An editorial in a weekly news magazine warns that we must quickly increase funding for education in order to remain economically competitive in the world marketplace. The line of reasoning is that the nation will soon face a shortage of engineers because engineers have come from universities, and that our university-age population is shrinking. Moreover, decreasing enrollments in high schools clearly show that this drop in university-age students will continue throughout thedecade. The authors argument is not convincing because it is based on several questionable assumptions.
First, the author assumes that because our university-age population is shrinking, university enrollments will likewise shrink. But even if the number of university-age students is dropping, it is possible that a greater proportion of those students will enter universities. If this percentage were sufficiently large, university enrollments could remain relatively stable. Moreover, even if overall university enrollments did drop, we must further assume that the number of engineering students would likewise drop. However, decreases in overall enrollments do no necessarily result in proportional enrollment decreases in each field of study. If demand for engineers were high, then a larger percentage of university students might study to become engineers, in which case engineering enrollments could increase or remain constant, while those in other major fields of study would drop disproportionately.
An additional assumption is that economic success in the world marketplace depends on the number of engineers produced by our universities. This assumption is simplistic. Professionals in other fields―such as agriculture, banking, and business―may contribute equally to our global success. The author does not explain why the predicted shortage of engineers is more critical than shortages in other fields that might result from shrinking university enrollments. Nor does the author demonstrate that providing more funds for education will correct the predicted shortage of engineers. Even if all of the previous assumptions are accepted, no connection between increased funding and the desired enrollment increase has been established.
In conclusion, the author has failed to make a convincing case for increased funding for education. Before we accept the conclusion, the author must provide evidence that we face a critical shortage of engineers, and that increased funding will have direct bearing on correcting this shortage. As it stands, both these claims rest on unwarranted assumptions.
54.
In this editorial the author argues for the imposition of strict pricing regulations in order to prevent citrus growers from continued inflation of prices of citrus fruit. The need for such regulation is supported by the authors contention that citrus growers have been unnecessarily raising prices of citrus fruit in the past. The evidence for this allegation is the fact that theprice of lemons has increased from 15 cents per pound to over a dollar per pound during the preceding 11-year period, even though weather conditions have been favorable to citrus production in all but one of those years. This argument is flawed in two important respects.
First and foremost, the author assumes that the only factor that influences the price of citrus fruit is the weather. Other factors―such as monetary inflation, increased distribution and labor costs, or alterations in supply and demand conditions―are ignored as possible sources for the increase. The charge that citrus growers have unnecessarily raised prices can be sustained only if these and other possible factors can be completely ruled out as contributing to the price increases. Since the author fails to address these factors, the recommendation calling for strict pricing regulations can be dismissed out-of-hand as frivolous.
Second, the author assumes that the only way to combat increased prices is through government intervention. In a free-enterprise system many other means of affecting the pricing of goods are available. For example, boycotting a product and thereby influencing supply and demand conditions of the commodity is an effective means of influencing the price of the product. In a free market economy the government should consider regulating prices only when all other means to rectify the problem have been exhausted.
In conclusion, the authors argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that the only factor influencing the price increases is the growers desire for increased profits.
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(12)
雅思阅读材料:Dior’s Chérie and Natalie Portman
雅思阅读材料:WikiLeaks Julian Assange freed
雅思阅读:毕业后别忘继续充电的十大理由
雅思阅读材料:梅德韦杰夫对美核政策表示欢迎
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(9)
雅思阅读:英旅客圣诞有家归不得
五大雅思阅读生词应对技巧
雅思阅读新攻略:雅思阅读文章的语言特点分析
雅思阅读材料:现代法律制度反对基督教?
雅思阅读中的6类重点信号词
雅思阅读材料:打击恐怖主义需要新政策
雅思阅读新攻略:史上最有效的雅思阅读方法
雅思阅读材料:公平的教育机会
雅思阅读材料:大学计划自主录取学生
雅思阅读材料:英首相卡梅伦是骗子?
雅思阅读材料:Harry Potter还在吗?
雅思阅读材料:拯救自然保护区
雅思阅读:英圣诞或面临燃料定额窘境
雅思阅读题的做题顺序
雅思阅读材料:英国小学毕业生不能读写?
雅思阅读背景词汇:有线电视
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(11)
雅思阅读材料来源:英国主要报刊网站
阅读特点决定雅思阅读练习方法
雅思阅读材料:朱利安.阿桑奇应被授予诺贝尔和平奖?
雅思阅读超高频词汇系列(10)
雅思阅读材料:英国浪费危机
雅思阅读材料:美国会通过俄核武器条约
雅思阅读Summary题型解题技巧
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |