C
　　The villagers of Yaluma in Southern Mexico are some of the poorest people in the country. But now they have an extra source of income.They are being paid to grow and develop forests by the organization in charge of Formula One racing (一级方程式赛车),which pumps 5,500 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the air every year.The idea is that the forests being planted around Yaluma will absorb this amount. It will also provide people there with money while wiping out motor racing's environmental debt.
　　Projects like this go under the name of "carbon trading". The basic idea is that governments and companies can buy the right to pump CO2 into the air by investing in green projrvyd. They can buy so-called "carbon credits" from countries which have succeeded in reducing CO2 emissions(排放物).
　　Supporters of carbon trading say that it brings money and green technology to poorer countries.It also provides a new way of doing busingess and spreading prosperity. They point out that the process of globalization will give people everywhere the most possible choice of products and services. Carbon trading is just another way of bringing that about. It is a "win - win" situation.
　　Opponents argue that nature comes before lifestyle. CO2 emissions need to be reduced, not bought and sold. And they believe that the rich world should lead the way.People might be willing to change the way they live to help save the world, but not to help the rich countries keep a lifestyle that depends on pollution.
　　Supporters of carbon trading believe in unlimited growth.Opponents believe that nature sets limits to the choices we make on how to live.It is "don't do " against "can do". It is life against lifestyle.
　　It is believed that modern lives are about choice.For example,the world can choose to take the danger of global warming seriously.And the sooner we choose to do it, the more choices we have about what to do next and the more time we have to do it in. We can also choose to pay no attention to the danger of global warming to keep our lifestyles. Then one day nature may give us no choice at all,and maybe not much of a life,either.
　　64.Carbon trading is discussed in the text in order to show the importance of ______ .
　　　A.reducing pollution B.taking care of forests
　　　C.spreading prosperity D.choosing lifestyle or nature
　　65."Carbon credits" may be used to ______.
　　　A.get the right to pump CO2 into the air
　　　B.get the right to pump CO2 into poor countries
　　　C.learn about the way to reduce CO2 emissions
　　　D.improve the way to reduce CO2 emissions
　　66.We can infer from the text that in the "win - win" situation _____.
　　　A.rich countries perform their duty to help poor countries
　　　B.poor countries get what they need from rich countries
　　　C.both rich countries and poor countries get what they need
　　　D.rich countries learn from poor countries in reducing pollution
　　67.In the opinion of people who are against carbon trading,the rich countries should ____.
　　　A.guide poor countries in reducing CO2 emissions
　　　B.show by example how to reduce emissions
　　　C.offer more help to save the world
　　　D.improve their lifestyles to keep the world clean

Dear Economist,
My newly-wedded wife and I are deeply in love. There is, however, one issue that threatens the happiness of our marriage. I absolutely insist on shopping at Walmart. My wife, meanwhile, would rather avoid Walmart at all costs.
　　I have recently tried to convince her that not only does Walmart offer the lowest prices known to man, but that the chain is also a force for good―lower prices mean better standards of living for all consumers, increased global trade means a tighter-knit(紧密团结的) international community, and efficient operations translate into higher productivity growth for the economy. My wife complains about poor labour policies, the “fact” that Walmart squeezes suppliers, and that it puts local shops out of business.
　　Who is right? Will our marriage survive?
　　                                                                                                                                                  Brian Gee
Dear Brian,
I have to agree with you about Walmart. Jason Furman, then an economist at New York University, now an adviser to President Obama, famously argued in 2005 that Walmart was unwittingly (不知不觉地) a progressive success story. The chain’s prices don’t much affect me (I prefer Whole Foods) but Furman estimated that they benefited low-and-middle-income Americans to the sum of around $250 billion a year.
　　Walmart does not pay much, so it may depress wages. Then again, it may increase wages by offering jobs to the otherwise-unemployed. Either way, the benefits of low prices to Walmart shoppers far outweigh any seemingly reasonable costs to Walmart employees. And while it is true that Walmart employees tend to be poor, the same is true of Walmart shoppers.
　　Armed with this information you can face your wife with confidence. You are sure to win the conversation. The divorce is likely to be more argued.
Economist
68. What concerns Brian Gee so much that he wrote the letter?
A. His wife refuses to shop at Walmart.
B. They are faced with a divorce.
C. They can’t afford the costs of shopping at Walmart.
D. They are in conflict about shopping at Walmart. 
69. Brian Gee’s wife tends to hold the opinion that _________.
A. it is wrong for Walmart to depress its employees’ wages
B. consumers’ lives have improved thanks to Walmart
C. Walmart’s business operation increases productivity in economy
D. Walmart’s business increases global trade
70. What can be inferred from the reply letter?
A. Some employees accept the low pay to keep the job.
B. Walmart appeals to only poor consumers and poor employees.
C. Employees suffer from Walmart’s low prices more than consumers.
D. Jason Furman, a New York University economist, spoke highly of Walmart.

I have had just about enough of being treated like a second-class citizen, simply because I happen to be that unfairly treated member of society --- a customer. The more I go into shops and hotels, banks and post offices, railway stations, airports and the like, the more I am convinced the things are being run solely to suit the firm, the system, or the union. There seems to be a deceptive (欺骗的) new motto for so-called “service” organizations --- Staff Before Service.

　　 How often, for example, have you queued for what seems like hours at the Post Office or the supermarket because there were not enough staff on duty to man all the service grilles or checkout counters? Surely in these days of high unemployment it must be possible to hire cashiers and counter staff. Yet supermarkets, hinting darkly at higher prices, claim that uncovering all their cash registers at any one time would increase operating costs. And the Post Office says we cannot expect all their service grilles to be occupied “at times when demand is low”.

　　  It is the same with hotels. Because waiters and kitchen staff must finish when it suits them, dining rooms close earlier or menu choice is cut short. As for us guests, we just have to put up with it. There is also the nonsense of so many friendly hotel night porters having been thrown out of their jobs in the interests of “efficiency” and replaced by coin-eating machines which offer everything from lager to laxatives (从贮藏啤酒到通便剂). Not to mention the tea-making kit in your room: a kettle with a mixed collection of tea bags, plastic milk boxes and lump sugar. Who wants to wake up to a raw teabag? I do not, especially when I am paying for “service”.

　　Can it be stopped, this worsening of service, this growing attitude that the customer is always a bore? I angrily hope so because it is happening, sadly, in all walks of life.

　　Our only hope is to hammer home our anger whenever and wherever we can and, if all else fails, bring back into practice that other, older slogan --- Take Our Deal Elsewhere.

1.The writer feels that nowadays customers __________.

A. deserve the lowest status in society

B. are unworthy of proper consideration

C. have received high quality service

D. have become victims of modern organizations

2.The writer argues that the quality of service is changing because __________.

A. customers’ demands have greatly changed

B. the staff receive more consideration than customers

C. customers’ needs have become more complex

D. staff members are less considerate than their employers

3.According to the writer, long queues at counters are caused by __________.

A. not having enough male staff on duty

B. difficulties in hiring more efficient staff

C. lack of cooperation between staff members

D. not providing enough staff on purpose to reduce budget

4.The writer suggests that a customer __________.

A. be patient when queuing before checkout counters

B. put up with the rude manners of the staff

C. try to control his temper when ill-treated

D. go to other places where good service is available