05期美国执业证照准则在阻止竞赛~~考研英语题源外刊赏析

ⅱfully 22% of american workers must hold licences simply to do their jobs, up from just 5% in 1950. licences make it harder to enter a profession. not everyone can afford to pay a registration fee or take time to study for an exam before being allowed to do a certain job. the beneficiaries from such barriers to entry are incumbent workers, whose wages rise when competition is chilled.

ⅲlicensing rules are enacted in the name of consumer protection. but tasks like issuing some prescriptions or drafting routine legal documents rarely require years of expensive postgraduate education. they may even be done better by a specialist who has fewer formal qualifications. the evidence from states where highly trained nurses can operate freely suggests that they provide just as good primary care as doctors do. yet more than half of states restrict their practice, often requiring them to operate under supervision from doctors, who, naturally, charge a huge fee for the privilege.

ⅳsome labour-market regulation makes sense. when buyers cannot easily judge quality, the state may need to step in. but there are pitfalls. because lawmakers also lack the expertise to judge who can safely perform, say, a dental procedure, they often ask professions to regulate themselves. inevitably, state bar associations charged with deciding what tasks should count as “practising law” tend to shut out non-lawyers.

ⅴthere are better ways to help consumers. the government can issue qualifications and titles, but leave consumers to decide whether such diplomas are a valuable signal of quality. or the government can use inspections instead of licences. inspections can tie in with credentials, as when restaurants receive health-and-safety certificates to display to customers.

ⅵmarket forces are often best of all, in spite of information asymmetries. brain surgery may be complex, but it is unlicensed, beyond the need for surgeons to have medical degrees. people tend to make better choices for themselves than governments, more so in a world of online reviews and price-comparison websites. the state should favour the flow of information by requiring transparent contracts. if buyers are exploited, they should have recourse through the courts.

ⅶmilton friedman said that you can tell who benefits from licensing by watching who lobbies for it—and rarely is that consumers. letting professions wield the power of government against potential competitors is foolish and costly. when licensing is inevitable, regulators should aim to promote competition as well as protect consumers. licensing running wild not only poisons markets, it also poisons sentiment towards markets that fail.

首要逻辑联接：①首句some rush to引出“有些人”观念。rush to（急于，匆促）带贬义，暗示后文驳斥。②第二句援引数据，必定实际“美国财富不均”。③后两句以yet转机，清楚作者不一样观念。those who…回答首句观念；ignore…标明作者对其争辩反驳；末句清楚an awkward fact所指。中心要害词：labour markets are over-regulated（劳作力商场被过度控制）。

ⅱfully 22% of american workers must hold licences simply to do their jobs, up from just 5% in 1950. licences make it harder to enter a profession. not everyone can afford to pay a registration fee or take time to study for an exam before being allowed to do a certain job. the beneficiaries from such barriers to entry are incumbent workers, whose wages rise when competition is chilled.
【翻译】：如今整整22%的美国工人有必要持有执照才可从事其作业，1950年这一数据仅为5%。执照添加了入行的难度。并不是一切人都拿得出注册费或备考时刻，来获取从事某项作业的答应。这些准入门槛的获益者是现有作业者，冷却竞赛可使他们薪资上涨。
【点评】：ii 清楚“监管过度”所指——严苛的作业证照准则，并简述其负面影响。首要指出证照准则过于严苛。随后论说其负面影响。

首要逻辑联接：①首句借今昔数据比照（证照需求前进）、神态动词（must）以及偏重副词（fully、simply），印证上段末“政府监管过度”。②第二、三句指出加大入行难度，两句间为说明阐明联络。第四句进一步提示疑问：加剧收入不均（外人入行难vs. 现有行内助员薪资上涨），其间such barriers to entry概指第二、三句。中心要害词：①licenses（证照）；①barriers（妨碍）

ⅲlicensing rules are enacted in the name of consumer protection. but tasks like issuing some prescriptions or drafting routine legal documents rarely require years of expensive postgraduate education. they may even be done better by a specialist who has fewer formal qualifications. the evidence from states where highly trained nurses can operate freely suggests that they provide just as good primary care as doctors do. yet more than half of states restrict their practice, often requiring them to operate under supervision from doctors, who, naturally, charge a huge fee for the privilege.
【翻译】：执照规则是以维护花费者的名义发布的。但开某些处方或起草往常法令文件等作业无需多年名贵的研讨生教育。正式文凭较少的专业人员甚至可以做得非常好。来自那些答应受过高度练习的护士自立打开作业的州的根据标明，护士供给的初级医治和医生相同好。可是超对折的州在捆绑护士执业，常常需求他们在医生的监管下操作。天然，后者会为该特权收取高额费用。
【点评】：iii 打开驳斥：指出证照准则不只未能维护花费者，反而会加剧其担负。首要阐明执照规则打的是“维护花费者”（前进各作业效能质量）的名义。这今后以“医疗业景象”为例指出证照规则并未起到这一作用。

首要逻辑联接：①期间以but一分为二，构成“介绍—驳斥”规划。②第二、三句以they may even be done better（they =tasks like…）构成递进、初步进行争辩反驳：有些初级医疗作业不需要研讨生教育（指医生），受过高度练习的护士甚至可以结束非常好。③第四、五句以yet构成转机，进一步凸显疑问：清楚有些州的景象标明护士可以自立结束初级医治，而许多州却强行需求他们在医生监管下结束，且医生会为此特权收取高昂费用（即：反而添加了花费者经济担负）。the privilege替代上句“监管护士作业”。中心要害词：in the name of consumer protection（打着维护花费者的名义）。

ⅳsome labour-market regulation makes sense. when buyers cannot easily judge quality, the state may

need to step in. but there are pitfalls. because lawmakers also lack the expertise to judge who can safely perform, say, a dental procedure, they often ask professions to regulate themselves. inevitably, state bar associations charged with deciding what tasks should count as “practising law” tend to shut out non-lawyers.
【翻译】：有些劳作力商场监管也合情合理。当花费者难以判别（产品或效能的）质量时，政府可以需要介入。但其间存在一些风险。因为立法者们也短少有关专业常识去判别谁能平安结束比方牙科手术。他们常托付各作业进行自我监管。成果必定是，被指定担任抉择哪些作业归于“从事律师作业”的州律师协会一般会将非律师拒之门外。
【点评】：iv 持续驳斥：指出该准则促进“作业维护”（降低了社会活动性，加剧收入不均）。首要招认恰当监管可取。随后转而指出“监管存在风险”。最终具体阐明。

首要逻辑联接：①首两句构成“概述观念—详释观念”的逻辑，step in=regulate。②第三句以but转而指出监管存在风险（pitfalls），第四、五句具体阐明风险。inevitably…体现因果逻辑：立法者们需求各作业自行监管，这天然会使得各作业将别人拒之门外。中心要害词：①pitfalls（误区）。

ⅴthere are better ways to help consumers. the government can issue qualifications and titles, but leave consumers to decide whether such diplomas are a valuable signal of quality. or the government can use inspections instead of licences. inspections can tie in with credentials, as when restaurants receive health-and-safety certificates to display to customers.
【翻译】：协助花费者有非常好的方法。政府可以公布资历证和职称证，但让花费者抉择这些证书是不是有价值的质量标识。或许政府可用“查看”替代“证照”。“查看”可以联系“认证”，比如饭馆可获得清洁与平安认证以展示给顾客。
【点评】：v 提出主张：如何才干比现行证照准则非常好地维护花费者利益？首要总说“协助花费者有非常好的方法”。随后分说两种可行方案。

首要逻辑联接：①第二句和第三、四句以or 联接，阐明两种可行方案，然后说明首句（better ways）。②第二句阐明方案1：让花费者/商场抉择执照价值（是不是质量的有用标识）。③第三、四句阐明方案2：“查看” 替代证照准则，并与“认证”联系（inspections…tie in with credentials）。中心要害词：better ways to help consumers（协助花费者还有非常好的方案）。

ⅵmarket forces are often best of all, in spite of information asymmetries. brain surgery may be complex, but it is unlicensed, beyond the need for surgeons to have medical degrees. people tend to make better choices for themselves than governments, more so in a world of online reviews and price-comparison websites. the state should favour the flow of information by requiring transparent contracts. if buyers are exploited, they should have recourse through the courts.
【翻译】：商场力气一般是最佳方法，尽管存在信息不对称。脑外科手术或许凌乱，但它不需要执照，只需要外科医生具有医学学位。我们一般能比政府非常好地为自个进行选择，在如今在线谈论和比价网站盛行的世界更是如此。政府应当需求合同通明化，以推进信息活动。当花费者遭到克扣时，他们应当可以求助于法院。
【点评】：vi 指出“维护花费者利益”的最佳力气——商场力气。首要提出凭仗商场力气是最佳方法，只是“信息不对称”疑问简略阻止商场机制正常发扬作用。随后举例阐明商场力气的作用。最终提出“信息不对称”疑问的处置办法。

首要逻辑联接：①首句经过best of all顺承上段“可行方案”，引出“最佳方百铮②第二、三句说明首句market forces are often best of all，其间第二句举例验证：无需证照准则，商场力气可促进“能者居衫淠第三句偏重花费者（即商场力气）比政府可以做出非常好的选择。③第四、五句回答首句information asymmetries，提出政府应处置 “信息不对称”疑问。中心要害词：market forces are often best of all（商场力气一般是最佳方法）。

ⅶmilton friedman said that you can tell who benefits from licensing by watching who lobbies for it—and rarely is that consumers. letting professions wield the power of government against potential competitors is foolish and costly. when licensing is inevitable, regulators should aim to promote competition as well as protect consumers. licensing running wild not only poisons markets, it also poisons sentiment towards markets that fail.
【翻译】：米尔顿·弗里德曼曾说过，要想晓得谁获益于作业证照，只需看谁在为此游说——而这很少是花费者。让作业行使政府权力去阻挡潜在竞赛者，既愚笨又价值无量。假定证照准则不可以避免，那监管者们应尽力于推进竞赛以及维护花费者。不加控制的证照准则不只会毒害商场，也会毒害我们对失效商场的心境。
【点评】：vii 重申观念，结束全篇。首要援引闻名经济学家friedman言语偏重证照获益方并不是花费者。这今后重申对监管者的主张。最终提出警告：有必要对证照准则加以管控。

首要逻辑联接：①首句benefits from licensing和rarely is that consumers照顾第三段“执照规则无法维护花费者权益”及第二段“证照获益者是业界人员”，总括文旨。②第二句回答第四段“监管风险”，并以激烈贬义词foolish和costly明示作者情绪。③第三句则简括第五、六段主张，清楚作者观念。③末句经过并排规划和poison重复偏重：“不加管控的证照准则”将引起负面成果，呼吁监管者马上采纳办法。中心要害词：should aim to（应尽力于）。