The world economy has been growing at its fastest for a generation．Money，goods and ideas mow around the globe more freely than they have for at least a century--maybe more than ever，when yoo think of modern communication and China’s re-emergence．①So why all the gripes and grumbles?The problem，as some see it，is that workers in rich countries are not getting a fair whack．Their share ot income has been shrinking for the past quarter of a century，most markedly in continental Europe and Japan．The new order may be just dandy for capitalists，but not for those who toil by hand or brain．
In its semi-annual World Economic Outlook，the IMF examines how trade。technology and immigration have stitched the world’s labour markets together at an astonishing rate，leaving rich— country workers unsure of where they stand．②Weighting each country’s workforce by its ratio of exports to GDP，the IMF estimates that global labour supply has in effect risen fourfold since l98o as China， India and once-communist countries have opened up．o Most of the extra workers got no further than secondary school(although the relative supply of graduates has gone up by 5 o％)．With this surge of competition，you might expect labour’s share of the pie to shrink．
In some cases，the competition is direct：workers cross borders to take jobs in rich countries． Although unwelcome in many places，immigrants’share of the workforce has risen a lot in some European countries(notably Britain，Germany and Italy)and in America，where it is close to 15％．④ The more important channel，though，is trade：largely because of China，developing countries’share of rich countries’manufacturing imports has doubled since the early l 99os．“offshorin9”一shifting production，especially of intermediate goods and some services，abroad--has been on the rise，although the IMF notes that it has grown more slowly than total trade．
Globalisation is not the only possible reason why labour’s share has shrunk．New technologies have probably taken a few degrees off the workers’slice too．Technological change had the biggest effect in Europe and Japan．In Anglo-Saxon countries(America，Australia，Britain and Canada)it was much smaller．
The effects of labour globalisation were most evident in AngoSaxon and small European countries． However，it has touched different places in different ways．In Europe the effects of offshoring and immigration have been more marked than in the AngloSaxon world；in Japan they have scarcely registered．The labour-intensive goods that rich countries import have fallen in price，pressing down on the workers’share．But this has been broadly offset by price falls in the capital—intensive goods they export．In Japan these prices fell by enough to yield an overall net gain in the labour share．[456 words]
1．By referring to China’s reemergence，the author intends to show______．
A．why there are so many gripes and grumbles
B．the unfairness of the world’s labour markets
C．the increased globalization in the world economy
D．the smaller share of income labour can expect to get
2．Labor’s share of income in rich countries has been shrinking mainly because of______．
A．the rapid increase of global labour supply
B．the low educational level of extra workers
C the opening up of once-communist countries
D．the higher ratio of each country’s exports to GDP
3．The fact that“offshoring has been on the rise”is used to show that______．
A．it has grown more slowly than totaI trade
B．China’s share of rich countries’imports is the largest
C．immigrants’share of the workforce has risen considerably
D．workers in rich countries face sharp competition from abroad
4．The author argues that the chief possible reason for labour’s smaller share of income is______．
A．1abour globalisation
B．technological change
C．the freer international trade
D．the fast-growing immigration
5．It can be inferred from the last paragraph that______．
A．1abour—intensive goods should not be imported
B．Japan is least vulnerable to labour globalisation
C．the effects of offshoring and immigration have been scarce
D．the effects of labour globalization vary from country to country
In its semi-annual World Economic Outlook，the IMF examines how trade。technology and immigration have stitched the world’s labour markets together at an astonishing rate，leaving rich— country workers unsure of where they stand．②Weighting each country’s workforce by its ratio of exports to GDP，the IMF estimates that global labour supply has in effect risen fourfold since l98o as China， India and once-communist countries have opened up．o Most of the extra workers got no further than secondary school(although the relative supply of graduates has gone up by 5 o％)．With this surge of competition，you might expect labour’s share of the pie to shrink．
In some cases，the competition is direct：workers cross borders to take jobs in rich countries． Although unwelcome in many places，immigrants’share of the workforce has risen a lot in some European countries(notably Britain，Germany and Italy)and in America，where it is close to 15％．④ The more important channel，though，is trade：largely because of China，developing countries’share of rich countries’manufacturing imports has doubled since the early l 99os．“offshorin9”一shifting production，especially of intermediate goods and some services，abroad--has been on the rise，although the IMF notes that it has grown more slowly than total trade．
Globalisation is not the only possible reason why labour’s share has shrunk．New technologies have probably taken a few degrees off the workers’slice too．Technological change had the biggest effect in Europe and Japan．In Anglo-Saxon countries(America，Australia，Britain and Canada)it was much smaller．
The effects of labour globalisation were most evident in AngoSaxon and small European countries． However，it has touched different places in different ways．In Europe the effects of offshoring and immigration have been more marked than in the AngloSaxon world；in Japan they have scarcely registered．The labour-intensive goods that rich countries import have fallen in price，pressing down on the workers’share．But this has been broadly offset by price falls in the capital—intensive goods they export．In Japan these prices fell by enough to yield an overall net gain in the labour share．[456 words]
1．By referring to China’s reemergence，the author intends to show______．
A．why there are so many gripes and grumbles
B．the unfairness of the world’s labour markets
C．the increased globalization in the world economy
D．the smaller share of income labour can expect to get
2．Labor’s share of income in rich countries has been shrinking mainly because of______．
A．the rapid increase of global labour supply
B．the low educational level of extra workers
C the opening up of once-communist countries
D．the higher ratio of each country’s exports to GDP
3．The fact that“offshoring has been on the rise”is used to show that______．
A．it has grown more slowly than totaI trade
B．China’s share of rich countries’imports is the largest
C．immigrants’share of the workforce has risen considerably
D．workers in rich countries face sharp competition from abroad
4．The author argues that the chief possible reason for labour’s smaller share of income is______．
A．1abour globalisation
B．technological change
C．the freer international trade
D．the fast-growing immigration
5．It can be inferred from the last paragraph that______．
A．1abour—intensive goods should not be imported
B．Japan is least vulnerable to labour globalisation
C．the effects of offshoring and immigration have been scarce
D．the effects of labour globalization vary from country to country