首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
A) In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an ambitious goal of 4 percent real growth in gross dom
A) In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an ambitious goal of 4 percent real growth in gross dom
admin
2022-10-13
32
问题
A) In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an ambitious goal of 4 percent real growth in gross domestic product (GDP). This goal has been greeted with substantial skepticism from parts of the economics establishment, while some economists have praised it as a "worthy and viable aspiration" that could be achieved with growth-oriented policies. Our recent research implies that a 4 percent growth goal for the first term of the next President is not only possible, but is what we should strive to achieve. Like Hubbard and Warsh, veteran Republican economic policymakers, we agree that the US needs policies that raise labor force participation, accelerate productivity growth and improve expectations. Where we part ways is the tactics.
B) Their recommendations focus on supply-side policies, such as tax reform, regulatory reform, reduced trade friction and education and training. Our research implies that a weak demand side explains the sluggish (萧条的) recovery from the Great Recession, with the rise of income inequality as a central factor. Consequently, our policy prescriptions revolve around increasing the take-home pay of the majority of American households. The Great Recession, which began in December 2007, was the most severe American economic downturn in three-quarters of a century. Most economists did not anticipate ahead of time that this kind of thing could happen, although we warned that " it could get ugly out there" in October 2007.
C) But as the severity of the recession became apparent in the dark days of late 2008 and early 2009, many economists predicted a swift bounce-back, reasoning from historical evidence that deep downturns are followed by rapid recoveries. Sadly, that prediction was also incorrect. The growth path following the Great Recession has been historically sluggish. Our recent research, supported by the Institute for New Economic Thinking, helps explain why: The economic drag from decades of rising income inequality has held back consumer spending.
D) Our work studies the link between rising income inequality and US household demand over the past several decades. From the middle 1980s until the middle 2000s, American consumers spent liberally despite the fact that income growth stagnated (停滞) for most of the population. We show that the annual growth rate of household income slowed markedly in 1980 for the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution, while income growth for the top 5 percent accelerated at the same time. The result was the widely discussed rise of income inequality.
E) It is also well-known that household debt grew rapidly during this period. Our work points out that the buildup of debt relative to income was concentrated in the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution. Debt to income for the top 5 percent bounced around with little clear trend; When the financial crisis hit, our work shows that the bottom 95 percent of Americans could no longer get the rising debt they needed to continue to spend along the trend they established in the years leading up to the crisis. The result was a sharp cutback in household demand relative to income that caused the collapse of the Great Recession.
F) What about the recovery? Household demand in 2013 (the most recent observation we have because our computations incorporate data that are released with a lag and are available at an annual frequency only) was a stunning 17. 5 percent below its pre-recession trend, with no sign of recovering back toward the trend. What happened? Our research implies that the cutoff of credit for the group of households falling behind as income inequality rose prevented their spending from recovering to its pre-recession path.
G) While there is no reason to necessarily expect that consumer spending will follow a constant trend over long periods of time, the practical reality is that the US economy needed the pre-recession trend of demand to maintain adequate growth and at least a rough approximation of full employment prior to 2007. In the middle 2000s, there was no sign of excess demand in the US economy. Inflation was tame and interest rates were low. Wage growth was stagnant. Although some gradual slowing in long-term US growth might have been predicted as the large baby-boom generation ages, the overall labor force participation rate was actually rising prior to the recession, so there was no reason to expect any significant decline in labor resources in the years immediately following 2007.
H) Yes, the way many Americans were financing their demand was unsustainable, but there is no indication that businesses could not sustainably continue to produce along the pre-recession trend if they had been able to sell the output. Our interpretation of the evidence is that the demand drag that could be expected as the result of rising inequality is, after a delay of a quarter century, finally constraining the US economy. Intuition, theory and evidence predict that high-income people spend, on average, a smaller share of their income than everyone else does. So as a higher share of income goes into the pockets of the well-to-do, the household sector as a whole is likely to recycle less of its income back into spending, which slows the path of demand growth.
I) A possible problem with this prediction for the US in recent years is that income inequality began to rise in the early 1980s, but household demand remained strong through 2006. Our argument is that the demand drag from rising inequality was postponed by the buildup of debt: The bottom 95 percent borrowed rather than cut back their spending when their income growth slowed. But as the crisis hit, leading to households collapsed, and the trend of rising debt could not continue.
J) The effect of rising inequality has hit the economy hard. As a result, today’s economy is underperforming. No one can know precisely how much of the stagnation in household demand is due to the rise of inequality, but our estimates imply that the current path of total demand in the economy is at least 10 percent below where it would have been with the income distribution of the early 1980s. Where demand goes, so follows output and employment. This analysis links to the call for 4 percent growth. Considering conventional estimates of the long-term trend growth of the economy, a 4 percent growth rate through the next US President’s first term would go a long way toward closing the gap in output that opened with the collapse of household spending in the Great Recession and has yet to be filled.
K) How can we move toward this goal? Our research strongly implies that the main problem is on the demand side, not the supply side. The US needs to find a way to boost demand growth by arresting, and hopefully reversing, the dramatic rise of inequality. The basic argument is exceedingly simple: The economy continues to be held back by insufficient household spending, and if the income share of Americans outside of the top sliver rises, household spending will increase. Policies that raise the minimum wage and reduce the tax burden of low- and middle-income households would help.
L) In our view, however, the best method to achieve this objective would be to restore wage growth across the income distribution as occurred in the decades after World War II. Meeting this objective is challenging for a variety of reasons, including the fact that there remains no clear consensus about what has caused the rise of American economic inequality. But the need to address inequality is not just a matter of social justice; it also is important to get the economy back on the right track after more than seven years of stagnation. We can do better.
To achieve the goal of 4% growth in GDP, the demand growth should be boosted by raising the income share of the bottom 95%.
选项
答案
K
解析
由题干中的goal、demand growth和boosted定位到原文K段。细节归纳题。K段阐述了应如何实现国内生产总值4%的增长目标。作者认为应遏制收入不平等的现象,从而拉动内需。题干是对定位段的概括,题干中的the bottom 95%对应原文中的Americans outside of the top sliver。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/T2R7777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
A、Cookmealsautomatically.B、Checkthestockautomatically.C、Goshoppinginasupermarket.D、Cleanroomautomatically.B
A、Suethegovernment.B、Suetheindividual.C、Closedownthecompany.D、Sentencetheindividualtodeath.B短文谈到,任何人不付钱就使用某种专利,该专
A、Itcombinesdifferentfeelingstogether.B、Itcanexpresssomeveryconfusingfeelings.C、Itexaggeratessomespecialfeelings
A、TheirBBSwasnotasgoodaswhattheyhadthoughtbefore.B、Theirprogressinthewebsite-designwashinderedforlackoffun
A、Fromyuppieclubs.B、IntheseafoodmarketC、Inthesupermarket.D、OntheInternet.D根据“这些吃起来很安全的昆虫能从网上找到和订购”,选D。
A、Sympathetic.B、Skeptical.C、Grateful.D、Indifferent.A选项为表态度的形容词。听到男士所说的sympathize应该知道A是其同根词。
A、Launchingacampaigninspecialistmedicaljournals.B、AdvertisingmedicinesthatneedaprescriptiononTV.C、Makingnewspape
A、FromaformerCornellUniversityprofessor.B、Fromascienceprogramontelevision.C、FromacompetitionheldbyCornellUnive
A、Itishighlyprobable.B、Itcouldbeavoided.C、Itmustbeignored.D、Itisgoodexperience.A
A、Launchinganinitiativetoincreasetheincomeofcoffeeproducers.B、Eliminatingilliteracyoncropproductionandmarketing
随机试题
记忆是人脑对______的事物的反映。
焊条电弧焊常采用的引弧方法是接触引弧。
女性,74岁。患慢性冠状动脉供血不足30余年,伴心房纤颤8年,2小时前突然出现左下肢剧烈疼痛,开始时为大腿上部急袭性痛,触痛明显,足背动脉搏动消失,检查发现在大腿上部可触及一较明显变温带,趾活动困难。最可能的疾病为
A.强心甾烯B.蟾蜍甾二烯(或海葱甾二烯)C.三萜D.α-羟基糖E.α-去氧糖乙型强心苷元的结构的基本母核为()
在软土地区基坑开挖深度超过()m,一般就要用井点降水。
甲公司2016年每股收益0.8元,每股分配现金股利0.4元,如果公司股利增长率预计为6%,2016年末股价为50元,预计股利支付率不变,公司2016年的内在市盈率是()。
期望效应又称罗森塔尔效应。()
有位美国学者做了一个实验,给被试儿童看三幅图画,鸡、牛、青草,然后让儿童将其分为两类。结果大部分中国儿童把牛和青草归为一类,把鸡归为另一类,大部分美国儿童则把牛和鸡归为一类,把青草归为另一类。这位美国学者由此得出:中国儿童习惯于按照事物之间的关系来分类,美
下图中的两片8259A工作在级联方式且优先级均固定不变,通道1、通道3、通道8和通道9的中断断请求信号按优先级从低到高排列的正确顺序是______。A)通道1、通道3、通道8、通道9B)通道1、通道8、通道3、通道9C)通道3、通道9、通道8、
PartyTimeAmericansplanparties【T1】______.Asinothercultures,manyAmericansattendpartiesforweddingsand【T2】______.
最新回复
(
0
)