2. 考研
  3. There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all got

There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all got

admin2022-08-04  101
问题     There is no more fashionable answer to the woes of the global recession than "green jobs." Leaders of great nations have all gotten behind what Ban Ki-moon has called a "green New Deal"—pinning their hopes for future growth and new jobs on creating clean-technology industries. It all sounds like the ultimate win-win deal: beat the worst recession in decades and save the planet from global warming, all in one spending plan. So who cares how much it costs? And since the financial crisis and recession began, governments, environmental nonprofits, and even labor unions have been busy spinning out reports on just how many new jobs might be created from these new industries—estimates that range from the tens of thousands to the millions.
    The problem is that history doesn’t bear out the optimism. As a new study from McKinsey consulting points out, clean energy is less like old manufacturing industries that required a lot of workers than it is like new manufacturing and service industries that don’t. The best parallel is the semiconductor industry, which was expected to create a boom in high-paid high-tech jobs but today employs mainly robots. Clean-technology workers now make up only 0.6 percent of the American workforce, despite the government subsidies, tax incentives, and other supports that already exists.
    The McKinsey study, which examined how countries should compete in the post-crisis world, figures that clean energy won’t command much more of the total job market in the years ahead. "The bottom line is that these ’clean’ industries are too small to create the millions of jobs that are needed right away," says James Manyika, a director at the McKinsey Global Institute. Although they might not create those jobs, yet they could help other industries do just that: they did create a lot of jobs, indirectly, by making other industries more efficient
    McKinsey and others say that the same could be true today if governments focus not on building a "green economy," but on greening every part of the economy using cutting-edge green products and services. Stop betting government money on particular green technologies that may or may not pan out, and start thinking more broadly. As McKinsey makes clear, countries don’t become more competitive by slightly changing their "mix" of industries but by outperforming in each individual sector. Taking care of the environment at the broadest levels is often portrayed as a political red herring that will weaken competitiveness in the global economy. In fact, the future of growth and job creation may depend on it.
McKinsey suggests governments improve their competitiveness by ________.
选项 A、striving to develop a green economy
B、blending green economy into other industries
C、selling green products to other economic sectors
D、focusing on the overall strength of economy
答案B
解析 根据题干中的governments及competitiveness可定位到第四段。由该段第一句中的but on greening…services可知，McKinsey赞成将绿色经济与其他产业融合，即B项所说内容。A项“竭力发展绿色经济”恰恰是McKinsey反对的内容；McKinsey强调的产业融合包括技术等内容，而非片面的卖产品，C项可排除；D项“关注经济的整体优势”在文中没有相关的表述，属于无中生有。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/q3i4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)