列表

详情


In order to “change lives for the better” and reduce “dependency,” George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the “upfront work search” scheme. Only if the jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register for online job search, and start looking for work will they be eligible for benefit—and then they should report weekly rather than fortnightly. What could be more reasonable?
More apparent reasonableness followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the jobseeker's allowance. “Those first few days should be spent looking for work, not looking to sign on,” he claimed. “We’re doing these things because we know they help people stay off benefits and help those on benefits get into work faster.” Help? Really? On first hearing, this was the socially concerned chancellor, trying to change lives for the better, complete with “reforms” to an obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was his zeal for “fundamental fairness”—protecting the taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most deserving claimants received their benefits.
Losing a job is hurting: you don't skip down to the jobcentre with a song in your heart, delighted at the prospect of doubling your income from the generous state. It is financially terrifying, psychologically embarrassing and you know that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You are now not wanted; you are now excluded from the work environment that offers purpose and structure in your life. Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone newly unemployed what they want and the answer is always: a job.
But in Osbomeland, your first instinct is to fall into dependency—permanent dependency if you can get it—supported by a state only too ready to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of ever tougher reforms of the job search and benefit administration system never happened. The principle of British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against the risk of unemployment and receive unconditional payments if the disaster happens. Even the very phrase “jobseeker's allowance” is about redefining the unemployed as a “jobseeker” who had no fundamental right to a benefit he or she has earned through making national insurance contributions. Instead, the claimant receives a time-limited “allowance,” conditional on actively seeking a job; no entitlement and no insurance, at $71.70 a week, one of the least generous in the EU.
1.George Osborne's scheme was intended to(  ).
2.The phrase “to sign on”(Paragraph 2) most probably means (  ).  
3.What prompted the chancellor to develop his scheme?
4.According to Paragraph 3, being unemployed makes one feel (  ).  
5.To which of the following would the author most probably agree?

第 1 问

A. motivate the unemployed to report voluntarily

B. provide the unemployed with easier access to benefits

C. encourage jobseekers, active engagement in job seeking

D. guarantee jobseekers' legitimate right to benefits

第 2 问

A. to register for an allowance from the government

B. to accept the government's restrictions on the allowance

C. to check on the availability of jobs at the jobcentre

D. to attend a governmental job-training program

第 3 问

A. A desire to secure a better life for all.

B. An eagerness to protect the unemployed.

C. An urge to be generous to the claimants.

D. A passion to ensure fairness for taxpayers.

第 4 问

A. insulted

B. uneasy

C. enraged

D. guilty

第 5 问

A. Unemployment benefits should not be made conditional.

B. The British welfare system indulges jobseekers' laziness.

C. The jobseekers' allowance has met their actual needs.

D. Osborne's reforms will reduce the risk of unemployment.

参考答案: C A D B A

详细解析:

1.应选[C]。考查考生把握文章重要细节信息的能力。
【试题解析】(1)本题可以定位在第一段。根据文章,“提前找工作”(upfront work search)这一概念本身就是“让失业者尽快找到工作”。(2)第二段提到“头几天花在找工作上”(spent looking for work, not looking to sign on)。而且,福利制度“不要求失业者努力找工作”(demands too little effort ... to find work)并且“纵容懒惰”(subsidises laziness),因此财政大臣提出了改革,就是要求“求职者积极求职”。(3)根据第四段,如果推进新方案,求职者“以积极找工作为条件方能领取救济金”(conditional on actively seeking a job)。综合这些信息,选项[C]最能表达财政大臣改革的动机。

2.应选[A]。考查考生推测文中词义的能力。
【试题解析】(1)本题可以定位在第二自然段。根据句子,“最初的七天应该花在主动找工作上,不要只指望登记后领取救济金”(not looking to sign on)。(2)第一段提到“‘找工作’方案”(scheme)要求失业者进行登记(register for)。其实“sign on”与“register for”是同义阐释关系。鉴于此,[A]最佳。

3.应选[D]。考查考生把握文章重要细节信息的能力。
【试题解析】(1)本题直接定位在第二段段末。文章提到,财政大臣改革的“动机”(motivated)是“保护纳税人,减少成本,保证最有资格的失业者获得救济”,即所谓的“公平性”(fundamental fairness)。(2)从第三段看,作者认为所有失业者都面对困境(hurting),救济金微乎其微(minimal),且都需要救济, 这些分析实际上在驳斥“公平性”的提法。(3)选项[D]中的“passion”对应于原文中的“motivated”。鉴于此,[D]的表述最贴近原文信息。

4.应选[B]。考查考生概括文内重要信息的能力。
【试题解析】(1)本题可以定位在第三自然段。(2)概括段意,失业者心情不愉快(don't skip...),经济上和心理上窘迫(psychologically),被排除在正常人的工作环境之外(environment)。无论如何,失业毕竟不是一件令人愉快的事。(3)在福利制度改革之后,失业者必须有条件地领取救济金(conditional),失去了保险(no insurance)。综合这些信息,选项[B]的表述最佳。

5.应选[A]。考查考生把握言外之意的能力。
【试题解析】(1)本题可直接定位在第四段末。在现行福利制度下,即便救济金显得慷慨,但有助于失业者防范风险(against the risk)。在改革后,救济金微乎其微(the least generous),失业者要想领取救济金还要遵从许多附带条件(conditional)。而关键的问题是,失业者在未失业前的工作过程中对国民保险是有所贡献的(national insurance contributions),现在就连这种应该享有的权利都没有了(no fundamental right, no entitlement)。(2)关于条件的问题,作者在第一段就埋下了伏笔,“对失业者提出了许多要求和条件”(only if...)。鉴于此,选项[A]是最合理的推测。

上一题