(2014·日照模拟)For years the government of that c...

(2014·日照模拟)For years the government of that country________their responsibility when it comes to the mentally ill.

A．ignored　    B．is ignoring

C．has ignored　    D．ignores

高三英语单项填空中等难度题查看答案及解析

(2014·日照模拟)What I value most for a holiday is________I relax myself after the heavy work.

A．that　    B．how

C．when　    D．what

高三英语单项填空中等难度题查看答案及解析

(2014·日照模拟)The new traffic rules that took effect on January 1 are much stricter than________in the past.

A．that　    B．this

C．it　    D．those

高三英语单项填空中等难度题查看答案及解析

The US Postal Service(USPS) is losing billions of dollars a year. The government company that delivers "small mail" is losing out to email and other types of electronic communication. First-class mail amount fell from a high point of 104 million pieces in 2000 to just 64 million pieces by 2014.

Congress permits the 600,000-employee USPS to hold a monopoly over first-class and standard mail. The company pays no federal, state or local taxes；pays no vehicle fees； and is free from many regulations on other businesses. Despite these advantages, the USPS has lost 52 billion since 2007, and will continue losing money without major reforms.

The problem is that Congress is preventing the USPS from reducing costs as its sales decline, and is blocking efforts to end Saturday service and close unneeded post office locations. USPS also has a costly union-dominated workforce that slows the introduction of new ideas or methods down. USPS workers earn significantly higher payment than comparable private-sector workers. The answer is to privatize the USPS and open postal markets to competition. With the rise of the Internet, the argument that mail is a natural monopoly that needs government protection is weaker than ever.

Other countries facing declining letter amounts have made reforms. Germany and the Netherlands privatized their national postal companies over a decade ago, and other European countries have followed suit. Britain floated shares of the Royal Mail on its stock exchange in 2013. Some countries, such as Sweden and New Zealand, have not privatized their national postal companies, but they have opened them up to competition.

These reforms have driven efficiency improvements in all of these countries. Additional number of workers have been reduced, productivity has risen and consumers have benefited. Also, note that cost-cutting measures — such as closing some post offices — are good for both the economy and the environment.

Privatization and competition also encourage new changes. When the USPS monopoly over "extremely urgent" mail was stopped in 1979, we saw an explosion in efficient overnight private delivery by firms such as FedEx.

The government needs to wake up to changing technology, study postal reforms abroad and let businessmen reinvent（彻底改造）our out-of-date postal system.

1.What does the underlined word "monopoly" in Paragraph 2 mean?

A.The act of solving a problem.

B.A duty to deal with something.

C.Complete control of a public service/goods.

D.The plan of investing money in something.

2.What do we know about the USPS?

A.Its great competitor is the delivery firm FedEx.

B.It is an old public service open to competitions.

C.Its employees don't pay federal, state or local taxes.

D.It has complete control of first-class and standard mail.

3.The author mentions some other countries in Paragraph 4 to_______ .

A.explain the procedures of reform to the USPS

B.show the advantages of private postal services

C.set some examples for the government to learn from

D.prove the situation is very common around the world

4.The author probably agrees that the USPS_______ .

A.needs government's protection as ever

B.can work together with other businesses

C.must be replaced by international companies

D.should be sold out and become a private service

5.Which of the following shows the development of ideas in this passage?

I： Introduction　　 CP： Central point　　　 P： Point　　 Sp： Sub-point　　 C： Conclusion

A. B. C. D.

高三英语阅读理解困难题查看答案及解析

The U．S．Postal Service (USPS) is losing billions of dollars a year．The government company that delivers "small mail" is losing out to email and other types of electronic communication．First-class mail amount fell from a high point of 104 million pieces in 2000 to just 64 million pieces by 2014.

Congress permits the 600,000-empIoyee USPS to hold a monopoly (垄断) over first-class and standard mail．The company pays no federal, state or local taxes; pays no vehicle fees; and is free from many regulations on other businesses．Despite these advantages, the USPS has lost $52 billion since 2007, and will continue losing money without major reforms.

The problem is that Congress is preventing the USPS from reducing costs as its sales decline, and is blocking efforts to end Saturday service and close unneeded post office locations．USPS also has a costly union-dominated workforce that slows the introduction of new ideas or methods down．USPS workers earn significantly higher payment than comparable private-sector workers．The answer is to privatize the USPS and open postal markets to competition．With the rise of the Internet, the argument that mail is a natural monopoly that needs government protection is weaker than ever.

Other countries facing declining letter amounts have made reforms．Germany and the Netherlands privatized their national postal companies over a decade ago, and other European countries have followed suit．Britain floated shares of the Royal Mail on its stock exchange in 2013．Some countries, such us Sweden and New Zealand, have not privatized their national postal companies, but they have opened them up to competition.

These reforms have driven efficiency improvements in all of these countries．Additional number of workers have been reduced, productivity has risen and consumers have benefited．Also, note that cost-cutting measures—such as closing tone post offices—are good for both the economy and the environment.

Privatization and competition also encourage new changes．When the USPS monopoly over "extremely urgent" mail was stopped in 1979, we saw an explosion in efficient overnight private delivery by firms such as FedEx.

The government needs to wake up to changing technology, study postal reforms abroad and let businessmen reinvent our out-of-date postal system.

1.What do we know about the USPS?

A．Its great competitor is the delivery firm FedEx.

B．It is an old public service open to competitions.

C．Its employees don't pay federal, state or local taxes.

D．It has complete control of first-class and standard mail.

2.The author mentions some other countries in Paragraph 4 to __________.

A．explain the procedures of reform to the USPS

B．show the advantages of private postal services

C．set some examples for the government to learn from

D．prove the situation is very common around the world

3.The author probably that the USPS __________.

A．needs government’s protection as ever

B．can work together with other businesses

C．must be replaced by international companies

D．should be sold out and become a private service

4.Which of the following shows the development of ideas in this passage?

A．B．

C．D．

高三英语阅读理解简单题查看答案及解析

The U. S. Postal Service (USPS) is losing billions of dollars a year. The government company that delivers "small mail" is losing out to email and other types of electronic communication. First-class mail amount fell from a high point of 104 million pieces in 2000 to just 64 million pieces by 2014.

Congress permits the 600.000-empIoyee USPS to hold a monopoly (垄断) over first-class and standard mail. The company pays no federal, state or local taxes; pays no vehicle fees; and is free from many regulations on other businesses. Despite these advantages, the USPS has lost $52 billion since 2007, and will continue losing money without major reforms.

The problem is that Congress is preventing the USPS from reducing costs as its sales decline, and is blocking efforts to end Saturday service and close unneeded post office locations. USPS also has a costly union-dominated workforce that slows the introduction of new ideas or methods down. USPS workers earn significantly higher payment than comparable private-sector workers. The answer is to privatize the USPS and open postal markets to competition. With the rise of the Internet, the argument that mail is a natural monopoly that needs government protection is weaker than ever.

Other countries facing declining letter amounts have made reforms Germany and the Netherlands privatized their national postal companies over a decade ago, and other European countries have followed suit. Britain floated shares of the Royal Mail on its stock exchange in 2013. Some countries, such us Sweden and New Zealand, have not privatized their national postal companies, but they have opened them up to competition.

These reforms have driven efficiency improvements in all of these countries. Additional number of workers have been reduced, productivity has risen and consumers have benefited. Also, note that cost-cutting measures—such as closing tone post offices—are good for both the economy and the environment.

Privatization and competition also encourage new changes. When the USPS monopoly over "extremely urgent" mail was stopped in 1979, we saw an explosion in efficient overnight private delivery by firms such as FedEx.

The government needs to wake up to changing technology, study postal reforms abroad and let businessmen reinvent our out-of-date postal system.

1.What do we know about the USPS?

A. Its great competitor is the delivery firm FedEx.

B. It is an old public service open to competitions.

C. Its employees don't pay federal, state or local taxes.

D. It has complete control of first-class and standard mail.

2.The author mentions some other countries in Paragraph 4 to __________.

A. explain the procedures of reform to the USPS

B. show the advantages of private postal services

C. set some examples for the government to learn from

D. prove the situation is very common around the world

3.The author probably that the USPS __________.

A. needs government’s protection as ever

B. can work together with other businesses

C. must be replaced by international companies

D. should be sold out and become a private service

4.Which of the following shows the development of ideas in this passage?

A. B.

C. D.

I: Introduction　　　　　　　 CP: Central point P: Point

Sp: Sub-point (次要点)　　 C: Conclusion

高三英语阅读理解困难题查看答案及解析

BEIJING , March 9 --- The central government will require an additional three years of use for official vehicles for ministers and governors to reduce the costs of purchasing new cars, media have reported.

The new rule has been applied among all Party and government departments nationwide, the Beijing News reported on Tuesday. The new rule has not yet been made public, said Li, a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference National Committee.

Under the old rules, the cars used by minister-level officials could be replaced as often as every five years, Li said. These officials will also keep the same cars when they assume new posts, he added.

The new rule also reiterated(重申) that officials ranking below minister-or-governor-levels should not be allocated cars. The cars possessed by their departments should be used on demand.

“It violates the rules for lower-ranking --- even county-level-officials to be allocated cars,” Li said.

Purchases of vehicles for official use have been heavily investigated, as they account for a large expenditure (花费) of public funds every year.

A survey on the Web news www.ifeng.com found 64 percent of respondents believed the new rule will be difficult to carry out because it is related to officials’ interests.

“Local government departments had halted(中断) approvals for requests for such vehicles and had started to work on new quotas(指标) under the new rules,” Li said. “The future reform of official vehicle use will introduce market mechanisms and monetization.”

Premier Wen Jiabao said in the annual government work report on Saturday that expenditures on such vehicles will not increase in 2011 compared with a year ago.

Beijing’s standing deputy mayor Ji Lin last week said the municipal (市政的) government will release the number of vehicles for official use in the capital as early as at the end of this month.

Earlier this month, the Minister of Finance had published a rule regulating the budgets for such vehicles.

1.What is the purpose of the new rule allocating vehicles among officials?

A．To promote a low-carbon lifestyle.

B．To cut down the present huge expenditures of purchasing cars.

C．To make good use of budgets for official cars.

D．To solve the problem of severe traffic jam.

2.How often could the cars used by minister-level officials be replaced according to the new rule?

A．Every 3 years.      B．Every 5 years.      C．Every 8 years.      D．Every 10 years.

3.What about the officials ranking below minister-or-governor levels in terms of official vehicles?

A．They can still possess special cars.

B．They can use their own private cars.

C．They can use cars whenever officially necessary.

D．They can be allocated second-hand cars.

4.What is the public’s attitude toward the new rule’s fulfillment?

A．Uncertain.         B．Optimistic.         C．Indifferent.        D．Passive

5.From the passage, we can infer that_________.

A．the government is determined to carry out the new rule

B．the new rule has not yet been made public

C．the new rule will benefit official’s interest

D．the new rule is applied to minister-level officials

高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析

BEIJING , March 9 --- The central government will require an additional three years of use for official vehicles for ministers and governors to reduce the costs of purchasing new cars, media have reported.

The new rule has been applied among all Party and government departments nationwide, the Beijing News reported on Tuesday. The new rule has not yet been made public, said Li, a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference National Committee.

Under the old rules, the cars used by minister-level officials could be replaced as often as every five years, Li said. These officials will also keep the same cars when they assume new posts, he added.

The new rule also reiterated(重申) that officials ranking below minister-or-governor-levels should not be allocated cars. The cars possessed by their departments should be used on demand.

“It violates the rules for lower-ranking --- even county-level-officials to be allocated cars,” Li said.

Purchases of vehicles for official use have been heavily investigated, as they account for a large expenditure (花费) of public funds every year.

A survey on the Web news www.ifeng.com found 64 percent of respondents believed the new rule will be difficult to carry out because it is related to officials’ interests.

“Local government departments had halted(中断) approvals for requests for such vehicles and had started to work on new quotas(指标) under the new rules,” Li said. “The future reform of official vehicle use will introduce market mechanisms and monetization.”

Premier Wen Jiabao said in the annual government work report on Saturday that expenditures on such vehicles will not increase in 2011 compared with a year ago.

Beijing’s standing deputy mayor Ji Lin last week said the municipal (市政的) government will release the number of vehicles for official use in the capital as early as at the end of this month.

Earlier this month, the Minister of Finance had published a rule regulating the budgets for such vehicles.

1.What is the purpose of the new rule allocating vehicles among officials?

A．To promote a low-carbon lifestyle.

B．To cut down the present huge expenditures of purchasing cars.

C．To make good use of budgets for official cars.

D．To solve the problem of severe traffic jam.

2.How often could the cars used by minister-level officials be replaced according to the new rule?

A．Every 3 years.      B．Every 5 years.      C．Every 8 years.      D．Every 10 years.

3.What about the officials ranking below minister-or-governor levels in terms of official vehicles?

A．They can still possess special cars.

B．They can use their own private cars.

C．They can use cars whenever officially necessary.

D．They can be allocated second-hand cars.

4.What is the public’s attitude toward the new rule’s fulfillment?

A．Uncertain.         B．Optimistic.         C．Indifferent.        D．Passive

5.From the passage, we can infer that_________.

A．the government is determined to carry out the new rule

B．the new rule has not yet been made public

C．the new rule will benefit official’s interest

D．the new rule is applied to minister-level officials

高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析

BEIJING, March 9—The central government will require an additional three years of use for official vehicles for ministers and governors to reduce the costs of purchasing new cars, media have reported.

The new rule has been applied among all Party and government departments nationwide, the Beijing News reported on Tuesday. The new rule has not yet been made public, said Li, a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference National Committee.

Under the old rules, the cars used by minister-level officials could be replaced as often as every five years, Li said. These officials will also retain the same cars when they assume new posts, he added.

The new rule also reiterated（重申） that officials ranking below minister-or governor-levels should not be allocated(分配) cars. The cars possessed by their departments should be used on demand.

“It violates（违反） the rules for lower-ranking-even county-level-officials to be allocated cars, “Li said.

Purchases of vehicles for official use have been heavily investigated, as they account for a large expenditure of public funds every year.

A survey on the Web news www. ifeng. com found 64 percent of respondents believed the new rule will be difficult to implement（执行实施） because it is related to officials’ interests.

“Local government departments had halted approvals for requests for such vehicles and had started to work on new quotas under the new rules.” Li said.

“The future reform of official vehicle use will introduce market mechanisms and monetization.”

Premier Wen Jiabao said in the annual government work report on Saturday that expenditures on such vehicles will not increase in 2011 compared with a year ago.

Beijing’s standing deputy mayor Ji Lin last week said the municipal government will release the number of vehicles for official use in the capital as early as at the end of this month.

Earlier this month, the Ministry of Finance had published a rule regulating the budgets for such vehicles.

1.What is the purpose of the new rule allocating vehicles among officials?

A. To promote a low-carbon lifestyle.

B. To cut down the present huge expenditures of purchasing cars.

C. To make good use of the budgets for official cars.

D. To solve the problem of severe traffic jam.

2.How often could the care used by minister-level officials be replaced according to the new rule?

A. Every 3 years.　　　　　 B. Every 5 years.

C. Every 8 years.　　　　　 D. Every 10 years.

3.What about the officials ranking below minister-or governor-levels in terms of official vehicles?

A. They can still possess special cars.

B. They can use their own private cars.

C. They can use cars whenever officially necessary.

D. They can be allocated second-hand cars.

4.What is the public’s attitude toward the new rule’s fulfillment?

A. Skeptical.　　 B. Optimistic.

C. Indifferent. D. Passive.

高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析

阅读理解。

BEIJING，March 9—The central government will require an additional three years of use for official vehicles for ministers and governors to reduce the costs of purchasing new cars，media have reported．

The new rule has been applied among all Party and government departments nationwide，the Beijing News reported on Tuesday．The new rule has not yet been made public，said Li，a member of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference National Committee．

Under the old rules，the cars used by minister-level officials could be replaced as often as every five years，Li said．These officials will also keep the same cars when they assume new posts，he added．

The new rule also reiterated that officials ranking below minister-or-governor-levels should not be allocated cars．The cars possessed by their departments should be used on demand．

“It violates the rules for lower-ranking—even county-level-officials to be allocated cars，” Li said．

Purchases of vehicles for official use have been heavily investigated，as they account for a large expenditure of public funds every year．

A survey on the Web news www．ifeng．com found 64 percent of respondents believed the new rule will be difficult to carry out because it is related to officials’ interests．

“Local government departments had halted approvals for requests for such vehicles and had started to work on new quotas under the new rules，” Li said．“The future reform of official vehicle use will introduce market mechanisms and monetization．”

Premier Wen Jiabao said in the annual government work report on Saturday that expenditures on such vehicles will not increase in 2011 compared with a year ago．

Beijing’s standing deputy mayor Ji Lin last week said the municipal government will release the number of vehicles for official use in the capital as early as at the end of this month．

Earlier this month，the Minister of Finance had published a rule regulating the budgets for such vehicles．

1. What is the purpose of the new rule allocating vehicles among officials？

A. To promote a low-carbon lifestyle．

B．To cut down the present huge expenditures of purchasing cars．

C．To make good use of budgets for official cars．

D．To solve the problem of severe traffic jam．

2.How often could the cars used by minister-level officials be replaced according to the new rule？

A．Every 3 years．　　　　　　　　 B．Every 5 years．

C．Every 8 years．　　　　　　　　 D．Every 10 years．

3.What about the officials ranking below minister-or-governor levels in terms of official vehicles？

A．They can still possess special cars．

B．They can use their own private cars．

C．They can use cars whenever officially necessary．

D．They can be allocated second-hand cars．

4.What is the public’s attitude toward the new rule’s fulfillment？

A．Uncertain．　　 　　　　　　 　 B．Optimistic．

C．Indifferent．　　　　　　 　　　 D．Passive

5.From the passage，we can infer that_________．

A．the government is determined to carry out the new rule

B．the new rule has not yet been made public

C．the new rule will benefit official’s interest

D．the new rule is applied to minister-level officials

高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析