阅读理解
Who is the best manager in the world? This column's nomination would go to an 82-year-old who does not rate a mention in the Thinkers 50 awards for the best business minds, is not an innovator, does not do leverage, thinks derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction and runs a bunch of the most basic industries imaginable.
His name, of course, is Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, and he is perhaps the most successful business person ever. He does not write business bestsellers, but he conducts a masterclass via his annual letters to shareholders. Every aspect of Berkshire's performance shows by opposition all that is wrong with contemporary capitalism.
Reading his letters, it dawns that what Buffett is describing is a version, refined and updated, of the inclusive capitalism that was the norm until the late 1970s. Continuing to retain and reinvest profits to fuel future growth to benefit all stakeholders, including investors, Berkshire is the last great standout against the "downsize and distribute" policies that now dominate—policies privileging outsourcing, downsizing and the slashing of research and development and capital investment in favour of massive dividend payments and share buybacks to shareholders. With almost half a century of comparison to go on, we can now safely judge which approach is more successful.
The conclusions contain some towering ironies. Berkshire confirms shareholders do better—much better—under a regime that optimizes returns to overall wellbeing than under one that focuses on shareholder value alone. Also striking are the radical results of business conservatism. A world with more Warren Buffetts and fewer quants and masters of the universe would be a wealthier and safer place. There would not be a financial crisis and our pensions would be safer. If the insurance industry was hit for $ 250 billion by some mega-catastrophe—three times larger than anything it has ever experienced—Berkshire would come through because it has so many streams of earnings, promises Buffett.
Finally, Berkshire Hathaway shows we do not need to do a lot of new things to reinvent management—just to stop doing some bad existing ones. In short, Buffett is the kind of manager who could give capitalism a good name, were it not for all the other capitalist managers.
His name, of course, is Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, and he is perhaps the most successful business person ever. He does not write business bestsellers, but he conducts a masterclass via his annual letters to shareholders. Every aspect of Berkshire's performance shows by opposition all that is wrong with contemporary capitalism.
Reading his letters, it dawns that what Buffett is describing is a version, refined and updated, of the inclusive capitalism that was the norm until the late 1970s. Continuing to retain and reinvest profits to fuel future growth to benefit all stakeholders, including investors, Berkshire is the last great standout against the "downsize and distribute" policies that now dominate—policies privileging outsourcing, downsizing and the slashing of research and development and capital investment in favour of massive dividend payments and share buybacks to shareholders. With almost half a century of comparison to go on, we can now safely judge which approach is more successful.
The conclusions contain some towering ironies. Berkshire confirms shareholders do better—much better—under a regime that optimizes returns to overall wellbeing than under one that focuses on shareholder value alone. Also striking are the radical results of business conservatism. A world with more Warren Buffetts and fewer quants and masters of the universe would be a wealthier and safer place. There would not be a financial crisis and our pensions would be safer. If the insurance industry was hit for $ 250 billion by some mega-catastrophe—three times larger than anything it has ever experienced—Berkshire would come through because it has so many streams of earnings, promises Buffett.
Finally, Berkshire Hathaway shows we do not need to do a lot of new things to reinvent management—just to stop doing some bad existing ones. In short, Buffett is the kind of manager who could give capitalism a good name, were it not for all the other capitalist managers.
单选题
6.The phrase "rate a mention" (Para. 1) probably means______.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】含义题。根据题干关键词定位到第一段第二句。此句说的是“本专栏提名的人选是一位82岁的老人，他不……全球50大商业思想家榜单，不擅创新，不借助杠杆，认为衍生品是大规模杀伤性金融武器，经营的都是一些大家能想象得到的最基础的行业。”由此可知，A项“位于……之列”符合题意，为正确答案。
单选题
7.According to Paragraph 2, Warren Buffett______.
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】细节题。根据题干关键词定位到第二段。D项“证明当代资本主义是错误的”与第二段最后一句Every aspect of Berkshire’s performance shows by opposition all that is wrong with contemporary capitalism相符，故D项为正确答案。
单选题
8.It can be inferred from Buffett's letters that______.
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】推断题。根据题干关键词定位到第三段第一句。Reading his letters，it dawns that what Buffett is describing is a version，refined and updated，of the inclusive capitalism that was the norm until the late 1970s．此句意为“读巴菲特的信能让人明白，巴菲特描述的是一种经过改进和更新的‘包容性资本主义’。在上世纪70年代末之前，包容性资本主义一直是资本主义的常态”。故B项“巴菲特描述的是一种经过改进和更新的‘包容性资本主义’”为正确答案。
单选题
9.Berkshire can deal with some mega-catastrophe because______.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】细节题。根据题干关键词定位到第四段最后一句：If the insurance industry was hit for $250 billion by some megacatastrophe three times larger than anything it has ever experienced--Berkshire would come through because it has so many streams of earnings，promises Buffett，此句意为“巴菲特承诺，即便一场超级灾难给保险行业带来2 500亿美元的损失，伯克希尔也能够渡过难关，因为它拥有非常多的利润来源”。故C项“它拥有非常多的利润来源”为正确答案。
单选题
10.Which of the following is NOT true according to the author?
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】细节题。此类题目放在最后，是考查考生对全文的掌握程度，难度系数较高。C项“巴菲特不如数量分析专家和‘宇宙主宰者’聪明”是对A world with more Warren Buffetts and fewer quants and masters of the universe would be a wealthier and safer place这句话的误解，故C项为正确答案。