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
【小题1】What concerns Brian Gee so much that he wrote the letter?

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

1.What concerns Brian Gee so much that he wrote the letter?

2.Brian Gee’s wife tends to hold the opinion that _________．

3.What can be inferred from the reply letter?

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

1．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．

2．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

3．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．

D

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．

Dear Economist，

My newly­wedded 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 tighterknit(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 low­and­middle­income 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 concerned 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 increased 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.