2. 考研
  3. There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all got

There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all got

admin2022-08-04  48
问题     There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all gotten behind what Ban Ki-moon has called a "green New Deal"—pinning their hopes for future growth and new jobs on creating clean-technology industries. It all sounds like the ultimate win-win deal: beat the worst recession in decades and save the planet from global warming, all in one spending plan. So who cares how much it costs? And since the financial crisis and recession began, governments, environmental nonprofits, and even labor unions have been busy spinning out reports on just how many new jobs might be created from these new industries—estimates that range from the tens of thousands to the millions.
    The problem is that history doesn’t bear out the optimism. As a new study from McKinsey consulting points out, clean energy is less like old manufacturing industries that required a lot of workers than it is like new manufacturing and service industries that don’t. The best parallel is the semiconductor industry, which was expected to create a boom in high-paid high-tech jobs but today employs mainly robots. Clean-technology workers now make up only 0.6 percent of the American workforce, despite the government subsidies, tax incentives, and other supports that already exists.
    The McKinsey study, which examined how countries should compete in the post-crisis world, figures that clean energy won’t command much more of the total job market in the years ahead. "The bottom line is that these ’clean’ industries are too small to create the millions of jobs that are needed right away," says James Manyika, a director at the McKinsey Global Institute. Although they might not create those jobs, yet they could help other industries do just that: they did create a lot of jobs, indirectly, by making other industries more efficient
    McKinsey and others say that the same could be true today if governments focus not on building a "green economy," but on greening every part of the economy using cutting-edge green products and services. Stop betting government money on particular green technologies that may or may not pan out, and start thinking more broadly. As McKinsey makes clear, countries don’t become more competitive by slightly changing their "mix" of industries but by outperforming in each individual sector. Taking care of the environment at the broadest levels is often portrayed as a political red herring that will weaken competitiveness in the global economy. In fact, the future of growth and job creation may depend on it.
It can be inferred from the last paragraph that protecting environment at the broadest levels ________.
选项 A、is not a popular proposal
B、will weaken the global economy
C、harms a country’s competitiveness
D、determines the global growth rate
答案A
解析 根据题干可直接定位到最后一段。该段是要求政府拓宽思路，摆脱大众专注于单单清洁技术工业发展的思维限制，这也说明作者的观点是小众的，尚未被大众接受的，故选A项。作者这种小众观点有助于促进全球经济发展和提高竞争力的，故排除B项“减弱全球经济”和C项“损害国家的竞争性”。该段并没有指出protecting environment at the broadest levels(在最广泛的层面上保护环境)是未来经济发展的决定性因素，显然D项过度引申，应排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/v3i4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)