2. 外语
  3. This Coronavirus affects everyone, but not equally. The young often shrug off the virus; the old often die of it. The rich shrug

This Coronavirus affects everyone, but not equally. The young often shrug off the virus; the old often die of it. The rich shrug

admin2022-06-18  34
问题     This Coronavirus affects everyone, but not equally. The young often shrug off the virus; the old often die of it. The rich shrug off the economic shock; the poor cannot. Because of COVID-19, the number of extremely poor people (i.e., those making less than $1.90 a day) will rise by 70m-100m this year, the World Bank predicts. Using a broader measure, including those who lack basic shelter or clean water and children who go hungry, the ranks of the poor will swell by 240m^90m this year, says the UN. That could reverse almost a decade of progress (see International section). If a vaccine is found, economies will no doubt bounce back. But widespread vaccination will take years and the very poor cannot wait that long. By then, malnutrition will have affected a tragic number of children’s bodies and minds.
    Safety-nets in low-income countries are cobweb-thin. Governments there have handed out only $4 extra per person on social programs—in total, not per day.
    Donors should help. Rich countries are on course to cut direct aid by a third compared with last year. The IMF and World Bank have raised lending, but only 31% more of the bank’s money has reached poor countries, says the Center for Global Development, a think-tank, about half the increase in the global financial crisis, a much smaller shock.
    Governments in some countries, meanwhile, need to spend their money wisely. Too many offer pork for old rich friends but only crumbs for the poor. Since the crisis began, one country has provided no new programs for the hard-up but has given a state oil giant tax breaks worth $2.7bn. Another country is expected soon to confirm another wasteful effort to keep its money-losing airline aloft. Even when money is earmarked for good ends, it is too often wasted or stolen. The country’s investigators are probing possible fraud in 658 contracts worth $300m for COVID-fighting kit (测试纸) Still another country’s health ministry bought some masks for $53 each. In a leaked recording, a laughter allegedly belonging to an official burst out as she and her colleagues appear to plan to pocket money meant for reducing suffering in the pandemic.
    The best way to help the poor is to give them money directly. The simplicity of this policy makes it less vulnerable to corruption. With a little extra cash in their pockets, recipients can feed their children and send them back to school. They can avoid a fire-sale of assets, such as a motorbike or a cow, that will help them make a living in the future. One country that has done well getting cash into poor pockets is Brazil. Various measures of poverty there have actually fallen, largely because the government has sent $110 per month for three months to the impoverished, helping 66m people. A priority for governments should be basic health care, which the pandemic has disrupted so badly that vaccination rates for children have been set back about 20 years.
    The crisis requires politicians to make hard choices quickly. Mistakes are inevitable, given how much remains unknown about the disease. But some are inexcusable. One country’s sudden lockdown threw millions of migrant workers out of their urban jobs and lodgings, forcing them to head back to their villages on foot or crowded trains, spreading the virus far and wide. Another country barred people from leaving home at night but then removed from shacks (棚屋) on public land, tens of thousands who are living in a building or on land without permission or without paying rent with no place to go. Politicians governing remotely from their comfortable home offices should think harder about how their decisions might affect those whom COVID-19 is plunging back into dire poverty. It is shameful when their responses to the pandemic add to the suffering of the least fortunate.
What might be the appropriate focus of the politicians’ decision?
选项 A、How to avoid those pandemic-stricken people being reduced to extreme poverty.
B、How to realize the lockdown and forcible detention of the workers.
C、How to ask other developed countries for help and relief goods.
D、How to protect the rich and themselves from the pandemic.
答案A
解析 根据最后一段最后两句“Politicians governing remotely from their comfortable home offices should think harder about how their decisions might affect those whom(COVID-19 is plunging back into dire poverty．It is shameful when their responses to the pandemic add to the suffering of the least fortunate．”可知，政策制定应以人民利益为先，应该致力于避免人民受疫情影响陷入贫困，所以选项A为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/BouO777K
本试题收录于： CATTI三级笔译综合能力题库翻译专业资格（CATTI）分类
0

CATTI三级笔译综合能力

翻译专业资格（CATTI）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)