Compared with that article, this one is ______ but not ______．

A．longer; as good        B．long; good        C．longest; best        D．long; so good

E
Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.
“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:
“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”
Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while Vhina will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing far better than Russia.
But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.
At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.
52．According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?
A．China.      B．Russia.     C．Brazil.      D．India.
53．According to Aslund, Russia shouldn’t be a BRIC partly because_______.
A．Russia’s economic performance is far worse than the other three
B．Russia’s leaders are not good at managing economy
C．Russia has taken effective measures to improve its economy
D．Russia will no longer attract investors from other countries
54．From the passage we know that ________.
A．Anders Aslund is working for the Russian government
B．Russia outperfoumed the other three countries in stock market
C．most people disagree Russia is included in BRICs
D．the BRICs would end up being the BICs sooner or later
55．The author seems to ________.
A．suggest it’s time to kick Russia out of the BRICs?
B．feel worried about the economy of the BRICs
C．think Russia is worth being one of the group
D．show disappointment to Russia’s economy

Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.

“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:

“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”

Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while Vhina will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing far better than Russia.

But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors（投資者）to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.

At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.

1．According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?

       A．China.                 B．Russia.                C．Brazil.                 D．India.

2．According to Aslund, Russia shouldn’t be a BRIC partly because        .

       A．Russia’s economic performance is far worse than the other three

       B．Russia’s leaders are not good at managing economy

       C．Russia has taken effective measures to improve its economy

       D．Russia will no longer attract investors from other countries

3．From the passage we know that        .

      A．Anders Aslund is working for the Russian government

       B．Russia outperfoumed the other three countries in stock market

       C．most people disagree Russia is included in BRICs

       D．the BRICs would end up being the BICs sooner or later

4．The author seems to        .

       A．suggest it’s time to kick Russia out of the BRICs?

       B．feel worried about the economy of the BRICs

       C．think Russia is worth being one of the group

       D．show disappointment to Russia’s economy

Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.

“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:

“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”

Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while China will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing

far better than Russia.

But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.

At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.

According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?

       A．China.      B．Russia.     C．Brazil.      D．India.

According to Aslund, Russia shouldn’t be a BRIC partly because_______.

       A．Russia’s economic performance is far worse than the other three

       B．Russia’s leaders are not good at managing economy

       C．Russia has taken effective measures to improve its economy

       D．Russia will no longer attract investors from other countries

From the passage we know that ________.

      A．Anders Aslund is working for the Russian government

       B．Russia outperfoumed the other three countries in stock market

       C．most people disagree Russia is included in BRICs

       D．the BRICs would end up being the BICs sooner or later

The author seems to ________.

       A．suggest it’s time to kick Russia out of the BRICs?

       B．feel worried about the economy of the BRICs

       C．think Russia is worth being one of the group

       D．show disappointment to Russia’s economy

Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.

“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:

“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”

Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while China will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing

far better than Russia.

But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.

At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.

1.According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?

2.According to Aslund, Russia shouldn’t be a BRIC partly because_______.

3.From the passage we know that ________.

4.The author seems to ________.

E

Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.

“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:

“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”

Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while Vhina will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing far better than Russia.

But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.

At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.

52．According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?

       A．China.      B．Russia.     C．Brazil.      D．India.

53．According to Aslund, Russia shouldn’t be a BRIC partly because_______.

       A．Russia’s economic performance is far worse than the other three

       B．Russia’s leaders are not good at managing economy

       C．Russia has taken effective measures to improve its economy

       D．Russia will no longer attract investors from other countries

54．From the passage we know that ________.

      A．Anders Aslund is working for the Russian government

       B．Russia outperfoumed the other three countries in stock market

       C．most people disagree Russia is included in BRICs

       D．the BRICs would end up being the BICs sooner or later

55．The author seems to ________.

       A．suggest it’s time to kick Russia out of the BRICs?

       B．feel worried about the economy of the BRICs

       C．think Russia is worth being one of the group

       D．show disappointment to Russia’s economy

Is it time to kick Russia out of the BRICs （金磚四國）? If so, it may end up sounding like a famous ball-point pen maker-BIC. An argument is being made that Goldman Sach’s famous marketing device（策略）,the BRICs, should really be the BICs.
“Is Russia really worth the name BRICs?” asks Anders Aslund, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, in an article for Foreigh Policy. Aslund, who is also co-author with Andrew Kuchins of “The Russian Balance Sheet”, thinks the Russia of Putin and Medvedev is just not worthy of inclusion alongside Brazil, India and China in the list of future economic powerhouses. He writes:
“The country’s economic performance has fallen to such a weak level that one must ask whether it has any say at all on the global economy, compared with the other members of its group. I have just returned from Moscow, which is always dull around this season. For the last seven years, Russia has taken very few measures to improve its economy. Instead, the state has been living on oil and gas. ”
Economically, Aslund has the numbers on his side. The International Monetary Fund figures that the Russian economy will fall by 6.7 percent in 2009, while China will grow 8.5 percent and India 5.4 percent. There is less of a case for Brazil, with a fall of 0.7 percent, but it is still doing
far better than Russia.
But the BRICs are not just about economy. As is mentioned above, it is a marketing device to encourage investors to focus on the big promising players. From an investment standpoint, it could be argued that Russia is leading the BRICs. Its stock（股票）market is up 128 percent this year while around 80 percent is for the other three.
At very least, however, Russia’s economic underperformance and stock market outperfoumance does suggest it is indeed one of the group.
【小題1】According to the passage, which country will enjoy the biggest increase in 2009?