this passage is to ______.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】[解析] 本文很明显是议论文,开篇的设问和接下来对问题的讨论都充分说明本文是在讨论人们过去和现在为什么对贫困问题的态度发生了变化,明显是想说服人们改变态度,更多地关注穷人。所以A、B、C三项可以直接排除掉,答案只能是D。