单选题 Many current discussions of immigration issues talk about immigrants in general, as if they were abstract people in an abstract world. But the concrete differences between immigrants from different countries affect whether their coming here is good or bad for the American people.
The very thought of formulating immigration laws from the standpoint of what is best for the American people seems to have been forgotten by many who focus on how to solve the problems of illegal immigration.
It is hard to look for 'the ideal outcome' on immigration in the abstract. Economics professor Milton Friedman once said, 'The best is the enemy of the good, ' which to me meant that attempts to achieve an unattainable ideal can prevent us from reaching good outcomes that are possible in practice.
Too much of our current immigration controversy is conducted in terms of abstract ideals, such as 'We are a nation of immigrants.' Of course we are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of people who wear shoes. Does it follow that we should admit anybody who wears shoes?
The immigrants of today are very different from those who arrived here a hundred years ago. Moreover, the society in which they arrive is different. To me, it is better to build a wall around the welfare state than the country.
But the welfare state is already here—and, far from having a wall built around it, the welfare state is expanding in all directions. We do not have a choice between the welfare state and open borders. Anything we try to do as regards immigration laws has to be done in the context of a huge welfare state that is already a major, inescapable fact of life.
Among other facts of life utterly ignored by many advocates of de facto amnesty (事实上的大赦)is that the free international movement of people is different from free international trade in goods.
Buying cars or cameras from other countries is not the same as admitting people from those countries or any other countries. Unlike inanimate objects, people have cultures and not all cultures are compatible with the culture in this country that has produced such benefits for the American people for so long.
Not only the United States, but the Western world in general, has been discovering the hard Way that admitting people with incompatible cultures is an irreversible decision with incalculable consequences. If we do not see that after recent terrorist attacks on the streets of Boston and London, when will we see it?
'Comprehensive immigration reform' means doing everything all together in a rush, without time to look before we leap, and basing ourselves on abstract notions about abstract people.

单选题 What does the author say about immigrants in America?______

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】由题干中的immigrants in America定位到首段最后一句。事实细节题。定位句指出，来自不同国家的移民之间的具体差异会影响他们的到来对美国人而言是好还是坏，也就是说移民的背景影响美国人的利益，故答案为C。 [参考译文] 目前许多关于移民问题的讨论，通常谈论起外来的移民都很笼统，就好像他们是抽象世界中的抽象人。但来自不同国家的移民之间的具体差异会影响他们的到来对美国人而言是好还是坏。站在对美国人最好的角度来制定移民法，这一想法似乎已经被许多关注如何解决非法移民问题的人所遗忘。在理论上，很难寻找移民的“理想结果”。经济学教授Milton Friedman曾经说过：“至善者善之敌。”对我而言，它意味着我们就无法取得在实践中有可能得到的好结果。我们目前的移民争议有太多都是就抽象的理想展开的，如“我们是一个移民国家”。我们当然是一个移民国家。但我们也是一个穿鞋的国家。那么，这是否意味着我们应该准许任何穿鞋的人移入本国? 如今的移民与100年前抵达这里的移民截然不同。此外，他们抵达的社会也不同。对我而言，给国家建起围墙不如给福利制度筑起壁垒。但福利制度已经在此——福利制度远未在其周围筑起壁垒，而是向各个方向扩展。在福利制度和开放边界之间我们没有选择。庞大的福利体制已成为生活中重大的、不可避免的事实，关于移民法我们所尝试做的任何事情都要考虑此背景。人员的自由国际流动不同于货物的自由国际贸易，是被许多提倡事实上大赦的人所完全忽略的客观事实之一。从他国购买汽车或相机不同于准许来自这些国家或任何其他国家的人移入本国。不像无生命的物体，人拥有文化，而且不是所有的文化都与美国文化相容，美国文化已为美国人民带来了如此之久的好处。不仅美国而且整个西方世界，都是在经历艰辛之后才发现准许拥有不兼容文化的人移入本国是不可逆转的、会带来无法估量的后果的决定。如果在近来波士顿和伦敦街头发生的恐怖袭击之后我们还没有认识到这一点，那么我们什么时候才能认识到呢? “全面移民改革”意味着一起匆忙地做每一件事，没有时间三思而后行，并以抽象人的抽象概念为依据。

单选题 What does the author try to say by citing Milton Friedman's remark?______

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的Milton Friedman定位到文章第三段第二句。推理判断题。由定位句可知，经济学教授Milton Friedman曾经说过：“至善者善之敌。”紧接着作者给出了对这句话的理解，要试图实现一个高不可攀的理想，我们就无法取得在实践中有可能得到的好结果；该段首句也指出，在理论上，很难寻找移民的“理想结果”。由此推出作者试图通过引用Milton Friedman的话来表明给美国移民问题找到理想的解决方法实际上行不通，因为这个目标过高，故答案为A。

单选题 What is the author's view regarding America's immigration policy?______

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】根据题干中的the author's view及America's immigration policy定位到第五段最后一句以及第六段。推理判断题。第五段的定位句提到作者的观点，给国家建起围墙不如给福利制度筑起壁垒。也就是说作者认为，限制移民不如限制福利制度。紧接着第六段的第一句用But转折，提到事实是福利制度并未加以限制；第二句指出在福利制度和开放边界之间我们没有选择。第三句提到，福利体制已成为生活中重大的、不可避免的事实，关于移民法我们所尝试做的任何的事情都要考虑到此背景。暗含的意思就是作者认为必须限制移民，否则会破坏美国的福利制度，故答案为C。

单选题 What is the author's purpose in citing the recent terrorist attacks on the streets of Boston and London?______

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由题干中的terrorist attacks及Boston and London定位到倒数第二段最后一句。推理判断题。定位句指出，如果在近来波士顿和伦敦街头发生的恐怖袭击之后我们还没有认识到这一点，那么我们什么时候才能认识到呢?该句中的“这一点”是指前一句中提到的“准许拥有不兼容文化的人移入本国是不可逆转的、会带来无法估量的后果的决定”，由此表明移民与东道国的文化不兼容会带来后果，故答案为D。