刷题刷出新高度,偷偷领先!偷偷领先!偷偷领先! 关注我们,悄悄成为最优秀的自己!

单选题

How can the train operators possibly justify yet another increase to rail passenger fares? It has become a grimly reliable annual ritual: every January the cost of travelling by train rises, imposing a significant extra burden on those who have no option but to use the rail network to get to work or otherwise. This year’s rise, an average of 2.7 per cent, may be a fraction lower than last year’s, but it is still well above the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure of inflation.
Successive governments have permitted such increases on the grounds that the cost of investing in and running the rail network should be borne by those who use it, rather than the general taxpayer. Why, the argument goes, should a car-driving pensioner from Lincolnshire have to subsidise the daily commute of a stockbroker from Surrey? Equally, there is a sense that the travails of commuters in the South East, many of whom will face among the biggest rises, have received too much attention compared to those who must endure the relatively poor infrastructure of the Midlands and the North.
However, over the past 12 months, those commuters have also experienced some of the worst rail strikes in years. It is all very well train operators trumpeting the improvements they are making to the network, but passengers should be able to expect a basic level of service for the substantial sums they are now paying to travel. The responsibility for the latest wave of strikes rests on the unions. However, there is a strong case that those who have been worst affected by industrial action should receive compensation for the disruption they have suffered.
The Government has pledged to change the law to introduce a minimum service requirement so that, even when strikes occur, services can continue to operate.This should form part of a wider package of measures to address the long-running problems on Britain’s railways.Yes, more investment is needed, but passengers will not be willing to pay more indefinitely if they must also endure cramped, unreliable services, punctuated by regular chaos when timetables are changed,or planned maintenance is managed incompetently. The threat of nationalisation may have been seen off for now, but it will return with a vengeance if the justified anger of passengers is not addressed in short order.

If unable to calm down passengers, the railways may have to face

A
the loss of investment.
B
the collapse of operations.
C
a reduction of revenue.
D
a change of ownership.
使用微信搜索喵呜刷题,轻松应对考试!

答案:

D

解析:

[精准定位]末段末句指出,虽然国有化威胁可能目前暂时得以解除,但是火车运营商若不立即处理乘客的愤怒悄绪,这一威胁将会更猛烈地卷土重来。可见D正确。 [命题解密][D] a change of ownership是对The threat of nationalisation... will return的正确解读,体现铁路公司面临的威胁:若不能平息乘客怒火,铁路运营很可能将面临所有权变更 -“私有“变“国有"。 A、C由②句more investment is needed... but passengers will not be willing to pay more推测若铁路 公司不能让乘客满意,则乘客将不愿付出高额票价,造成收益下降、投资损失。但这两项一方面夸大了事实(运营商减少的是车票收入,不一定是所有投资收入),另一方面又弱化了威胁(收益下降、投资损失仅是直接影响,未能体现运营商面临的终极威胁 国有化)。B由O句can continue to operate反向推测而来,误以为乘客的愤怒情绪会导致铁路运营瘫痪,但原文实际指“罢工“会导致服务瘫痪。
创作类型:
原创

本文链接:If unable to calm down passengers, the railways ma

版权声明:本站点所有文章除特别声明外,均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。

让学习像火箭一样快速,微信扫码,获取考试解析、体验刷题服务,开启你的学习加速器!

分享考题
share