Reading Comprehension Practice
English Verbal Ability Test for English Preparation and Practice Materials and Online Tests
Questions
Three percent deficit criteria
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- was the issue for the policy makers
- was necessary for membership in the integration
- was hardly found in most of the nations
- was expected to be achieved in every nation after the currency union
The criterion that the budget deficit should remain below 3% of the GDP may not prove effective in the long run. This is the view of
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- European Union leaders
- Germany's administrative officers
- Bundesbank officials
- the author
The passage is mainly about
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- the importance of fiscal policy.
- the German policies for currency union in Europe.
- the criteria necessary for currency union.
- the talks before the currency union.
According to the passage, the talk of a delay in implementation of the EMU plan has acquired heat because
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- many nations have yet not stabilized their economies
- the German economy is not in a condition to fulfill the required criteria
- now most nations are seeing an inherent defect in the plan itself
- the key criteria for budget deficit has not been fulfilled by most nations
'The Maastricht Treaty' describes
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- the important entry criteria
- the foreign rates of the nations
- the economic condition of various nations
- the policies agreed to at by the members of the union
What do you infer about the policy of the currency union?
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- The currency union was intended to start by 1999.
- The currency union was planned by a few nations.
- Most European countries were in favor of the currency union.
- Nothing could be said about the outcomes of the policy.
Fiscal stability of the EMU is necessary because
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- it shows how stable the rates of the European union are
- it makes exchange rates far more stable
- it assures close monitoring of fiscal solidity of the members
- it leads to the actualization of the common currency concept
From the passage, it can be made out that
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- Bundesbank is not the national bank of 'Germany
- the state central bank of Germany has different presidents for different branches of the bank
- Bundesbank is the central bank of Germany
- the European Currency union will not start with the plan by 1999
The word recession in the passage is closest in meaning to
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- defect
- poverty
- growth
- slump
The main thrust of the passage may be said to be the...
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- distribution of labour
- allocation of resource
- labour saving devices
- labour law of torts
The tone of the passage may be said to be
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- descriptive
- narrative
- analytical
- introspective
According to the author, different arrangements are possible for what?
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- Slavery and leisure.
- Division of labor, leisure and wealth.
- Slavery, serfdom, feudalism and wealth.
- Slavery, equitable division of labour, leisure and wealth.
According to the passage the 'burden of labour' has been imposed on us by
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- God
- mankind
- nature
- the need to eat
On the basis of the passage it can be inferred that the writer is a
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- socialist
- pragmatist
- radical reformer
- capitalist
Which of the following is a solution given by the author for the betterment of labour
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- that one person put in ten hours a day to support ten persons in luxury
- that everyone works longer than needed but after a certain age and education
- that everyone should be given better wages
- that work is divided up between the work in such a way that there is an equal distribution
Which of the following has not been mentioned as a helpful entity?
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- Water power
- Modern machinery
- Labour power
- Steam power
The word stunt in the passage is closest in meaning to
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- pacify
- end
- boost
- lower
The meaning of 'leisure' as used in the passage is
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- freedom
- pleasure
- enjoyment
- goodness
It may be inferred from the passage that Kennedy was...
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- a President
- the President of the United States
- a President of a Multinational company
- a very high ranking official of the american army
According to the passage, the Triple Underpass is most probably
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- a book depository
- a freeway
- a plaza
- a tunnel
In paragraph 3 of the passage, what does the author mean by the expression 'the crowds thinned out'?
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- That the people started to lose interest and went away to some other interesting places.
- That Kennedy thought that the people in Dallas were really thin.
- That the number of people who stood to watch the president started to reduce.
- That the people started to move out from the ground.
The word phalanx as used in the passage means
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- a large group
- army
- formation
- truck full of
It may be inferred that the described attempt of murder took place in...
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- Dallas
- Texas
- Minnesota
- Washington
The tunnel that came on the way brought a smile on the face of Mrs. Kennedy because
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- she could stop the car and have some cool water
- she could rest their hands as she would not have to wave them
- it would be safe in there
- it would provide them respite from the heat
It can be inferred from the passage that
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- Mrs. Kennedy did not see her husband being shot perhaps because her face was turned in the opposite direction
- Mrs. Kennedy could not protect her husband because her face was turned in the opposite direction
- Greers slowing down of the car was deliberate
- the people of Dallas had no love lost for the Kennedys
According to the passage how many people were in Kennedys car when he was shot?
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- Four
- Five
- Six
- Three
The writer develops the idea in the passage by
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- referring to different economic models
- analysing the various economic isms in the world
- positing possible methods by which labour can be divided
- analysing how the rich thrive at the expense of the poor
What do we come to know about the condition of Germany from the passage?
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- Germany, inspite of taking the initial steps, is feared to not fulfill the criteria.
- Germany is the decisive and the most developed economy in Europe.
- Germany lacks few criteria to be a part of the integration.
- Germany had planned the currency union and criteria for it.
By giving the example of the island and the cocoa-nuts in the passage, the author wants
Passage –II
Before there can be any wealth to divide up, there must be labour at work. There can be no loaves without farmers and bakers. There are a few little islands thousands of miles away where men and women can lie basking in the sun and live on the cocoa-nuts the monkeys throw down to them. But for us there is no such possibility. Without incessant daily labour we should starve, if anyone is idle, someone else must be working for both or there would be nothing for either of them to eat. That was why St Paul said ‘If a man will not work neither shall he eat. The burden of labour is imposed on us by nature, and has to be divided up and so is the wealth produced by it.
But the two divisions need not correspond to one another. One person has to produce much more than enough to feed him/her. Otherwise the young children could not be fed; and the old people who are past work would starve. Many a woman with nothing to help her but her two hands has brought up a family on her own earnings, and kept her aged parents into the bargain, besides making rent for a landlord as well. And with the help of water power, steam power, electric power, and modern machinery, labour can be so organised that one woman can turn out more than a thousand women could turn out 150 years ago.
This saving of labour by harnessing machines to natural forces, like wind and water and the heat latent in coal, produces leisure, which also has to be divided up. If one person's labour for ten hours can support ten persons for a day, the ten can arrange in several different ways. They can put the ten hours work on one person and let the other nine have all the leisure as well as free rations. Or they can each do one hour's work a day and each of them will have nine hours leisure. Or they can have anything between these extremes. They can also arrange that three of them shall work ten hours a day each producing enough for thirty people, so that the other seven will not only have nothing to do, but will be able to eat enough for fourteen and to keep thirteen servants to wait on them and keep the three up to their work into the bargain.
- to show that one cannot usually get to live a nice life without working
- to show that the number of people who live on tropical islands and eat cocoa-nuts are few
- to prove his theory that one group of people consumes while the other produces
- to show how monkeys are trained to do manual work for in some islands
Creative accounting in the passage refers to
Passage – I
The European Union must launch its planned single currency on time or risk serious set-backs even though Germany- the driving force behind integration- might itself miss key entry targets, senior German central bank officials said on Monday night.
Three members of the Bundesbank’s ruling council, speaking at separate events in Germany, warned that nations struggling to meet the fiscal entry criteria while still recovering from severe recession should avoid any temptation to postpone the 1999 start of the monetary union.
Although this might seem like a less painful, and therefore, a desirable option, Mr. Guntram Palm, president of the state central bank in Beden Wuerttemberg, said all talk of delaying the start date was “totally misplaced”.
Such a decision would lend to an immediate, severe appreciation of the German mark, which would hurt German exports as well as stunt nation’s efforts to achieve a further consolidation of finances.
One reason that talk of a delay has reached new heights might be that so many nations, including Germany, risked missing the key criteria which call for an aspiring nation’s budget deficit to remain below three percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and that its debt should not exceed a reference value of 60 percent of the GDP.
Klaus-Dieter Kuehbacher, president of the state central bank in Berlin and Brandenburg, said that he doubted whether the German government would reach its goal of holding its budget deficit to 2.9 percent of GDP in 1997.
But the three also acknowledged that the deficit goal was only one of a number of entry criteria and that it might ultimately not be the most instrumental to sustaining a stable currency union.
The Maastricht Treaty also states that participating nations must present stable foreign exchange rates as well as low long-term interest and inflation rates and many more nations fulfill these goals.
“In my opinion, European currency union can start in January 1999, while conforming to those EMU convergence criteria that are most often discussed.” said Ernst Welteke, president of the state central bank in Hesse. Welteke said he wondered how a budget deficit of less than three percent would be good for stability, while a budget deficit of slightly more than three percent would be negative.
At the same time, he added, “Fiscal stability in currency union is naturally a very important asset as it ensures that fiscal solidity of the individual members can be closely monitored.”
Fearing strict entry criteria could give way to creative book-keeping, Mr. Palm said, “A trick-free deficit of just over three percent in 1997 that will be further reduced in following years due to savings efforts is preferable to 2.9 percent reached through creative accounting.”
Mr. Welteke added that the three percent deficit criteria should not be a knock-out criteria”, prohibiting any nation just over that level from entering. Both Mr. Palm and Mr. Welteke feel the currency union will go ahead as planned with Germany and France, noting that a currency union without them would make little sense. Officials, however, part ways on whether the union will be a small or a slightly larger one at the beginning. Mr. Palm noticing that most nations already meeting the other criteria, forecasts a bigger circle, but Mr. Kuehbacher saw fewer members.
- creative book-keeping
- the accounts which are specifically made by creative persons
- the adjustment in the budget to attain a target
- the accounts based on unreal transactions
According to the passage, Mrs. Connally was
Passage –III
With a phalanx of Dallas police motorcycle officers clearing the way ahead, the big limousine carrying the Kennedy family made a 90-degree turn from Main onto Houston in front of the Dallas County Sheriff's Office. Almost two dozen deputies and other lawmen stood on the sidewalk watching.
Atop the building was a large Hertz Rent-A-Car sign that had a digital time and temperature display. In front of the Depository, the limousine slowed to a crawl to make a 120-degree turn onto Elm Street, although turns of more than 90-degrees were prohibited by the Secret Service. The turn was so tight that Greer almost ran the limousine up onto the north curb near the Depository's front door, according to Depository Superintendent Roy Truly.
The car continued a slow glide down the incline of Elm into Dealey Plaza, maintaining its position in the center lane of the three-lane street. The crowds thinned out as the Triple Underpass approached and security men began to relax. About three car lengths ahead of the presidential limousine in the lead car, Agent Lawson, a former Army counterintelligence man now with the Secret Service White House detail was sitting in the right front seat. He looked at his watch. It was 12:30 p.m. Picking up the car's microphone; he radioed the Trade Mart saying: 'We'll be there in about five minutes.’
In the presidential limousine, Kennedy was waving to his right hand at a group of people standing near a sign reading STEMMONS FREEWAY. His right arm and hand was slightly over the side of the car. Mrs. Kennedy had been waving to her left, but her thoughts were on the Texas heat. Mrs. Kennedy later told the Warren Commission: 'And in the motorcade, I waved to the left side and Mr. Kennedy was waving mostly to the right and that explains why we were not looking at each other very often. The climate also was very inhospitable; it was extremely hot and the heat was blinding us.’ Sensing her discomfort, Mrs. Connally, an old acquaintance of Mrs. Kennedy’s, turned and said: 'We'll soon be there.'
Mrs. Kennedy recalled seeing the Triple Underpass ahead: We saw that we were approaching an underpass, which I thought at the time was a blessing for us as it would offer respite from the heat.’ Mrs. Connally had wanted to mention the warm and enthusiastic welcome for some time, but she had held back. Now she could contain herself no longer. Turning to Kennedy, she said: 'Mr. President, you can't say that Dallas doesn’t love you.' According to Mrs. Kennedy, the President smiled and replied: 'No, you certainly can’t.’
Soon after this remark Mrs. Connally heard a frightening noise off to her right. She looked in that direction and caught a peripheral glimpse of Kennedy raising both hands to his neck. She heard no sound from the President, but noticed a blank, ‘nothing' expression on his face. Kellerman, sitting directly in front of Connally and Kennedy, noticed they had just passed a highway sign when he heard a 'pop' to his right and immediately looked in that direction, surveying the easternmost slope of the Grassy Knoll. Kellerman told the Warren Commission: turning to the right to view whatever it was ...I heard someone saying that he had been hit and I was pretty sure that it was the president. Also I remember him putting his hands up here like this [indicating both hands up near the head] . . . [It] was enough for me to verify that the man was hit.
Immediately after this I grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, “Let’s get out of here we’re hit,” and agin I spoke into the microphone, ’Lawson, this is Kellerman………we are hit and need to go to the hospital immediately.’ And just as I talking , I heard a flurry of shells come into the car.
Mrs. Connally testified she heard Kellerman say: 'Pull out of the motorcade. Take us to the nearest hospital.' The limousine indeed pulled out of the motorcade and raced to Parkland Hospital.
Driver Greer said he was busy looking ahead to the railroad overpass when he heard a noise he thought was a motorcade backfire. Then he heard the noise again and caught a glimpse of Connally starting to slump over. He then heard two more noises that seemed to come one on top of the other. Greer said after the second noise and a glance over his right shoulder at Connally, he stepped on the accelerator. However, a film taken that day shows the limousine brake lights remained on until after the fatal shot to Kennedy.
- the Kennedy's personal secretary.
- the governor of Dallas.
- a friend of the Kennedys.
- Mrs. Kennedy's friend from Dallas.