2003年Text 3
In recent years, railroads have been combining with each other, merging into supersystems, causing heightened concerns about monopoly. As recently as 1995, the top four railroads accounted for under 70 percent of the total ton-miles moved by rails. Next year, after a series of mergers is completed, just four railroads will control well over 90 percent of all the freight moved by major rail carriers.
Supporters of the new super systems argue that these mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service. Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks. But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is too costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat.
The vast consolidation within the rail industry means that most shippers are served by only one rail company. Railroads typically charge such "captive" shippers 20 to 30 percent more than they do when another railroad is competing for the business. Shippers who feel they are being overcharged have the right to appeal to the federal government's Surface Transportation Board for rate relief, but the process is expensive, time consuming, and will work only in truly extreme cases.
Railroads justify rate discrimination against captive shippers on the grounds that in the long run it reduces everyone's cost. If railroads charged all customers the same average rate, they argue, shippers who have the option of switching to trucks or other forms of transportation would do so, leaving remaining customers to shoulder the cost of keeping up the line. It's theory to which many economists subscribe, but in practice it often leaves railroads in the position of determining which companies will flourish and which will fail. "Do we really want railroads to be the arbiters of who wins and who loses in the marketplace?" asks Martin Bercovici, a Washington lawyer who frequently represents shipper.
Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be his with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortuning fortunes, still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to acquire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on. Consider the .2 billion bid by Norfolk Southern and CSX to acquire Conrail this year. Conrail's net railway operating income in 1996 was just million, less than half of the carrying costs of the transaction. Who's going to pay for the rest of the bill? Many captive shippers fear that they will, as Norfolk Southern and CSX increase their grip on the market.
51. According to those who support mergers railway monopoly is unlikely because
[A] cost reduction is based on competition.
[B] services call for cross-trade coordination.
[C] outside competitors will continue to exist.
[D] shippers will have the railway by the throat.
[答案] C
[解題思路]
本題的對(duì)應(yīng)信息為第二段，其中該段第二句話(huà)說(shuō)"Any threat of monopoly, they argue, is removed by fierce competition from trucks"（他們認(rèn)為，在卡車(chē)運(yùn)輸?shù)募ち腋?jìng)爭(zhēng)面前，壟斷的威脅已經(jīng)不復(fù)存在）。因此，支持鐵路公司合并的人們認(rèn)為來(lái)自卡車(chē)運(yùn)輸?shù)母?jìng)爭(zhēng)會(huì)阻止鐵路壟斷的形成，因此只有C選項(xiàng)符合題意，其中"outside competition"指的就是"competition from trucks"。對(duì)于A選項(xiàng)，盡管該段第一句提到了"Supporters of the new super systems argue that these mergers will allow for substantial cost reductions and better coordinated service"（組建超大型鐵路集團(tuán)的支持者們認(rèn)為，兼并將帶來(lái)成本的大幅降低，提高協(xié)調(diào)服務(wù)），但并沒(méi)有提到成本降低與競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的關(guān)系。B選項(xiàng)的"cross-trade coordination"在原文沒(méi)有提及。D選項(xiàng)針對(duì)的是該段最后一句"But many shippers complain that for heavy bulk commodities traveling long distances, such as coal, chemicals, and grain, trucking is too costly and the railroads therefore have them by the throat"（但許多客戶(hù)卻抱怨說(shuō)，對(duì)于依賴(lài)長(zhǎng)途運(yùn)輸?shù)拇笞谏唐啡缑禾俊⒒瘜W(xué)制品和糧食來(lái)說(shuō)，由于公路運(yùn)輸花費(fèi)太大，因此鐵路公司"卡住了他們的脖子"），但卻恰恰顛倒了原句的主語(yǔ)和賓語(yǔ)，具有很強(qiáng)的干擾性。
[題目譯文]
根據(jù)那些支持合并的人們的觀點(diǎn)，鐵路壟斷不可能發(fā)生，因?yàn)? 。
[A] 成本的降低以競(jìng)爭(zhēng)為基礎(chǔ)
[B] 服務(wù)業(yè)需要跨行業(yè)的協(xié)調(diào)
[C] 外部競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者將會(huì)繼續(xù)存在
[D] 托運(yùn)人將控制鐵路運(yùn)輸
55. According to the text, the cost increase in the rail industry is mainly caused by
[A] the continuing acquisition.
[B] the growing traffic.
[C] the cheering Wall Street.
[D] the shrinking market.
[答案] A
[解題思路]
本題的對(duì)應(yīng)信息在文章的最后一段。該段第一至三句談到"Many captive shippers also worry they will soon be his with a round of huge rate increases. The railroad industry as a whole, despite its brightening fortuning fortunes, still does not earn enough to cover the cost of the capital it must invest to keep up with its surging traffic. Yet railroads continue to borrow billions to acquire one another, with Wall Street cheering them on"（許多"受制"客戶(hù)還擔(dān)心他們很快將遭遇一輪新的大幅漲價(jià)。從整體來(lái)說(shuō)，雖然鐵路行業(yè)有耀眼的資產(chǎn)，但它的收入仍然不足以支付為滿(mǎn)足不斷增長(zhǎng)的運(yùn)輸需要而進(jìn)行的固定資產(chǎn)投資。然而鐵路公司仍然繼續(xù)貸款數(shù)十億美元來(lái)進(jìn)行相互兼并，而華爾街也鼓勵(lì)它們這樣做），后面還舉了例子說(shuō)明鐵路公司由于并購(gòu)而借入了大量資金，其與公司收入之間的缺口恐怕就要托運(yùn)人來(lái)填補(bǔ)了，從而導(dǎo)致鐵路行業(yè)成本的進(jìn)一步上升，因此A選項(xiàng)符合原文。B選項(xiàng)對(duì)應(yīng)于第二句話(huà)中的"surging traffic"，但這并不是最主要的原因。而C、D選項(xiàng)則與題干的問(wèn)題無(wú)關(guān)。
[題目譯文]
根據(jù)本文，鐵路業(yè)成本的增加主要是由于 。
[A] 持續(xù)的購(gòu)置
[B] 日益繁忙的交通
[C] 令人振奮的華爾街
[D] 縮小的市場(chǎng)
相關(guān)推薦：考研英語(yǔ)閱讀理解命題思路透析和真題揭秘
2009年考研英語(yǔ)歷年真題閱讀理解精讀筆記匯總
