Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:English for Senior Students. Part 1. Учебное пособие
.pdf
Task 7. Translate into English.
Появление термина "глобализация" может быть связано
с именем американского социолога Р. Робертсона, который
в 1985 году дал толкование понятию "глобализация".
Глобализация – это процесс воздействия различных
экономических и политических, а также культурного
и информационного обмена на социальную действительность
в отдельных странах. Глобализация подразумевает образование единого международного экономического, правового
и культурно-информационного пространства. Иными словами, феномен глобализации выходит за экономические рамки
и оказывает заметное влияние на все основные сферы
общественной деятельности – политику, идеологию, культуру. Он, несомненно, должен будет играть определяющую
роль в мировой экономике XXI в., формируя новую систему
международных экономических и политических отношений.
Если бы не было глобализации, международная
конкуренция не была столь явной. Можно назвать еще одно
преимущество глобализации – экономия на масштабах
производства, что потенциально может привести к сокращению издержек и снижению цен, а, следовательно,
к устойчивому экономическому росту.
Необходимо было бы сказать, благодаря глобализации
существенно снижены тарифы, устранены многие иные
барьеры в торговле товарами и услугами.
Глобализация сказывается на экономике всех стран. Она
затрагивает производство товаров и услуг, использование
рабочей силы, инвестиции, технологии и их распространение
из одних стран в другие. Процесс глобализации экономики
ускорился в последние десятилетия, когда различные рынки,
в частности, капитала, технологии и товаров.
21
Наконец, в результате глобализации происходит рост
торговли услугами, включая финансовые, юридические,
управленческие, информационные услуг, которые превращаются в основной фактор международных торговых
отношений. Если в 1970 г. с экспортом услуг было связано
менее 1/3 прямых иностранных инвестиций, то в настоящее
время эта доля возросла до 50%.
Task 8. Read the article and answer the questions.
1. Why does the author believe that the USA may be on the
wrong side of Globalization?
2. What is TPP?
3. What do trade agreement boosters claim?
On the Wrong Side of Globalization
By Joseph E. Stiglitz
March 15, 2014
Trade agreements are a subject that can cause the eyes to
glaze over, but we should all be paying attention. Right now,
there are trade proposals in the works that threaten to put most
Americans on the wrong side of globalization.
In his State of the Union address President Obama referred
to ―new trade partnerships‖ that would ―create more jobs.‖ Most
immediately at issue is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP,
which would bring together 12 countries along the Pacific Rim
in what would be the largest free trade area in the world.
Negotiations for the TPP began in 2010, for the purpose of
increasing trade and investment, through lowering tariffs and
other trade barriers among participating countries. But the TPP
negotiations have been taking place in secret, forcing us to rely
on guesses. At the same time, Congress introduced a bill this
year that would grant the White House authority, under which
22
Congress simply approves or rejects whatever trade agreement is
put before it, without revisions or amendments.
This is controversial. It is easy to imagine the shape of the
whole TPP, and it doesn‘t look good. There is a real risk that it
will benefit global elite at the expense of everyone else. The fact
that such a plan is under consideration at all is testament to how
deeply inequality is manifested our economic policies.
Worse, agreements like the TPP are only one aspect of
a larger problem: our gross mismanagement of globalization.
Let‘s tackle the history first. In general, trade deals today are
markedly different from those made in the decades following
World War II, when negotiations focused on lowering tariffs. As
tariffs came down on all sides, trade expanded, and each country
could develop the sectors in which it had strengths and as
a result, standards of living would rise. Some jobs would be lost,
but new jobs would be created.
Today, the purpose of trade agreements is different. Tariffs
around the world are already low. The focus has shifted to
―nontariff barriers,‖ and the most important of these – for the
corporate interests pushing agreements – are regulations. Huge
multinational corporations complain that inconsistent
regulations make business costly. But most of the regulations,
even if they are imperfect, are there for a reason: to protect
workers, consumers, the economy and the environment.
What‘s more, those regulations were often put in place by
governments responding to the democratic demands of their
citizens. Trade agreements‘ new boosters claim that they are
simply after regulatory harmonization, a clean-sounding phrase
that implies an innocent plan to promote efficiency. One could,
of course, get regulatory harmonization by strengthening
regulations to the highest standards everywhere. But when
corporations call for harmonization, what they really mean is a
race to the bottom.
23
In this series, I have repeatedly made two points: The first is
that the high level of inequality in the United States today, and
its enormous increase during the past 30 years, is the cumulative
result of an array of policies, programs and laws. Given that the
president himself has emphasized that inequality should be the
country‘s top priority, every new policy, program or law should be
examined from the perspective of its impact on inequality.
Agreements like the TPP have contributed to this inequality.
Corporations may profit, and it is even possible, that gross
domestic product as conventionally measured will increase. But
the well-being of ordinary citizens is likely to decrease.
And this brings me to the second point that I have repeatedly
emphasized: Trickle-down economics is a myth. Enriching
corporations – as the TPP would – will not necessarily help those
in the middle, let alone those at the bottom [5].
Ex. A. Find in the text the equivalents of the following
words and word combinations.
1) under discussion
2) unite
3) depend on with full trust or confidence
4) become clear or obvious to the eye or mind
5) make determined efforts to deal with
6) change the emphasis, direction, or focus
7) not compatible
8) a person or thing that helps increase or promote
something
9) suggest (something) as a logical consequence
10) a collection of things of a series of events
Ex. B. Decide whether the statements are true or false.
1. Americans would not like the idea to be on the wrong side
of globalization.
24
2. The Trans-Pacific Partnership implies raising tariffs and
It is an economic idea which states that
decreasing tax rates - especially for corporations,
investors and entrepreneurs - can stimulate
production in the overall economy. According to
trickle-down theory proponents, this stimulus leads
to economic growth and wealth creation that benefits
everyone, not just those who pay the lower tax rates.
Do you agree or disagree?
trade barriers.
3. The situation around the Trans-Pacific Partnership is
clear and transparent.
4. Inconsistent regulations make business more expensive
to run.
5. Ordinary citizens will benefit from the TPP.
Ex. C. Read about trickle-down economics and express
your opinion:
25
Task 9. Read the article and translate it into Russian.
Economic history
When did globalisation start?
―GLOBALISATION‖ has become the buzzword of the last two
decades. The sudden increase in the exchange of knowledge,
trade and capital around the world, driven by technological
innovation, from the internet to shipping containers, thrust the
term into the limelight.
Some see globalisation as a good thing. According to Amartya
Sen, a Nobel-Prize winning economist, globalisation ―has
enriched the world scientifically and culturally, and benefited
many people economically as well‖. The United Nations has even
predicted that the forces of globalisation may have the power to
eradicate poverty in the 21st century.
Others disagree. Globalisation has been attacked by critics of
free market economics, like the economists Joseph Stiglitz and
Ha-Joon Chang, for perpetuating inequality in the world rather
than reducing it. Some agree that they may have a point. The
International Monetary Fund admitted in 2007 that inequality
levels may have been increased by the introduction of new
technology and the investment of foreign capital in developing
countries. Others, in developed nations, distrust globalisation as
well. They fear that it often allows employers to move jobs away
to cheaper places. In France, ―globalisation‖ and ―délocalisation‖
have become derogatory terms for free market policies. An April
2012 survey by IFOP, a pollster, found that only 22% of French
people thought globalisation a ―good thing‖ for their country.
However, economic historians reckon the question of whether
the benefits of globalisation outweigh the downsides is more
complicated than this. For them, the answer depends on when
you say the process of globalisation started. But why does it
26
matter whether globalisation started 20, 200, or even 2,000 years
ago? Their answer is that it is impossible to say how much of a
―good thing‖ a process is in history without first defining for how
long it has been going on.
Early economists would certainly have been familiar with the
general concept that markets and people around the world were
becoming more integrated over time. Although Adam Smith
himself never used the word, globalisation is a key theme in the
Wealth of Nations. His description of economic development has
as its underlying principle the integration of markets over time.
As the division of labour enables output to expand, the search for
specialisation expands trade, and gradually, brings communities
from disparate parts of the world together. The trend is nearly as
old as civilisation. Primitive divisions of labour, between
―hunters‖ and ―shepherds‖, grew as villages and trading
networks expanded to include wider specialisations. Eventually
armourers to craft bows and arrows, carpenters to build houses,
and seamstress to make clothing all appeared as specialist
artisans, trading their wares for food produced by the hunters
and shepherds. As villages, towns, countries and continents
started trading goods that they were efficient at making for ones
they were not, markets became more integrated, as specialisation
and trade increased. This process starts to sound rather like
―globalisation‖, even if it was more limited in geographical area
than what most people think of the term today [5].
27
UNIT 2
EMPLOYMENT
―To win in the marketplace you
must first win in the workplace.‖
Doug Conant, CEO of
Campbell’s Soup
_________ vocabulary _________
Task 1. Read and learn the following words and word
career
n.
1. A job or profession which one intends
to follow with opportunities for
advancement or promotion.
e.g. What is your future career?
2. The general course of a person‘s
working life e.g. She spent most of her
career as a lawyer in London.
career
adj.
Professional e.g. He‘s a career soldier.
occupation
n.
1. Job, employment
e.g. He has chosen a rare occupation.
2. Activity that occupies a person‘s time
e.g. His favourite occupation is reading.
3. Action of occupying e.g. Part of the
country was under enemy occupation.
occupational
adj.
Connected with a person‘s job
e.g. an occupational advice service,
occupational diseases.
expressions.
28
job
n.
1. Regularly paid position or post
e.g. Thousands of workers lost their
jobs when the factory closed; a parttime job, a full-time job.
2. Piece of work, task or assignment,
pay somebody by the job, do a fine job.
e.g. It was quite a job finding his flat.
3. Responsibility or function
e.g. It‘s not my job to lock up.
jobless
adj.
Unemployed; to be out of job e.g. The
number of jobless people is increasing.
apply
v.
1. Make a formal request e.g. You
should apply immediately, in person or
by letter. Apply for a job (passport, visa,
position).
2. Use e.g. apply the ointment (the
glue, etс.), apply economic sanctions,
apply force.
applicant
n.
1. A person who applies, especially, for
a job, a job applicant e.g. a long waiting
list of applicants for jobs.
2. A person who takes entrance exams to
a university e.g. There are many appli-
cants to get a place at this university.
application
n.
1. A formal request e.g. We received
400 applications for a job.
2. Use e.g. Three applications a day.
The new invention will have a lot of
applications in our industry.
employ
(antonym:
sack, fire)
v.
1. Give work to somebody
e.g. How many people have you
employed recently ?
29
2. Make use of, occupy (time, attention,
etс.) e.g. You could employ your spare
time better.
employer
n.
Person or company that gives jobs to
others
e.g. My employer is a good manager.
employment
n.
1. Act of employing
e.g. employment has always been an
urgent issue.
2. Occupation
e.g. give employment to somebody, find
employment, government employment
office.
labour
n.
1. Physical or mental work.
e.g. Workers are paid for their labour.
2. pl. Task, piece of work
e.g. tired after one‘s labours.
3. Workers as a group or class
e.g. skilled/unskilled labour, labour
leaders, labour union = trade union
salary
n.
The money that someone is paid for the
job each month, especially when they
have a professional or other nonmanual job
e.g. Salaries mare usually paid directly
into their bank account or by cheque.
wage
n.
1. Is the amount of money that is
regularly paid to someone or to a
group of people for a particular type of
work, especially manual or unskilled
work
e.g. Tomorrow union leaders meet the
30
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]