[单选题]

　　If a genetic test could tell whether you are at increased risk of getting cancer or Alzheimer's， would you take it? Once used only for medical reasons? basic predictive genetic tests can now be ordered online for a few hundred dollars.In April，one company， 23andMe， in California? received regulatory approval to screen for risk factors connected to ten diseases and genetic conditions.The ruling could open the floodgates for others to sell direct to consumers.

　　Unlike diagnostic genetic tests， predictive ones are conducted on people without symptoms.Tests might influence financial as well as medical decisions.Someone likely to contract cancer may buy cancer or critical- illness cover， which pays a lump sum upon diagnosis.Because predictive tests - unlike diagnostic ones - often need not be disclosed， the customer can secure an advantage over a future insurer.

　　So underwriters warn that predictive genetic testing could well lead to adverse selection.The New York Times recently reported on a woman who bought long-term care insurance after testing positive for ApoE4，a mutation of a gene related to increased risk of Alzheimer's.The insurer had tested her memory three times before issuing the policy， but could not know about the genetic result.Asymmetry of information - when the customer knows more than the insurer - is the industry's nightmare.If predictive tests further improve and become more common while non-disclosure rules stay in place， some insurance products might eventually die out.Either insurers would go belly-up， or premiums would become prohibitively expensive.Hence， argue some insurers， if the customer knows something relevant about their health， so should the insurer.

　　However， those seeking new policies fear that underwriters may use predictive information to discriminate.Some might lose access to insurance.This raises ethical questions about when， if ever， genetic discrimination is acceptable.Moreover， since the relative role that genes play in the development of diseases is still being studied， some people might be unfairly and wrongly penalised.

　　Regulations today often protect consumers from the compulsory disclosure of predictive tests.But the rules are patchy.In Britain the industry has agreed to a blanket suspension， renewable every three years， on using predictive genetic information.In America the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act bans health insurers from using such results， but is silent on other types of insurance.

　　Some regulators， such as Germany's， have outlawed direct-to-consumer tests.But nothing stops Germans from ordering from abroad， and， just as it became normal for life insurers to ask for family history， so insurers will surely eventually have access to relevant genetic information.The question will be what they are allowed to do with it.When blood tests for AIDS first appeared， insurers also complained about adverse selection.Many jurisdictions ruled they could not be used for calculating health premiums， as these were a basic good， but could be used for life policies.As genetic testing spreads， society and insurers may face many similar difficult assessments.

　　Which of the following about regulations on genetic tests is true?

　　ABritain has suspended the conducting of predictive tests.

　　BAmerica allows insurers to use predictive information.

　　CGermany prohibits companies from providing predictive test service.

　　DCurrent regulations tend to grant access to predictive information.

　　参考答案：C

　　[单选题]

　　As deals go， the New one was a big one.Franklin Roosevelt's plan to haul America out of depression permanently altered the contours of the country's economy and politics.Proponents of a “Green New Deal” harbour similar ambitions.

　　In economics， climate change is a straightforward example of a market failure， with a correspondingly straightforward solution.Governments need only include the social costs of carbon-such as pollution-related deaths and climate change-in the prices people pay.In January economists signed a letter supporting a carbon tax that would refund revenue in the form of a flat， universal dividend.But robust carbon taxation is politically elusive.

　　Green New Dealers reckon the secret to solving climate change lies in making the economy both greener and more equitable.Their plan proposes a move to 100 % clean energy by 2035， and to zero net emissions by mid-century.Carbon prices might be included， but the emphasis is elsewhere.Supporters describe extensive state support for domestic green industries and large-scale efforts to help workers.They are vague about costs and funding.But decarbonising the economy so quickly would certainly require vast sums， some of which would almost certainly be raised by taxes on the well-off.

　　Why bundle together the seemingly unrelated issues of climate change and economic inequality? To some， the appeal rests in political economy.Any plan to free an industrialised economy from fossil-fuel dependence will create losers.To succeed politically， it must mobilise groups of winners more powerful and passionate than those losers.Plans to tax carbon and pay out the revenue as a dividend may seem appealing.But a carbon refund of $ 100 per month might be too small to mobilise a critical mass of voters， while the associated tax would prompt a no-holds-barred campaign by deep-pocketed fossil-fuel firms.A Green New Deal， in contrast， might promise sufficient goodies to sufficiently organised interest groups， such as labour unions and domestic manufacturers， to gather a winning political coalition.To others， the Green New Deal is something more revolutionary.They view climate change as the result of unchecked capitalism and aim to solve it by redistributing economic and political power.

　　There is plenty in the Green New Deal to make economists nervous.The plan largely ignores analysis of the costs and benefits of climate policy.It would create large opportunities for rent-seeking and protectionism， with no guarantee that the promised climate benefits will follow.It might chuck growth-harming tax rises and dangerously high deficits into the bargain as well.

　　The criticism of the economic approach to climate change implicit in the Green New Deal is not that it is flawed or politically unrealistic， but that it is a category error.Climate change is not a market problem to be fixed through pricing， in this view， but part of a terrible social crisis.It is hard to judge such arguments without decades of hindsight， But they seem to be winning ， raising the possibility that， for the moment， economists have lost the chance to lead the fight against climate change.

　　According to Paragraph 5， economists______.

　　Aare concerned about the high costs of Green New Deal

　　Bunderestimate the potential benefits of Green New Deal

　　Care vague about the costs and benefits of climate policy

　　Dignore the negative economic effect of carbon taxes

　　参考答案：A

　　[单选题]

　　We often hear about threats to American democracy， but this one is plausible.Layoffs at the New York Daily News， the Denver Post and many other local and regional newspapers have raised an alarm about “news deserts.”

　　The concern over the local-news vacuum has prompted at least one state to take action， but the plan doesn't much resemble independent journalism or a real newsroom.New Jersey's Legislature has allocated $ 5 million for a “civic information consortium.” A board， made up of political appointees and representatives of universities， would give grants to groups to “show demonstrable usefulness to a local community”-no substitute for a newspaper staff.

　　Yet there already exists a nationwide network of independent local nonprofits charged with providing news and information to communities.It is the system of 1 ，400 public broadcasting radio and television licensees.Established through the 1967 Public Broadcasting Act， the system was intended originally to provide a better alternative to what was then described as broadcasting's “vast wasteland.”Today， though-in an era when HBO， Netflix and Amazon have created a new golden age of television-the market failure is in local journalism.

　　Reforms of public broadcasting could address the problem.The $ 445 million federal subsidy for “public media” needs to be redirected-away from national programming and toward current and future local newsrooms across the country.Doing so would require changes in the Public Broadcasting Act.If public broadcasting is to demonstrate to the White House-which has called for an end to its federal funding-that it still has a reason to exist， reviving local journalism is the best argument.

　　Here's how the system works now： Some $ 313 million in public broadcasting's federal appropriation goes to local stations in the form of “community service grants.” But most of this money is used for purposes other than local journalism， and much of it heads back to Washington.Local stations are required to spend some of the funds on acquiring national programs-mainly from National Public Radio (NPR) and Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).

　　National programs will increasingly be delivered directly to your smartphone or tablet， bypassing the cable box or FM dial.PBS Kids is already an app.So is NPR programming.Why would local stations want to send their federal funds to NPR and PBS， given this new distribution technology? Letting local stations keep their federal funds would help local citizens understand local issues.It would lead to more culturally and politically diverse offerings， some of which would make their way on to national outlets such as NPR and PBS.

　　Fifty years after its establishment， public broadcasting must demonstrate it still has a purpose and deserves its subsidy.With an emphasis on local journalism， its appropriation would not be a blank check.Stations would still face a market test， having to rely on local citizens and businesses for the majority of their funding.But a shift toward local journalism could be public broadcasting's way to keep American democracy vital.

　　By explaining how the public broadcasting system works， the author intends to show ______.

　　Aits unreasonable funding allocation

　　Bthe complex steps to reform it

　　Cits vital role in serving communities

　　Dattractions of national programs

　　参考答案：A

　　[单选题]

　　For years， if not decades， banks， post office and pubs have been disappearing on the British high street.Still， the scale and pace of the current crop of casualties seems exceptional， as well as the shortage of replacement activities.Where once the ex-banks could be readily converted into pubs， and a variety of often innovative bars and restaurants promised to breathe life into streets abandoned by traditional shops， now even those hopeful trends have been reversed.The various companies have widely varied reasons for their problems， yet together they symbolise the crisis on the high street.And the word“crisis” is justified.

　　There are common， and familiar， problems.The squeeze on household incomes， with near-stagnant wage levels and bouts of relatively high inflation， has lasted since the financial crisis began a decade ago.Even with the British shopper's ingenious way of defying financial logic， and despite the Bank of England's attempts to put cheap money into borrowers， pockets， sooner or later there was bound to be a correction.

　　While the money flowing into the high street has hardly risen， the supply of everything from cupcake stands to sandwich outlets has been expanding， pushing rents and wages higher.Huge retail developments are still looked on by desperate development agencies and local councils as the quick fix for any devastated post-industrial landscape.Once again， sooner or later this vast overcapacity was going to run into the reality of weak demand.No matter how smart the store or niche the outlet， when overheads aren't being covered by healthy sales， the future is bleak.

　　Overarching all of that， however， is the digital revolution， with giants such as Amazon invading new retail sectors.Less well advertised is the simple trend among the British towards entertaining and making the most of their leisure time in their very expensive homes.Why go to a public house or a restaurant when your private house is just as entertaining and where virtually any pastime or product can be transmitted via satellite， web or cable technology， and a cheap takeaway delivery and a bottle of wine are just a couple of clicks away?

　　Britain famously was once disparaged as “nation of shopkeepers”， small-minded merchants with narrow cultural and political horizons.Then the British became notorious as a “nation of shoppers”， small-minded consumers with narrow cultural and political horizons， as well as an almost reckless taste for debt and disregard for saving for the future.Now the British are becoming a nation of home-lovers， with pizzas arriving by moped and with a wireless hub for cosy nights in.For the sake of the high street， we need to get out more： either that， or local councils need to think hard about allowing more shops to be converted into flats.Then the British could become a nation of ex-shop dwellers， even if their cultural and political horizons remain as narrow as ever.

　　The crisis on the high street is partly due to______.

　　Athe Bank of England's poor lending policy

　　Bslow growth of average household incomes

　　CBritish shoppers， defying financial logic

　　Dwage levels that remain almost unchanged

　　参考答案：D

　　[单选题]

　　America rarely looks to Brussels for guidance.Commercial freedom appeals more than governmental control.But when it comes to data privacy， the case for copying the best bits of the European Union's approach is compelling.

　　The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)is due to come into force next month.It is rules- heavy and has its flaws， but its premise that consumers should be in charge of their personal data is the right one.The law lets users gain access to， and to correct， information that firms hold on them.It gives consumers the right to transfer their data to another organisation.It requires companies to define how they keep data secure.And it lets regulators levy big fines if firms break the rules.

　　America has enacted privacy rules in areas such as health care.But it has never passed an overarching data-protection law.The failings of America's self-regulatory approach are becoming clearer by the week.Large parts of the online economy are fuelled by data that consumers spray around without thought.Companies' mysterious privacy policies obscure what they do with their users' information， which often amounts to pretty much anything they please.Facebook is embroiled in crisis after news that data on 87m users had been passed to a political-campaign firm.

　　These are changing the calculus about the benefits of self-regulation.Opponents of privacy legislation have long argued that the imposition of rules would keep technology companies from innovating.Yet as trust leaks out of the system， innovation is likely to suffer.If consumers worry about what smartphone apps may do with their data， fewer new offerings will take off.It is striking that many of the firms preparing for the GDPR's arrival in Europe are excited that the law has forced them to put their data house in order.

　　The need to minimise legal fragmentation only adds to the case for America to adopt bits of the GDPR.One reason behind the new rules in the EU was to harmonise data-protection laws so that firms can do business across Europe more easily.America is moving in the opposite direction.States that have detected a need for greater privacy are drafting their own laws.California has pending legislation that would establish a data-protection authority to regulate how the state's big tech firms use Californians' personal data.

　　The GDPR is far from perfect.At nearly 100 articles long， it is too complex and tries to achieve too many things.The compliance costs for smaller firms， in particular， look burdensome.But these are arguments for using it as a template， not for ignoring the issue of data protection.If America continues on today's path， it will fail to protect the privacy of its citizens and long-term health of its firms.America's data economy has thrived so far with hardly any rules.That era is over.

　　According to Paragraphs 1 and 2， GDPR______.

　　Astresses commercial freedom over governmental control

　　Baims to give citizens the control of their personal data

　　Cgrants companies the right to collect user information

　　Drecognizes the legitimacy of data transfer among firms

　　参考答案：B

进入焚题库 领取备考资料

　　☛☛☛试题来源于考试网焚题库，进入2022年研究生考试练习题库>>>更多考研试题(每日一练、模拟试卷、历年真题、易错题)等你来做!

扫码进入考研交流群

☟☟☟