2. 考研
  3. The context for Occupy Wall Street and proposals to tax the rich is the broader issue of economic inequality. For years, liberal

The context for Occupy Wall Street and proposals to tax the rich is the broader issue of economic inequality. For years, liberal

admin2019-03-20  89
问题 The context for Occupy Wall Street and proposals to tax the rich is the broader issue of economic inequality. For years, liberal politicians, academics and pundits have complained about growing inequality, but their protests barely resonated with the public. When most people are doing okay, the fact that some people are doing better does not arouse much anger. No more. When many people do worse, or fear they might, the rich inspire resentment and envy. Glaring inequalities that once seemed tolerable become offensive.
By and large, Americans regard the rich the way they do the poor. There are the "deserving" and the "undeserving". The deserving pioneer technologies, manage vibrant businesses or excel at something. Few resent the wealth of Bill Gates or Oprah Winfrey. By contrast, the "undeserving" rich succeed through self-dealing or activities lacking broad social value.
What’s happening now is that the more rich are being disparaged as "undeserving". Blamed for the financial crisis, Wall Street types top the list. Corporate chief executives stir similar ire.
There are many theories about why inequality has increased, though no consensus: New technologies reward the highly skilled; globalization depresses factory wages; eroded union power does the same; employer-paid health insurance squeezes take-home pay; a "winner-take-all" society confers huge rewards on an elite of celebrities, sports stars and business leaders.
The trouble is that the wealthy don’t fit the stereotypes: They aren’t all pampered CEOs, hotshot investment bankers, pop stars and athletes. Many own small and medium-sized companies. Reid would pay for Obama’s jobs plan by taxing the people who are supposed to create jobs. Does it make sense?
The backlash against the rich is the start of debate, not the end. Are the rich to be punished for succeeding or merely asked to pay their "fair" share? Who is wealthy or who’s just well-off? If taxes do rise, what approach would best preserve incentives for hard work, investment and risk-taking? However measured, the rich are besieged; the attacks almost certainly will intensify.
选项
答案 占领华尔街运动和对富人征税的提案的背景是广泛的经济不平等问题。多年来，自由主义政治家、学者以及权威人士抱怨不平等在加剧，但他们的抗议丝毫没有得到公众的响应。大多数人过得还不错，所以即使一部分人过得更好也不会引起众怒。但时过境迁，许多人生活过得很差，或担心生活会变糟糕，这时就把怨恨和嫉妒发泄在富人身上。赤裸裸的不平等，原先还可以容忍，但现在已经成为众矢之的了。 大体上说，美国人拿看待穷人的方式来看待富人，有两种分法，即“应得的人”和“不应得的人”。应得的那些人开发新技术、在商场游刃有余或在某方面有专长。就好比很少有人会去埋怨比尔?盖茨或奥普拉?温弗瑞的财富。相比之下，“不应得”的那些有钱人是通过内部交易或做一些无益于社会价值的事情来牟利的。 现在的情况是更多的富人被贬低为“不应得”的人。华尔街之流因为金融危机而饱受责备，可以说在此是荣居榜首。企业的董事长们也受到了牵连。 虽然缺乏共识，但有许多说法可以解释不平等在增加的原因：新技术使掌握高技能人士受益；全球化压低了工厂工资；削弱的工会争取工资的权力；雇主所付的健康保险挤压了实发薪水空间；“赢者通吃”的社会赋予社会名流、体育明星以及商业精英巨额利益。 问题是有钱人并不都是一个模子出来的：他们并不都是养尊处优的老总、高明的投资银行家、流行歌手或是运动员。许多人有的是中小公司。里德将会通过向那些创造工作的人征税，以资助奥巴马的就业计划。这说得通吗? 对富人的中伤只是争论的开始，远没有结束。有钱人会由于成功而受到惩罚还是只是支付自己的那个“公平”的份额?什么样的算是富人，什么样的算是过小康生活的人?如果真的涨税，什么办法才可以继续激励人们努力工作，进行投资以及敢于冒险?不管采取什么措施，富人们都是身陷囹圄，攻击必定会升级。
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/AvhUFFFM
本试题收录于： 翻译硕士（英语翻译基础）题库专业硕士分类
0

翻译硕士（英语翻译基础）

专业硕士

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)