2. 考研
  3. In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into super systems, causing heightened concerns about mo

In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into super systems, causing heightened concerns about mo

admin2016-01-05  64
问题     In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into super systems, causing heightened concerns about monopoly. As recently as 1995, the top four railroads accounted for under 70 percent of the total ton-miles moved by rails. Next year, after a series of mergers is completed, just four railroads will control well over 90 percent of all the freight moved by major rail carriers.
    Supporters of the new super systems argue that these mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service. Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks. But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is too costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat.
    The vast consolidation within the rail industry means that most shippers are served by only one rail company. Railroads typically charge such "captive" shippers 20 to 30 percent more than they do when another railroad is competing for the business. Shippers who feel they are being overcharged have the right to appeal to the federal government’s Surface Transportation Board for rate relief, but the process is expensive, time consuming, and will work only in truly extreme cases.
    Railroads justify rate discrimination against captive shippers on the grounds that in the long run it reduces everyone’ s cost. If railroads charged all customers the same average rate, they argue, shippers who have the option of switching to trucks or other forms of transportation would do so, leaving remaining customers to shoulder the cost of keeping up the line. It’s a theory to which many economists subscribe, but in practice it often leaves railroads in the position of determining which companies will flourish and which will fail. "Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?" asks Martin Bercovici, a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper.
    Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be hit with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortunes, still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to acquire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on. Consider the $10.2 billion bid by Norfolk Southern and CSX to acquire Conrail this year. Conrail’s net railway operating income in 1996 was just $427 million, less than half of the carrying costs of the transaction. Who’s going to pay for the rest of the bill? Many captive shippers fear that they will, as Norfolk Southern and CSX increase their grip on the market.
According to those who support mergers, railway monopoly is unlikely because
选项 A、cost reduction is based on competition.
B、services call for cross-trade coordination.
C、outside competitors will continue to exist.
D、shippers will have the railway by the throat.
答案C
解析 细节题。答案要在第二段的前半段中找，后半段说的是货主们的观点。支持者认为：“Anythreat of monopoly，they argue，is removed by fierce competition from trucks．”，意思是：因为要和卡车(指公路运输)竞争，所以不存在垄断的可能。所以C项最符合文章的意思。A项不对，文章说支持者认为兼并能降低成本，与竞争没有关系。B项没有根据。D项把主语和宾语弄反了，而且也不是支持者的观点，所以也是错误的。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/13sZ777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)