IBPS CLERK Mains 2018 – 10 Days Study Planner – English -Day 8
IBPS CLERK Mains 2018 – 10 Days Study Planner – English -Day 8
Dear Bankersdaily Aspirants,
IBPS CLERK Mains Exam 2018 is coming fast than you think and there are only less days to make your preparation fruitful. The preparation strategy must be fixed in such a way that the actual ones will help to score more marks in the IBPS CLERK mains Exam 2018.
The IBSP CLERK Mains Exam 2018 is scheduled to happen on 20th December 2019.
The key to score more marks lies in scoring in the General Awareness, banking Awareness and English Section. So, one needs to be preparing in such a way that, the aspirant must get maximum marks in the above said section. Practising is the key to score in these topics and aspirants must read at least 6 months Current Affairs to crack the General Awareness Section and Banking Awareness Section.
We have started the IBPS CLERK Mains Exam 2018 – Planner where we are providing practice questions from the above topics which will help the aspirants to increase the solving ability and to learn new questions.
We have also included the New pattern Questions which have been asked in the recent exams like SBI Clerk, IBPS RRB Assistant and others. This will assist the aspirants in analyzing the type of questions and to know the nuances of attending the Different type of questions.
- Section : English Language
- Topic: Reading Comprehension – Part 3
- Total Questions: 20
- Total Timing: 15 Minutes
D.1-10): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.
Academic Economist’ has of late become a fashionable term of abuse. If you feel his analysis of facts to be inconvenient, this term comes in handy to dismiss him as an irrelevant busybody. Recently a businessman hurled the Brahmastra: “Ask an academic economist writing learned essays to run a business profitably in these difficult times”. Again Mr. Ashok Mitra whose many avatars include being an economist, politician, adviser, bureaucrat and Finance Minister wrote in the Economic and Political Weekly last month: the “academic economist … while tendering advice does not have to take into account ground realities governing the polity”. There can be no doubt that the politician and the businessman have immediate problems to confront. The capitalist is concerned about the health of his firm’s current balance sheet and has to face his shareholders in the AGM or ruminate about the fate of his company’s shares in the stock exchange. As for the politician, Mr. Mitra could not be any more explicit: there is the “need to continue breathing in a democratic climate and win elections at regular intervals”. Other groups such as large farmers, Government servants, trade unions, employers associations, college and university teachers and so on with their day-to-day worries too find the `academic economist’ bearing bad tidings or suggesting bitter medicines to be an ignoramus not understanding the real world. This impatience is understandable but not the caricature made of the academic economist. Mr. Mitra said: “The economist we have in mind … proceeded to the United States to get a Ph.D. in liberal economics … offered an assignment in the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund or the WTO … (and remains) an emigre since then”. On the contrary, there are numerous economists educated in India, teaching Indian students, working in India on Indian problems without the remotest relationship to world bodies such as the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO, and continuously gathering knowledge about the ground realities carrying no preconceived notions and with deep involvement and concern for the long term well-being of every segment of the country. They believe that the health of the economy and welfare of the masses are far more important than the unhealthy desires of the different sectional interests or the power hungry politician’s anxiety to win elections at any cost. There is always a need for someone to examine the welfare of the whole as opposed to the exclusive interests of the constituent parts. The science of economics emerged to do this task systematically using both empirical information and rigorous logic. This does not mean that economists can be totally objective like a soulless weighing machine as they too are human, capable of harbouring bias, subject to ignorance and prone to misjudgement. While not being infallible, their location in the social matrix puts them in a unique position. As Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati once said: “Politicians must play to their constituencies. Bureaucrats cannot forget the politicians. Think- tanks must seek funds to survive. All must mind their manners, trim their sails, and bend to the wind. Only professors have tenure, protecting them from the retribution that the indulgence of independence may bring. Indeed, that alone makes it an obligation, not just a luxury, for the academic scholars to break ranks, to cut through the fog of obfuscations that attends the politics of policy- making … to propose policies and advance agendas that reflection and analysis lead one to believe to be good and beneficial, even when they appear outlandish now and will bring one neglect, at best, and opprobrium, at worst”. If they take advantage of the freedom and training, their advice can provide valuable insights to the policy-maker. Different economists may see different things in the same phenomena but that is no reason to discount the economists’ approach to view things holistically. In any case there are some aspects of economic thinking that are absolutely correct and no amount of verbal or numerical legerdemain can counter their inexorable logic. Economics is all about scarcity, efficiency and welfare which it demonstrates by relating causes to consequences. It yields conditional propositions of the type: “If A, then B”. This is embedded in certain ruthless truths of economics. Let us see three of them. First, there is no such thing as a free lunch. The cost is borne either by yourself or by someone else. Second, there is no escaping from trade-offs. You have to choose between different desired alternatives. And third, no amount of rearrangement of your resources can increase welfare or growth without increasing the efficiency of their utilisation. No politician, however powerful he is, can get over these fundamental truths. Policies have repercussions on the way the resources of society are distributed among people and regions. Policies can also determine whether benefits, or otherwise, accrue in the present time or at a future date. Given this, the politician tends to favour those with the loudest voice and the strongest clout besides being unconcerned about the future although his actions may be inimical to the welfare of everyone in a long run perspective. When the economist points out this uncomfortable fact, he becomes unpopular both with the special interests and the politicians all primed with their short term agendas. The economists’ arguments against protection, subsidies or wasteful unproductive expenditure on the one hand, and advocacy of compulsory primary education, provision of basic health care or investments in infrastructure on the other are all based on the type of economic truths mentioned earlier. A high degree of protection for local manufacturers or liberal subsidies for this and that involve a cost borne by the consumers and tax payers respectively without necessarily increasing the welfare of the population in general. Similarly while expenditure on education, health care and infrastructure involve costs being borne by all taxpayers, their impact on the well-being of everyone and efficiency of the economy justifies the policy. Ultimately, the economist asks whether the broad objectives of the society could not be achieved by other less costly or more efficient means. The contention of economists is that while it is legitimate for sectional interests to clamour for protection, subsidies and grants because it suits them, if the Government behaves in a way assuming the non- existence of these fundamental propositions of economics, it is a sure recipe for eventual economic disaster. Even the seemingly invincible East Asian Tigers bit the dust because their policy-makers did not pay sufficient heed to undisputable economic truths as the MIT economist, Paul Krugman, has demonstrated. If all this is so patent, why do politicians and their apologists persist in following short-sighted policies? The reasons are not far to seek. To be fair to the political leaders, they may have initiated policies that seemed genuinely beneficial to the economic well-being of society and worth pursuing. But once begun they become difficult to give up especially when powerful vested interests emerge to corner all the advantages. Another reason is that the impact of fundamental economic laws usually manifest themselves only incrementally. The existing institutional structure often masks the consequences, and this homeostatic process lulls the victims into thinking that no harm will come their way until disaster strikes with all its malignance. Again, in the short run, such policies – though violative of economic logic – may bring all round substantial benefit. Once hooked, it becomes impossible to give up as the system becomes dependent on such policies even though they have outlived their utility. In the final analysis, economics is about zeroing in on the consequences of certain policies, conditions and choices. It is not for the professional economist to say what is desirable or preferable though he has a right to hold opinions as a concerned citizen. If a politician or an interested party claims that a certain objective can only be achieved through a certain policy, and if economic analysis demonstrates its absurdity, it is the duty of the academic economist to expose it whether he is praised or reviled.
Q.1) According to the passage need to continue breathing in a democratic climate is applicable to:
a) Large farmers
b) College teachers
c) Government servants
e) Share holders
Q.2) ‘Academic Economists’ are described, according to the author as those:
a) Who suggest bitter medicines?
b) who bear bad tidings?
c) Who are ignorant of the real world?
d) Both a) and c)
e) All a), b) and c)
Q.3) Economics is associated with which of the following?
e) All a), b) and c)
Q.4) One of the truths of Economics is said to be “there is no escaping from trade-offs”. What is implied by this?
a) Trading is important for Economics.
b) Escaping from loss is the essence of Economics.
c) Choice has to be made between different described alternatives.
d) A prescribed right course is to adopted.
e) None of the above.
Q.5) The concepts of economic truths are associated in the light of the passage, to which of the following?
a) Provision of basic health.
b) Avoiding wasteful unproductive expenditure.
c) Investment in infrastructure.
d) Arguments against subsidies.
e) All the above.
Q.6) Genuinely beneficial policies initiated by politicians for short term benefits are confirmed because:
a) Those are useful for the society, are large.
b) In due course of time vested interests emerge.
c) To prevent opposition parties from taking advantage.
d) Politicians contribute funds for those policies.
e) None of the above.
Q.7) According to the author, the impact of fundamental economic laws is observed:
a) All too suddenly.
Q.8) “Even the seemingly invincible East Asian Tiger bit the dust” – The author conveys which of the following concepts?
a) East Asian Tigers was extremely dominant; but it failed in due course.
b) East Asian Tigers was dull and hence faithful in due course.
c) “East Asian Tigers” became invisible even though he was powerful earlier.
d) “East Asian Tigers” was dusted and began to end up with the invincible.
e) The profits of “East Asian Tigers” soared as they paid head to undisputable economic truths.
Q.9) A high degree of protection for local manufacturers involves cost which is borne by?
a) Tax payers
b) The Government of India
c) The Police department
d) The consumers
e) The owner of the firms
Q.10) The essence of Economics is stated to be which of the following on a final analysis?
a) Zeroing the wasteful expenditure.
b) Zeroing is on the consequences of certain policies, conditions and choices.
c) Zero tolerance to corruption and subsidies.
d) Zero balance maintenance in foreign trade.
e) All the above.
D.11-15): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.
In more than a decade of publication, the annual Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Programme has usually steered clear of controversy while making out a case for expanding the understanding and measurement of development beyond the traditional approaches of increasing the gross domestic product of an economy. In the 2001 HDR, however, the UNDP has managed to anger its “traditional” support base of citizens’ groups and organisations critical of the dominant development paradigm by suggesting, first, that modern technology can offer solutions to many of the problems of the developing countries and, second, that the benefits of biotechnology and transgenic crops probably outweigh the risks, especially when it comes to meeting the challenges of increasing food production. To be fair to the HDR, it is explicit in its argument that technology is not a silver bullet for removal of poverty. Yet, if there is one running strand in the 2001 report it is that the advances in modern technology combined with the forces of globalisation – constituting the “networked society” – offer the developing countries an opportunity to leap-frog out of poverty. Unfortunately, the understanding of technology is a very restrictive one, with the discussion confined to information and communication technologies, biotechnology and in a very limited fashion to advances in medicine. Besides, there is little that the HDR offers beyond a few historical examples to suggest that these new technologies by themselves will do much more for development than innumerable other technological advances of the past. As the report itself notes, many of the benefits of older technologies are yet to be distributed as illustrated, for example, in the fact that a third of the world’s population is still without electricity and two billion people do not have access to low-cost essential medicines. The UNDP study does argue that in biotechnology, as in other technologies, there is a need to weigh the benefits against the risks. But all the careful language does not hide the case that is made, in particular, for a more open welcome to transgenic crops in the developing countries. Yet, as the report itself notes, many of the world’s national scientific academies have asked for a “thorough risk assessment” of the consequences of development of transgenic crop varieties. A more explicit and potentially more dangerous argument contained in the HDR is that the standards of risk and safety are different in rich and poor countries. That is, while consumers in the advanced countries can afford to worry about the safety of transgenic crops, the citizens of the developing countries cannot afford to do so because their first priority is food. Safety concerns in a variety of areas in the developed societies on occasion are indeed taken to unreasonable and unrealistic levels. But more generally the relevant question is: are basic standards of safety breached by certain technologies? It cannot be that there must be lax standards for poor societies and another set of stricter standards for the rich societies. The HDR 2001 contains, as usual, the latest measures of the human development index for most countries in the world. The picture over the longer term, since 1975, shows substantial progress in some, retrogression in a fairly large number and an unsatisfactory pace of growth in most countries in the developing world. The HDR’s appraisal reveals a mixed record so far on the very modest United Nations goals for development for the year 2015 in income, health and education. In some areas (hunger and education), more countries are on track than falling behind in meeting the targets for 2015. In others, (infant, child and maternal mortality and access to safe water), the reverse is true because of an extremely slow pace of improvement.
Q.11) Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Programme is published:
a) On a monthly basis.
c) Every week.
d) Every year.
e) Not mentioned in the passage.
Q.12) To be fair to the HDR, it is explicit in its argument that technology is not a silver bullet for removal of poverty-The author implies which of the following through this statement?
a) A simple remedy such as technology is not available for the complex problem of removal of poverty which is openly admitted by the HDR and that stand is identified as fair.
b) A shining bullet made of silver is necessary for the removal of poverty which according to HDR is a fair measure of technology.
c) Removal of poverty is considered to be shining silver according to the fair estimate of HDR as per its explicit statement.
d) Poverty removal is a silver bullet that reflects technology which is explicit in the statement of HDR.
e) None of these.
Q.13) Why does the author suspect that basic standards of safety are breached by certain technologies?
a) As no standards are followed by these technologies.
b) As lax standards for poor societies and another set of stricter standards for the rich societies are in place in respect of these technologies.
c) As these technologies are at unreasonable and unrealistic levels.
d) As latest norms are not followed in respect of these technologies.
e) As developed countries take an advantage in respect of these technologies.
Q.14) In the 2001 HDR, which of the following are projected?
a) Modern technology can offer solutions to many of the problems of the developing countries.
b) The benefits of biotechnology and transgenic crops probably outweigh the risks.
c) Both a) and b).
d) Neither a) nor b).
e) The answer is not available in the passage.
Q.15) In some areas (hunger and education), more countries are on track than falling behind in meeting the targets for 2015. In others, (infant, child and maternal mortality and access to safe water), the reverse is true because of an extremely slow pace of improvement-what is the tone involved in these?
D.16-20): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is being flaunted as the single-biggest economic reform since the economic liberalisation of 1991. Even critics of the tax, who complain about its complex four-slab rate structure, agree that it is a step in the right direction. The primary reason is that it does away with the present system of multiple Central and State taxes, replacing it with a much simpler tax system. Another supposed benefit of GST is that it is a tax on consumption, which replaces the current web of ‘cascading’ taxes in the production chain that increases prices and distorts production. In the process, it is said, the new tax system does away with the barriers to free trade within and between States, effectively turning India into a single free market for goods and
services. For sceptics, there is good reason to doubt all these claimed benefits of the GST. One, a nationwide tax such as the GST will lead to a higher tax burden as it reduces tax competition. Earlier, States which were keen to attract investment and labour from each other had a reason to cut taxes. Now, the Centre, which will face no tax competition except from the rest of the world, can determine rates at whim. This will encourage tax rate increases that are detrimental to growth. Two, the number of taxes does not necessarily reflect the actual burden imposed on businesses by any tax system. For example, a single, high tax rate might impose a greater burden on businesses than multiple taxes that add up to a lower rate. A single, low tax rate might also turn out to be more burdensome if the cost of bureaucratic compliance is higher than under multiple, higher tax rates. So what matters eventually is the overall burden under a tax regime, which is likely to be lower when States compete than otherwise. Three, contrary to common belief, the prices that consumers pay don’t rise or fall in tandem with taxes imposed on goods, be they production or consumption taxes. Consumer prices are determined purely by consumer demand, not the cost of production. It is true that a discriminatory tax might force businesses to discontinue or reduce the supply of certain goods in favour of others. Such distortion of production can lead to the rise in the prices of certain goods (due to lower supply) and a fall in the prices of others (due to greater supply), which is clearly not the same as a general increase in prices. Which brings us to the final point. It is true that multiple taxes across and within States can distort production, but the benefits in the form of lower tax rates are likely to outweigh the costs of such distortion. A bigger, but imperfect, economic pie may be preferable to a smaller, but perfect, one.
Q.16) According to the passage, the system of multiple central and state taxes, is indicated as:
a) The goods and serious Tax (GST)
b) Tax an Income
c) Distorted Tax System
d) Cascading Taxes
e) Innovation Tax system
Q.17) After the introduction of the GST, consumer prices will depend in the opinion of the author on
a) Cost of production.
b) Cost of compliance.
c) Consumer demand.
d) Global Competition.
e) Consumer location.
Q.18) The author’s comment that ‘a bigger but imperfect, economics pie may be preferable to a smaller, but perfect, one reflects on the concept ‘of:
a) GST as a perfect economic pie.
b) Multiple tax system as a bigger economic pie.
c) GST as an imperfect economic pie.
d) Both a) and b).
e) Both b) and c).
Q.19) Which meaning is associated with the opinion of the author – ‘A single low tax rate might also turn out to be more burdensome of the cost of bureaucratic compliance is higher than under multiple higher tax rates?
a) Multiple, higher tax rates are preferable, in the event of cost of bureaucratic compliance being lesser than that for a single, low tax.
b) Multiple, higher tax is burdensome compared to single high tax in case of bureaucratic compliance.
c) Bureaucratic compliance is an essential feature of multiple, higher tax rates.
d) Single low tax regime is controlled by bureaucratic compliance whereas multiple, higher tax is not.
e) None of the above.
Q.20) Which of the following will be an appropriate title to the passage?
a) GST – A panacea.
b) Single unique Tax.
c) GST – A tax Burden.
d) State Taxes – A Boon.
e) GST – No panacea.
Answers for the above questions can be found below.
We (Race Institute & Bankersdaily) have also released the IBPS CLERK Mains Exam 2018 – 15 Test Series package which is now available @ Bankersdaily Store. Aspirants can buy the tests before 17 th January 2019 to get the tests @ Offer price.
#1 TRENDING VIDEO in Race YOUTUBE CHANNEL