2. 外语
  3. For the most part, it seems, workers in rich countries have little to fear from globalization, and a lot to gain. But is the sam

For the most part, it seems, workers in rich countries have little to fear from globalization, and a lot to gain. But is the sam

admin2011-01-04  29
问题     For the most part, it seems, workers in rich countries have little to fear from globalization, and a lot to gain. But is the same thing true for workers in poor countries? The answer is that they are ever more likely than their rich country counterparts to benefit, because they have less to lose and more to gain. Orthodox economics takes an optimistic line on integration and the developing countries. Openness to foreign trade and investment should encourage capital to flow to poor economies. In the developing world, capital is scarce, so the returns on investment there should be higher than in the industrialized countries, where the best opportunities to make money by adding capital to labor have already been used up. If pool countries lower their barriers to trade and investment, the theory goes: rich foreigners will want to send over some of their capital.
    If this inflow of resources arrives in the form of loans or portfolio investment, it will supplement domestic savings and loosen the financial constraint on additional investment by local companies. If it arrives in the form of new foreign controlled operations, FDI, so much the better: this kind of capital brings technology and skills from abroad packaged along with it, with less financial risk as well. In either case, the addition to investment ought to push incomes up, partly by raising the demand for labor and partly by making labor more productive.
    This why workers in FDI receiving countries should be in an even better position to profit from integration than workers in FDI sending countries. Also, with or without inflows of foreign capital, the same static and dynamic gains from trade should apply in developing countries as in rich ones. This gain from trade logic often arouses suspicion, because the benefits seem to come from nowhere. Surely one side or the other must lose. Not so. The benefits that a rich country gets through trade do not come at the expense of its poor country trading partners, or vice versa. Recall that according to the theory, trade is a positive sum game. In all these transactions, sides exporters and importers, borrowers and lenders, shareholders and workers can gain.
Which of the following statements is correct?
选项 A、A rich country gets benefits through trade at the expense of its poor country trading partners.
B、A poor country gets benefits through trade at the expense of its rich country trading partners.
C、In trade, one side or the other must lose because the benefits must come from somewhere.
D、In trade, it is possible for every part involved winning at the expense of nobody.
答案D
解析 推断题，最后一段中提及“The benefits that a rich country gets through trade do not come at the expense of its poor country trading partners or vice versa”，可排除A、B项。文中还提到“the benefits seem to come from nowhere．Surely one side or the other must lose．Not so”，可排除C项。从而确定D项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/MQSYFFFM
0

在职攻硕英语联考

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)