PASSAGE ONE
(1)Life can be tough for immigrants in America. As a Romanian bank clerk inAtlanta puts it, to find a good job “you have to be like a wolf in the forest —able to smell out the best meat.” And if you can't find work, don't expect thetaxpayer to bail you out. Unlike in some European countries, it is extremelyhard for an able-bodied immigrant to live off the state. A law passed in 1996explicitly bars most immigrants, even those with legal status, from receivingalmost any federal benefits.
(2)That is one reason why America absorbs immigrants better than many other richcountries, according to a new study by the University of California.Theresearchers sought to measure the effect of immigration on the native-born in20 rich countries,taking into account differences in skills between immigrantsand natives, imperfect labor markets and the size of the welfare state in eachcountry.
(3)Their results offer ammunition for fans of more open borders. In 19 out of 20countries, the authors calculated that shutting the doors entirely to foreign workerswould make the native-born worse off,Never mind what it would do to theimmigrants themselves, who benefit far more than anyone else from being allowedto cross borders to find work.
(4)Thestudy also suggests that most countries could handle more immigration than theycurrently allow. In America, a one-percentage point increase in the proportionof immigrants in the population made the native- born 0.05% better off. Theopposite was true in some countries with generous or ill-designed welfare states,however. A one-point rise in immigration made the native-born slightly worseoff in Austria, Belgium, German Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden andSwitzerland. In Belgium, immigrants who lose jobs can receive almost two-thirdsof their most recent wage in state benefits,which must make the hunt for a newjob less urgent.
(5)None of these effects was large, but the study undermines the claim thatimmigrants steal jobs from natives or drag down their wages. Many immigrantstake jobs that Americans do not want, the study finds. This“smooths” the labormarket and ultimately creates more jobs for locals. Native-owned grocery storesdo better business because there are immigrants to pick the fruit they sell.Indian computer scientists help American software firms expand. A previousstudy found that because immigrants typically earn less than locals withsimilar skills,they boost corporate profits, prompting companies to grow andhire more locals.
PART V READING COMPREHENSION [35MIN]
SECTION A MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
Inthis section there are three passages followed by ten multiple choicequestions. For each multiple choice question,there are four suggested answersmarked A, B, C and D. Choose the one that you think is the best answer and markyour answers on ANSWER SHEET TWO.
PASSAGE ONE
(1)Life can be tough for immigrants in America. As a Romanian bank clerk inAtlanta puts it, to find a good job “you have to be like a wolf in the forest —able to smell out the best meat.” And if you can't find work, don't expect thetaxpayer to bail you out. Unlike in some European countries, it is extremelyhard for an able-bodied immigrant to live off the state. A law passed in 1996explicitly bars most immigrants, even those with legal status, from receivingalmost any federal benefits.
(2)That is one reason why America absorbs immigrants better than many other richcountries, according to a new study by the University of California.Theresearchers sought to measure the effect of immigration on the native-born in20 rich countries,taking into account differences in skills between immigrantsand natives, imperfect labor markets and the size of the welfare state in eachcountry.
(3)Their results offer ammunition for fans of more open borders. In 19 out of 20countries, the authors calculated that shutting the doors entirely to foreign workerswould make the native-born worse off,Never mind what it would do to theimmigrants themselves, who benefit far more than anyone else from being allowedto cross borders to find work.
(4)Thestudy also suggests that most countries could handle more immigration than theycurrently allow. In America, a one-percentage point increase in the proportionof immigrants in the population made the native- born 0.05% better off. Theopposite was true in some countries with generous or ill-designed welfare states,however. A one-point rise in immigration made the native-born slightly worseoff in Austria, Belgium, German Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden andSwitzerland. In Belgium, immigrants who lose jobs can receive almost two-thirdsof their most recent wage in state benefits,which must make the hunt for a newjob less urgent.
(5)None of these effects was large, but the study undermines the claim thatimmigrants steal jobs from natives or drag down their wages. Many immigrantstake jobs that Americans do not want, the study finds. This“smooths” the labormarket and ultimately creates more jobs for locals. Native-owned grocery storesdo better business because there are immigrants to pick the fruit they sell.Indian computer scientists help American software firms expand. A previousstudy found that because immigrants typically earn less than locals withsimilar skills,they boost corporate profits, prompting companies to grow andhire more locals.
