You
should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1–16, which are based on Reading Passage 1 below.
Why are Americans so
angry?
Americans
are generally known for having a positive outlook on life, but with the
countdown for November's presidential election now well under way, polls show
voters are angry. This may explain the success of non-mainstream candidates
such as Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders. But what is
fuelling the frustration?
A
CNN/ORC poll carried out in December 2015 suggests 69% of Americans are either
"very angry" or "somewhat angry" about "the way things
are going" in the US. And the same proportion - 69% - are angry because
the political system "seems to only be working for the insiders with money
and power, like those on Wall Street or in Washington," according to a
NBC/Wall Street Journal poll from November. Many people are not only angry,
they are angrier than they were a year ago, according to an NBC/Esquire survey
last month - particularly Republicans (61%), somewhat white people (54%), but
also 42% of Democrats, 43% of Latinos and 33% of African Americans.
Candidates
have sensed the mood and are adopting the rhetoric. Donald Trump, who has
arguably tapped into voters' frustration better than any other candidate, says
he is "very, very angry" and will "gladly accept the mantle of anger"
while rival Republican Ben Carson says he has encountered "many Americans
who are discouraged and angry as they watch the American dream slipping
away". Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders says: "I am
angry and millions of Americans are angry," while Hillary Clinton says she
"understands why people get angry". Here are five reasons why some
voters feel the American dream is in tatters.
1. Economy
"The
failure of the economy to deliver real progress to middle-class and
working-class Americans over the past 15 years is the most fundamental source
of public anger and disaffection in the US," says William Galston, an
expert in governance studies at the Brookings Institution think tank. Although
the country may have recovered from the recession - economic output has
rebounded and unemployment rates have fallen from 10% in 2009 to 5% in 2015 -
Americans are still feeling the pinch in their wallets. Household incomes have,
generally speaking, been stagnant for 15 years. In 2014, the median household
income was $53,657, according to the US Census Bureau - compared with $57,357
in 2007 and $57,843 in 1999 (adjusted for inflation). There is also a sense
that many jobs are of lower quality and opportunity is dwindling, says Galston.
"The search for explanations can very quickly degenerate into the
identification of villains in American politics. On the left it is the
billionaires, the banks, and Wall Street. On the right it is immigrants, other
countries taking advantage of us and the international economy - they are two
sides of the same political coin."
2. Immigration
America's
demographics are changing - nearly 59 million immigrants have arrived in the US
since 1965, not all of whom entered the country legally. Forty years ago, 84%
of the American population was made up of non-Hispanic white people - by last
year the figure was 62%, according to Pew Research. It projects this trend will
continue, and by 2055 non-Hispanic white people will make up less than half the
population. Pew expects them to account for only 46% of the population by 2065.
By 2055, more Asians than any other ethnic group are expected to move to US.
"It's
been an era of huge demographic, racial, cultural, religious and generational
change," says Paul Taylor, author of The Next America. "While some
celebrate these changes, others deplore them. Some older, whiter voters do not
recognise the country they grew up in. There is a sense of alien tribes,"
he says.
The
US currently has 11.3 million illegal immigrants. Migrants often become a target
of anger, says Roberto Suro, an immigration expert at the University of
Southern California. "There is a displacement of anxiety and they become
the face of larger sources of tensions, such as terrorism, jobs and
dissatisfaction. We saw that very clearly when Donald Trump switched from
[complaining about] Mexicans to Muslims without skipping a beat after San
Bernardino," he says, referring to the shooting in California in December
that left 14 people dead.
3. Washington
"When
asked if they trust the government, 89% of Republicans and 72% of Democrats say
"only sometimes" or "never", according to Pew Research. Six
out of 10 Americans think the government has too much power, a survey by Gallup
suggests, while the government has been named as the top problem in the US for
two years in a row - above issues such as the economy, jobs and immigration,
according to the organisation.
The
gridlock on Capitol Hill and the perceived impotence of elected officials has
led to resentment among 20 to 30% of voters, says polling expert Karlyn Bowman,
from the American Enterprise Institute. "People see politicians fighting
and things not getting done - plus the responsibilities of Congress have grown
significantly since the 1970s and there is simply more to criticise. People
feel more distant from their government and sour on it," she says.
William
Galston thinks part of the appeal of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders is down to
frustration with what some see as a failing system. "So on the right you
have someone who is running as a 'strong man', a Berlusconi and Putin, who will
get things done, and on the left you have someone who is rejecting
incrementalism and calling for a political revolution," he says.
Ted
Cruz, who won the Republican caucuses in Iowa, is also running as an
anti-establishment candidate. "Tonight is a victory for every American
who's watched in dismay as career politicians in Washington in both parties
refuse to listen and too often fail to keep their commitments to the
people," he said on Monday night.
4. America's place in the world
America
is used to being seen as a superpower but the number of Americans that think
the US "stands above all other countries in the world" went from 38%
in 2012 to 28% in 2014, Pew Research suggests. Seventy percent of Americans
also think the US is losing respect internationally, according to a 2013 poll
by the centre.
"For
a country that is used to being on top of the world, the last 15 years haven't
been great in terms of foreign policy. There's a feeling of having been at war
since 9/11 that's never really gone away, a sense America doesn't know what it
wants and that things aren't going our way," says Roberto Suro. The rise
of China, the failure to defeat the Taliban and the slow progress in the fight
against the so-called Islamic State group has contributed to the anxiety.
Americans
are also more afraid of the prospect of terrorist attacks than at any time
since 9/11, according to a New York Times/CBS poll. The American reaction to
the San Bernardino shooting was different to the French reaction to the Paris
attacks, says Galston. "Whereas the French rallied around the government,
Americans rallied against it. There is an impression that the US government is
failing in its most basic obligation to keep country and people safe."
5. Divided nation
Democrats
and Republicans have become more ideologically polarised than ever. The typical
(median), Republican is now more conservative in his or her core social,
economic and political views than 94% of Democrats, compared with 70% in 1994,
according to Pew Research. The median Democrat, meanwhile, is more liberal than
92% of Republicans, up from 64%.
The
study also found that the share of Americans with a highly negative view of the
opposing party has doubled, and that the animosity is so deep, many would be
unhappy if a close relative married someone of a different political
persuasion.
This
polarisation makes reaching common ground on big issues such as immigration,
healthcare and gun control more complicated. The deadlock is, in turn, angering
another part of the electorate. "Despite this rise in polarisation in
America, a large mass in the middle are pragmatic. They aren't totally
disengaged, they don't want to see Washington gridlocked, but they roll their
eyes at the nature of this discourse," says Paul Taylor. This group
includes a lot of young people and tends to eschew party labels. "If they
voted," he says, "they could play an important part of the
election."
Questions 1-8
Complete the sentences
below using ONLY ONE WORD for
each answer.
1. Conducted poll in
December says that most Americans are with the
way that hing are going.
2. Many people are
angrier than a year ago, particulary .
3.The economical rates are
decreasing, even though the country has recovered from the .
4. Billionaires and
immigrants are the two sides of one political .
5. It is expected
that the will be the biggest ethnic group to move
in the USA by the year 2055.
6. It has been an era
of demographic, racial, cultural, religious and change.
7. Roberto Suro says
that migrants might become a of anger.
8. Six to ten
Americans believe that government has too much .
Questions 9-16
Do the following
statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?
In boxes 9-16 on your
answer sheet, write
TRUE
if the statement agrees with the information
FALSE
if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN
if there is no information on this
9. The Congress has more
responsibilities now than in 1970s.
10. William
Galston believes that the appeal of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders is growing
bigger each day.
11. Ted
Cruz is running as an anti-establishment candidate.
12. The
number of Americans who think that the US "stands above all other
countries in the world" increased by 10% in 2014 compared to
2012.
13. Since
9/11 there's been a feeling of war in America and it's still here.
14. The
Americans had the same reaction to the San Bernardino shooting as French to the
Paris attacks.
15. The
ideological diversity between the Democrats and the Republicans is stronger
than ever now.
16. The
pragmatic mass consists of a lot of young people.
You
should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 17–28, which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.
Do e-cigarettes make it
harder to stop smoking?
(A) People trying to give up smoking often use
e-cigarettes to help wean themselves off tobacco. Most experts think they are
safer than cigarettes but a surprising paper was published recently - it
suggests that people who use e-cigarettes are less successful at giving up
smoking than those who don't. "E-cigarettes WON'T help you quit,"
reported the Daily Mail. "Smokers using vapers are '28% less likely to
ditch traditional cigarettes,'" read the paper's headline. The story was
reported on many other websites around the world, including CBS: "Study:
E-cigarettes don't help smokers quit," it said.
(B) The study causing the fuss was written by
researchers at the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the
University of California, and published in one of the Lancet's sister journals,
Lancet Respiratory Medicine. It is a meta-analysis, which means the authors
reviewed the academic literature already available on the topic. They sifted
out the weaker papers - ones that didn't have control groups, for example - and
were left with 20.
(C) The conclusion? Smokers who use e-cigarettes
have a 28% lower chance of quitting than smokers who don't use them, according
to Prof Stanton Glantz, one of the authors. But while the conclusion is
surprising, so is the number of academics who have criticised the paper. One
was Ann McNeill, professor of tobacco addiction at Kings College London, whose
own research is included in Glantz's analysis. "This review is not
scientific," she wrote on the Science Media Centre website. "The
information… about two studies that I co-authored is either inaccurate or
misleading… I believe the findings should therefore be dismissed.
(D) "I am concerned at the huge damage
this publication may have - many more smokers may continue smoking and die if
they take from this piece of work that all evidence suggests e-cigarettes do not
help you quit smoking; that is not the case." Prof Peter Hajek, director
of the Tobacco Dependence Research Unit at the Wolfson Institute also called
the findings "grossly misleading".
(E) The critics are making three main points.
First, the definition of e-cigarettes is a bit loose. There are many different
types - some look like cigarettes, others have tanks for the vaping liquid,
some are disposable and other are multi-use. They all deliver different doses
of nicotine. Many of the papers included in the analysis don't specify which
type people are using, according to Linda Bauld, professor of health policy at
the University of Stirling. Another point is that the studies vary in the way
they measure how often people use e-cigarettes. "Some only assessed
whether a person had ever tried an e-cigarette or if they had tried one
recently, not whether they were using it regularly or frequently," Bauld
says.
(F) Even the paper's author admits it's
possible that in some of the studies e-cigarettes may only have been used once,
which he says would not be a good predictor of whether they had affected
people's ability to stop smoking. And there is another problem. You might
expect, if you were going to draw conclusions about how useful e-cigarettes are
in helping people quit, to focus on studies looking at people who are trying to
give up. Prof Robert West, who heads a team at University College London
researching ways to help people stop smoking, says this analysis mashed
together some very different studies - only some of which include people using
e-cigarettes to help them quit.
(G) "To mix them in with studies where
you've got people using an e-cigarette and are not particularly trying to stop
smoking is mixing apples and oranges," he says. Some of the studies track
smokers who use e-cigarettes for other reasons - perhaps because smoking a
cigarette in a bar or an office is illegal and they want a nicotine hit.
"With the studies where people are using electronic cigarettes
specifically in a quit attempt the evidence is consistent," says West,
referring to two randomised control trials.
(H) Both are quite small and one was funded by
the e-cigarette industry. They took two groups of smokers, and gave one real
e-cigarettes, and the other a placebo. The studies reach a broadly similar
conclusion to a large, real-world study called the Smoking Toolkit run by West.
West's investigation follows people in their daily lives and assesses how
successful various methods of giving up smoking are - this includes nicotine
patches, medicines and going cold turkey. These studies suggest that people
using e-cigarettes to help them quit are 50% to 100% more successful than those
who use no aids at all.
(I) In his paper, Glantz acknowledges there
are limitations to the research that he analysed. He agrees there are problems
with the way the use of e-cigarettes is measured and accepts it's not clear
which devices people are using. But he is sticking by his analysis because he
believes he has taken these factors into account. The editor of Lancet
Respiratory Medicine, Emma Grainger, defends the article too. She says she does
not see a problem with the paper and that it has been through the normal
peer-review process.
Reading
Passage 2 has nine paragraphs, A–I.
Which
paragraph contains the following information?
Write
the correct letter, A–I, in boxes 17–25 on your
answer sheet.
17. Possible damage
18. Shocking news
19. Mix of different studies
20. Misleading information
21. Types of e-cigarettes
22. A place where the controversial research was written
23. The defence of the article
24. A research by an e-cigarette industry
25. The consistent evidence
Questions 26–28
Choose
the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Write
the correct letter in boxes 26–27 on your answer sheet.
26. New controversial research suggests that e-cigarettes:
- make
it easier to quit smoking
- make
it harder to quit smoking
- don't
play a major role in quitting smoking
- the
research doen't answer this question
27. Ann McNeill critisized the research because:
- the
majority of other researches disagree with this review
- the
definition of e-cigarettes is a bit loose
- some
information is either inaccurate or misleading
- the
analysis mashed together some very different studies
28. This article aims at:
- finding
the truth about e-cigarettes, providing facts
- showing
that the e-cigarettes are worthless
- promoting
the use of e-cigarettes
- analyzing
different scientific researches
E.
You should spend about
20 minutes on Questions 29–40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.
F.
The battle over the gender price gap
G.
Boots has reduced the
price of "feminine" razors to bring them in line with men's. The
chemist chain says it's just an isolated incident, but campaigners say its part
of a "pink tax" that discriminates against women. Who's right and
what's the bigger story, ask Jessica McCallin and Claire Bates.
H.
Campaigners against
what's been dubbed the "pink tax" - where retailers charge women more
than men for similar products - are celebrating after Boots said it would
change the price of some of its goods. A Change.org petition has already
gathered more than 43,000 signatures. The issue has been raised in Parliament.
Paula Sherriff, Labour MP for Dewsbury, called a debate on the issue on
Tuesday. She wants the government to commission independent research to
quantify the extent of the problem, arguing that it amounts to women paying
thousands of pounds more over the course of their lives.
I.
Stevie Wise, who launched
the petition, was driven by a Times investigation which claimed that women and
girls are charged, on average, 37% more for clothes, beauty products and toys.
The investigation was inspired by research in the US which found that women's
products are routinely more expensive than men's. The New York Department of
Consumer Affairs had compared the prices of 800 products with male and female
versions and concluded that, after controlling for quality, women's versions
were, on average, 7% more expensive than men's.
J.
Boots says the two
examples highlighted in the Change.org petition are exceptional cases, but
campaigners are not so sure. "This is a very exciting response," says
Wise. "We are delighted with Boots' decision, but we now need to get them
to look at all of their products, not just the ones highlighted in the
petition. We hope this decision is just the first of many and we may broaden
our campaign to focus on other retailers as well." Wise says that women
have been getting in touch with examples of other price discrepancies from lots
of companies and says there seems to be a particular problem with toys and
clothes. Argos has been criticised for identical scooters that cost £5 more if
they were pink rather than blue. Argos said it was an error that had already
been rectified and that it would never indulge in differential pricing.
K.
Among the examples sent
to Wise was Boots selling identical child car seats that cost more in pink.
Another retailer was selling children's balance bikes which cost more for a
flowery print aimed at girls than a pirate print aimed at boys. But the latter
example already appears to have been tweaked on the retailer's website, albeit
by applying a £10 discount to the flowery version. With many retailers
indulging in complicated algorithms to calculate price, or frequently changing
prices around promotions, it's easy for them to argue that what appears to be a
gender price gap is in fact an innocent mistake.
L.
One of the main things
that retailers consider when deciding what to charge is what the customer is
willing to pay, argues Mark Billige, UK managing partner at Simon-Kucher, a
management consultancy that advises companies on things like pricing.
"They have to consider what it costs to make the product and what their competitors
are charging, but in a world where consumers have lots of choices, willingness
to pay becomes very important as people will vote with their wallets if they
don't like the price of a product. There is something in the fact that women
are willing to pay more. Why, I don't know, but it will probably have something
to do with psychology."
M.
When challenged over
sexist pricing, both Levi's and Tesco argued that different versions of things
could have different production costs even if appearing fairly similar. Prof
Nancy Puccinelli, a consumer psychologist at Oxford University says that her
research suggests that women are actually much more careful shoppers than men,
better able to scrutinise adverts and pricing gimmicks. She wonders if women
are perceiving more value in the more expensive products. "For men, razors
are functional, whereas women may perceive hair removal as more hedonistic,
more about self-care, and be more willing to pay more. But there could also be
environmental factors hindering their choices, like product placement in the
store. If products are separated into male and female sections far away from
each other it's harder to scrutinise prices." Such a situation could
either be deliberate or accidental but the campaigners are not convinced.
N.
"It's just the tip
of the iceberg," says the Fawcett Society's head of policy, Jemima
Olchawski. "It's been happening in plain sight and, to me, it shows that
bias against women is ingrained across our society. The worst thing about it is
that women are getting ripped off twice. They are paid less than men and are
also charged more for similar products." The campaign may lead to further
changes, but the perennial advice to shop around remains the same. "There
are quite a few comparison websites you can use to see if there's a price
difference," says Sally Francis, senior writer at moneysavingexpert.com.
If, as Tesco claim, there are "additional design and performance
features" testing the male and female versions at home should settle
whether they are worth it.
O.
There is an opportunity
for some companies, argues Olchawski. "The finding shows the power of
marketing in our lives, how it shapes our perception of what it means to be a
man or a women. Some companies could choose not to play into this, not to play
into the stereotypes and rip women off, but launch products more in tune with
moves toward gender equality."
P.
Q.
Questions 29–35
R.
Who's responsible for
what? Choose A, B, C or D and write your answers in boxes 29–35 on your answer sheet.
S.
A Stevie Wise
T.
B Mark Billige
U.
C Jemima Olchawski
V.
D Nobody from the above
X.
29. Called
a debate on the issue
Y.
30. Launched
the petition
Z.
31. States that women
are willing to pay more
A.32. Says that women are more careful shoppers than
men
. 33. Says that companies should keep in mind
gender equality while making products
. 34. Was told that there are many problems with prices, especially with toys and clothes
. 34. Was told that there are many problems with prices, especially with toys and clothes
35. States that women
are getting ripped off twice
.
.
Questions 36-40
Do the following
statements agree with the information in the IELTS reading text?
.
In boxes 36-40 on your
answer sheet, write
II.
J TRUE
if the statement agrees with the information FALSE
if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN
if there is no information on this
36. "Pink
tax" means that women are being charged more than men for the same
products.
37. Due to the fact that the petition gathered more than 43,000 signatures the issue has been raised in Parliament.
37. Due to the fact that the petition gathered more than 43,000 signatures the issue has been raised in Parliament.
38. After comparing the prices of 800 products., it
was concluded that women's versions were 7% more expensive than
men's.
39. It
is hard for the retailers to pretend that the gender price gap is an innocent
mistake.
40. If
male and female products are situated in different sections, it makes it harder
to examine the prices.
Get your Answer : Please Click Here
No comments:
Post a Comment