a我考网

 找回密码
 立即注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

扫一扫,访问微社区

查看: 115|回复: 0

[考试辅导] GMAT考试写作指导:Issue写作范文六一

[复制链接]
发表于 2012-8-15 21:50:16 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
61.        I agree with the statement insofar as government systems of taxation and / s1 U6 b1 o! `
regulation are, in general, a great burden to business, and I agree that government
# |' V1 |8 p9 f7 Hconstraints are needed to prevent serious harms that would result if business were left # A, ?* e/ w0 b( }6 o; {3 t. r
free in the singular pursuit of profit. However, I think the speaker states the obvious and / W1 @  x; @+ T
begs the more relevant question.* s' y/ W8 c% G* `, Y
      Is government "at best" a "tremendous burden" on business, as the speaker claims?
" P/ f( }. Z  [; W* s. R$ c( zl think one would be hard-pressed to find any small business owner or corporate CEO 0 z% E' d2 n+ b% Q/ G9 m
who would disagree. Businesses today are mired in the burdens that government has
6 j7 k' Y0 q8 F0 G5 Bimposed on them: consumer and environmental protection laws, the double-tiered tax $ _: q& Z& n! g  H9 V- t, I
structure for C-corporations, federal and state securities regulations, affirmative action
) @; s/ L# Q+ frequirements, anti-trust laws, and so on. in focusing solely on these burdens, one might & n: I7 E  k. r- X3 p
well adopt a strict laissez faire view that if business is left free to pursue profit the so-
# V. |0 S% g. rcalled invisible hand of competition will guide it to produce the greatest social benefit, 7 J: m! }: y3 m* i
and therefore that the proper nexus between business and government is no nexus at all.) C- ~# [! {3 B* D0 {
      Is government, nevertheless, a "necessary" burden on business, as the speaker also + O# f9 g4 k1 s3 M. |9 `% f
claims? Yes. Laissez faire is an extreme view that fails to consider the serious harms 6 T: `+ B4 E. Y8 B# C% e
that business would do—to other businesses and to the society—if left to its own
- q2 `, x! R2 N6 odevices. And the harms may very well exceed the benefits. In fact, history has shown ! d) {; r! O- J- \$ h
that left entirely to themselves, corporations can be expected not only to harm the ( t$ p* s: _5 ?4 u2 p
society by making unsafe products and by polluting the environment, but also to cheat 2 D; [/ b, I. M
one another, exploit workers, and fix prices -all for profit's sake. Thus, I agree that 9 f3 g; X- b& j! u( I/ P* j' U
government constraints on business are necessary burdens.
% S- C( Z9 U/ `  D( O9 |      Ideally, the government should regulate against harmful practices but not interfere # l( O$ @* c! ~+ E1 i' q& k# ~1 J) A( ]
with the beneficial ones. But achieving this balance is not a simple matter. For instance,
7 E  d1 S9 e7 s8 I. kI know of a business that was forced by government regulation of toxic effluents to
7 i! ]* }; ~# w$ T0 ~spend over $120,000 to clean up an area outside of its plant where employees had ' W' Z$ T# B" o2 S3 I
regularly washed their hands. The 'toxin' in this case was nothing more than - E5 w) @, i9 R
biodegradable soap. This example suggests that perhaps the real issue here is not & V7 ?7 n- I* w# Y) J1 g: h
whether government is a necessary burden on business—for it clearly is—but rather
" C6 C5 A" ]& Y" o) D3 \$ jhow best to ensure that its burdens don't outweigh its benefits.
. p" Z( j+ v6 X( k! u      In sum, the speaker's two assertions are palpable ones that are amply supported by
3 |! M- g4 W: y8 ?' a# Vthe evidence. The more intriguing question is how to strike the best balance.
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|Woexam.Com ( 湘ICP备18023104号 )

GMT+8, 2024-6-28 05:30 , Processed in 0.217027 second(s), 22 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4 Licensed

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表