domingo, 10 de novembro de 2019

FGV 2019 – LÍNGUA INGLESA – ECONOMIA – 1º SEMESTRE – 1ª FASE

https://vestibular.fgv.br

EESP - Prova de Inglês
EESP - Gabarito Oficial
❑ TEXTO: Read the text in order to answer questions from 76 to 90.
Como corrigir a desigualdade

September 10, 2018 by N.B.

Introduction

In an age of widening inequality, the Stanford professor Walter Scheidel believes he has cracked the code on how to overcome it in his book “The Great Leveler”.
Numa época de crescente desigualdade, o professor de Stanford, Walter Scheidel, acredita ter decifrado o código sobre a forma de a ultrapassar no seu livro “The Great Leveler”.

The Economist’s Open Future initiative asked Mr Scheidel to reply to a number of questions.
A iniciativa Open Future da Economist pediu ao Sr. Scheidel que respondesse a uma série de questões.

1. The Economist:
Is society incapable of tackling income inequality peacefully?
A sociedade é incapaz de enfrentar a desigualdade de rendimentos de forma pacífica?

Walter Scheidel:
No, but history shows that there are limits. There is a big difference between maintaining existing arrangements that successfully check inequality — Scandinavia is a good example — and significantly reducing it.
Não, mas a história mostra que há limites. Existe uma grande diferença entre manter os mecanismos existentes que controlam com sucesso a desigualdade – a Escandinávia é um bom exemplo – e reduzi-la significativamente.

The latter requires real change and that is always much harder to do: think of America or Britain, not to mention Brazil, China or India.
O último exige mudanças reais e isso é sempre muito mais difícil de fazer: pense-se na América ou na Grã-Bretanha, para não falar do Brasil, da China ou da Índia. 

The modern welfare state does a reasonably good job of compensating for inequality before taxes and transfers.
O Estado-providência moderno faz razoavelmente um bom trabalho na compensação da desigualdade antes de impostos e transferências.

However, for more substantial levelling to occur, the establishedorder needs to be shaken up: the greater the shock to the system, the easier it becomes to reduce privilege at the top.
Contudo, para que ocorra um nivelamento mais substancial, a ordem vigente precisa de ser abalada: quanto maior o choque no sistema, mais fácil se torna reduzir os privilégios no topo.

2. The Economist:
Are we really living in an implacable period of wealth inequality — or was the relatively equal society that followed the Second World War the real aberration?
Vivemos realmente num período implacável de desigualdade de riqueza – ou foi a sociedade relativamente igualitária que se seguiu à Segunda Guerra Mundial a verdadeira aberração?

Walter Scheidel:
When we view history over the longrun, we can see that this experience was certainly a novelty.
Quando olhamos para a história a longo prazo, podemos perceber que esta experiência foi certamente uma novidade. 

We now know that modernisation as such does not reliably reduce inequality.
Sabemos agora que a modernização, enquanto tal, não reduz de forma confiável a desigualdade.
 
Many things had to come together to make this happen, such as very high income and estate taxes, strong labour unions, and intrusive regulations and controls.
Muitas coisas tiveram de se conjugar para que isto acontecesse, tais como impostos muito elevados sobre o rendimento e a propriedade, sindicatos fortes e regulamentações e controlos intrusivos.

Since the 1980s, liberalisation and globalisation have allowedinequality to rise again.
Desde a década de 1980, o liberalismo e a globalização permitiram que a desigualdade voltasse a aumentar. 

Ainda assim, a concentração de riqueza na Europa está longe de ser tão elevada como há um século.
 
Like Europe, America, meanwhile, is getting there — which shows that it all depends on where you look.
Tal como a Europa, a América, entretanto, está chegando lá – o que mostra que tudo depende para onde se olha.

3. The Economist:
How do artificial intelligence and automation fit in to your thinking? Will they be a calamity for employment and thus for equality? Or might they unleash extraordinary productivity and improvements in living standards that actually narrow inequality?
Como é que a inteligência artificial e a automação se enquadram no seu pensamento? Serão uma calamidade para o emprego e, por conseguinte, para a igualdade? Ou poderão desencadear uma produtividade extraordinária e melhorias nos níveis de vida que, na realidade, reduzam a desigualdade?

Walter Scheidel:
Ideally, we would like education to keep up with technological change to make sure workers have the skills they need to face this challenge.
Idealmente, gostaríamos que a educação acompanhasse as mudanças tecnológicas para garantir que os trabalhadores tivessem as competências necessárias para enfrentar este desafio.

But in practice, there will always be losers, and even basic-income schemes can take us only so far.
Mas, na prática, haverá sempre perdedores e mesmo os regimes de rendimento básico só nos podem levar até certo ponto.

At the end of the day, someone owns the robots.
No final do dia, alguém é dono dos robôs.

As long as the capitalist world system is in place, it is hard to see how even huge productivity gains from greater automation would benefit society evenly instead of funnelling even more income and wealth to those who are in the best position to pocket these gains.
Enquanto o sistema mundial capitalista estiver em vigor, é difícil ver como é que mesmo os enormes ganhos de produtividade resultantes de uma maior automatização beneficiariam a sociedade de forma uniforme, em vez de canalizar ainda mais rendimento e riqueza para aqueles que estão em melhor posição para embolsar esses ganhos.
76 – The text intends to
(A) show that economic inequality may be tackled based on previous historical experiences.
(B) praise the Stanford professor Walter Scheidel as well as advertise his newly released book.
(C) demonstrate that it is impossible to reduce income differences in most socialist countries.
(D) discuss and provide insights to overcome economic inequality in the modern world.
(E) defend a fair tax system in order to avoid privileges and excessive rights.

•    Gabarito D  
The text intends to
O texto pretende

(A) show that economic inequality may be tackled based on previous historical experiences.
mostrar que a desigualdade econômica pode ser combatida com base em experiências históricas anteriores.

(B) praise the Stanford professor Walter Scheidel as well as advertise his newly released book.
elogiar o professor de Stanford Walter Scheidel, bem como divulgar o seu livro recentemente lançado.

(C) demonstrate that it is impossible to reduce income differences in most socialist countries.
demonstrar que é impossível reduzir as diferenças de rendimento na maioria dos países socialistas.

(D) discuss and provide insights to overcome economic inequality in the modern world.
discutir e fornecer insights para superar a desigualdade econômica no mundo moderno.
  • "[...] In an age of widening inequality, the Stanford professor Walter Scheidel believes he has cracked the code on how to overcome it in his book “The Great Leveler”. The Economist’s Open Future initiative asked Mr Scheidel to reply to a number of questions."
  • Numa época de crescente desigualdade, o professor de Stanford, Walter Scheidel, acredita ter decifrado o código sobre a forma de a superar no seu livro “The Great Leveler”. A iniciativa Open Future da Economist pediu ao Sr. Scheidel que respondesse a uma série de questões.
(E) defend a fair tax system in order to avoid privileges and excessive rights.
defender um sistema fiscal justo, de forma a evitar privilégios e direitos excessivos.

77 – In the excerpt from the introduction
  • “Walter Scheidel believes he has cracked the code on how to overcome it”, the expression in bold means that he has
(A) created a new code.
(B) figured out the solution.
(C) identified the flaw.
(D) found how to fix the code.
(E) explained how the legal system works.

•    Gabarito B  
In the excerpt from the introduction
the expression in bold means that he has
a expressão a negrito significa que ele

(A) created a new code.
(criou um novo código)

(B) figured out the solution.
(encontrou a solução)

(C) identified the flaw.
(identificou a falha)

(D) found how to fix the code.
(encontrou como corrigir o código)

(E) explained how the legal system works. (explicou como funciona o sistema jurídico)

>> "CRACK THE CODE" → Semanticamente é equivalente a frase "TO FIGURE OUT THE SOLUTION".

  • The media company seems to have cracked the code of what consumers want from a streaming service. - A provedora de mídia parece ter descoberto a solução para os consumidores que querem serviço de transmissão on-line. [The Free Dictionary Dictionary]
  • Problematic students can be especially frustrating for teachers, but if you devote additional time and effort, you should be able to crack the code. - Alunos problemáticos podem ser especialmente frustrantes para os professores, mas se você dedicar mais tempo e esforço, poderá descobrir a solução. [The Free Dictionary Dictionary]
78 – In Walter Scheidel's answer to the first question, he
(A) poses that there are two situations that have to be treated differently.
(B) believes that Brazil, China and India should follow the example of America or Britain.
(C) states that Scandinavia needs to forward changes in order to control inequality.
(D) considers America and Britain as wealthy societies that need a system shock.
(E) says that Brazil, China and India have already checked inequality.

•    Gabarito A  
In Walter Scheidel's answer to the first question, he
Na resposta de Walter Scheidel à primeira questão, ele

(A) poses that there are two situations that have to be treated differently.
afirma que existem duas situações que devem ser tratadas de forma diferente.
  • "[...] There is a big difference between maintaining existing arrangements that successfully check inequality — Scandinavia is a good example — and significantly reducing it."
  • Existe uma grande diferença entre manter os mecanismos existentes que controlam com sucesso a desigualdade – a Escandinávia é um bom exemplo – e reduzi-la significativamente.
(B) believes that Brazil, China and India should follow the example of America or Britain.
acredita que o Brasil, a China e a Índia devem seguir o exemplo da América ou da Grã-Bretanha.

(C) states that Scandinavia needs to forward changes in order to control inequality.
afirma que a Escandinávia precisa fazer avançar mudanças para controlar a desigualdade.

(D) considers America and Britain as wealthy societies that need a system shock.
considera os Estados Unidos e a Grã-Bretanha como sociedades ricas que necessitam de um choque sistêmico.

(E) says that Brazil, China and India have already checked inequality.
diz que o Brasil, a China e a Índia já verificaram a desigualdade.

79 – According to Walter Scheidel’s answer to the first question, in order to reduce inequality substantially, there should be
(A) a peaceful approach.
(B) a preservation of successful arrangements.
(C) an improvement of the welfare state.
(D) a tax and transfer compensation.
(E) an impact to the established order.

•    Gabarito E  
According to Walter Scheidel’s answer to the first question, in order to reduce inequality substantially, there should be
De acordo com a resposta de Walter Scheidel à primeira questão, para reduzir substancialmente a desigualdade, deveria haver

(A) a peaceful approach.
uma abordagem pacífica.

(B) a preservation of successful arrangements.
uma preservação dos arranjos bem-sucedidos.

(C) an improvement of the welfare state.
uma melhoria do estado de bem-estar social.

(D) a tax and transfer compensation.
uma compensação fiscal e de transferência.

(E) an impact to the established order.
impacto na ordem vigente.
  • "[...] However, for more substantial levelling to occur, the established order needs to be shaken up: the greater the shock to the system, the easier it becomes to reduce privilege at the top.
  • Contudo, para que ocorra um nivelamento mais substancial, a ordem vigente precisa de ser abalada: quanto maior o choque no sistema, mais fácil se torna reduzir os privilégios no topo.
80 – In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s first answer "The latter requires real change”, the expression in bold refers to
(A) limits.
(B) maintaining existing arrangements.
(C) Scandinavia.
(D) reducing inequality.
(E) real change.

•    Gabarito D  
In the excerpt :
  • No, but history shows that there are limits. There is a big difference between maintaining existing arrangements that successfully check inequality — Scandinavia is a good example — and significantly reducing it. The latter requires real change and that is always much harder to do: think of America or Britain, not to mention Brazil, China or India.
"The latter requires real change”, the expression in bold refers to
(A) limits.
(B) maintaining existing arrangements.
(C) Scandinavia.
(D) reducing inequality.
(E) real change.

81 – In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s first answer "However, for more substantial levelling to occur”, the word in bold can be correctly replaced by
(A) Meanwhile.
(B) Insofar as.
(C) Nevertheless.
(D) Unlike.
(E) Furthermore.

•    Gabarito C  
In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s first answer "However, for more substantial levelling to occur”, the word in bold can be correctly replaced by
No excerto da primeira resposta de Walter Scheidel “No entanto, para que ocorra um nivelamento mais substancial”, a palavra em negrito pode ser substituída corretamente por

(A) Meanwhile.
(B) Insofar as.
(C) Nevertheless.
(D) Unlike.
(E) Furthermore.

>> "HOWEVER" (= DESPITE THIS) - indicates an idea that contrasts with one just mentioned. - SYNONNYM: NEVERTHELESS, NONETHELESS, NOTWITHSTANDING, HOWBEIT. (www.merriam-webster.com)

82 – The second questions made by The Economist assume that
(A) income inequality has always been the same last century.
(B) after the Second World War, society
 became more equal than before.
(C) both equality and inequality are historically transitory in our society.
(D) the Second World War aided wealth concentration and therefore inequality.
(E) conflicts such as wars reorganise and concentrate wealth among the countries involved.

•    Gabarito B  
The second questions made by The Economist assume that
A segunda questão colocada pelo The Economist presume que

(A) income inequality has always been the same last century.
a desigualdade de rendimentos foi sempre a mesma no século passado.

(B) after the Second World War, society became more equal than before.
após a Segunda Guerra Mundial, a sociedade  tornou-se mais igual do que antes.
  • "[...] Are we really living in an implacable period of wealth inequality — or was the relatively equal society that followed the Second World War the real aberration?"
  • Vivemos realmente num período implacável de desigualdade de riqueza – ou foi a sociedade relativamente igualitária que se seguiu à Segunda Guerra Mundial a verdadeira aberração?
(C) both equality and inequality are historically transitory in our society.
tanto a igualdade como a desigualdade são historicamente transitórias na nossa sociedade.

(D) the Second World War aided wealth concentration and therefore inequality.
a 2ª Guerra Mundial ajudou na concentração da riqueza e, por conseguinte, na desigualdade.

(E) conflicts such as wars reorganise and concentrate wealth among the countries involved.
os conflitos como as guerras reorganizam e concentram a riqueza entre os países envolvidos.

83 –In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer “Many things had to come together to make this happen”, an example of the word in bold is
(A) a novelty.
(B) modernisation.
(C) strong labour unions.
(D) liberalisation and globalisation.
(E) wealth concentration.

•    Gabarito C  
In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer
No excerto da segunda resposta de Walter Scheidel
  • “Many things had to come together to make this happen”,
  • Muitas coisas tiveram de se unir para que isto acontecesse
an example of the word in bold is
um exemplo da palavra em negrito é

(A) a novelty.
uma novidade.

(B) modernisation.
modernização.

(C) strong labour unions.
sindicatos fortes.

(D) liberalisation and globalisation.
liberalização e a globalização.

(E) wealth concentration.
concentração de riqueza.

> TRECHO QUE JUSTIFICA:
  • "[...] Many things had to come together to make this happen, such as very high income and estate taxes, strong labour unions, and intrusive regulations and controls."
  • Muitas coisas tiveram de se conjugar para que isto acontecesse, tais como impostos muito elevados sobre o rendimento e a propriedade, sindicatos fortes e regulamentações e controlos intrusivos.
84 – The excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer “Even so, wealth concentration in Europe is nowhere near as high as it was a century ago”, means that wealth concentration in Europe, compared to a century ago, is
(A) much lower now.
(B) substantially higher now.
(C) similarly low.
(D) as high as it was.
(E) getting increasingly higher.

•    Gabarito A  
The excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer “Even so, wealth concentration in Europe is nowhere near as high as it was a century ago”, means that wealth concentration in Europe, compared to a century ago, is
O excerto da segunda resposta de Walter Scheidel “Mesmo assim, a concentração de riqueza na Europa não é nem de longe nem de perto tão elevada como era há um século”, significa que a concentração de riqueza na Europa, em comparação com há um século, é

(A) much lower now.
(B) substantially higher now.
(C) similarly low.
(D) as high as it was.
(E) getting increasingly higher.

85 – The excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer “Like Europe, America, meanwhile, is getting there” means that
(A) inequality has risen in America due to globalisation.
(B) America needs a strong liberalising shock.
(C) America has always displayed a very high income.
(D) intrusive regulations and controls are slowly taking place in America.
(E) wealth concentration is diminishing in America.

•    Gabarito A  
The excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s second answer “Like Europe, America, meanwhile, is getting there” means that

(A) inequality has risen in America due to globalisation.
(B) America needs a strong liberalising shock.
(C) America has always displayed a very high income.
(D) intrusive regulations and controls are slowly taking place in America.
(E) wealth concentration is diminishing in America.

86 – In the excerpt from the third question made by The Economist “Will they be a calamity for employment and thus for equality?”, the word in bold denotes
(A) consequence.
(B) alternative.
(C) addition.
(D) exclusion.
(E) purpose.

•    Gabarito A  
In the excerpt from the third question made by The Economist “Will they be a calamity for employment and thus for equality?”, the word in bold denotes
No excerto da terceira questão colocada pela The Economist “Serão uma calamidade para o emprego e, por conseguinte, para a igualdade?”, a palavra a negrito denota

(A) consequence.
(B) alternative.
(C) addition.
(D) exclusion.
(E) purpose.

87 – In the excerpt from the third question made by The Economist
  • “Or might they unleash extraordinary productivity and improvements in living standards that actually narrow inequality?”, the word in bold can be correctly replaced, without meaning change, by
(A) must.
(B) have.
(C) will.
(D) could.
(E) ought.

•    Gabarito D  
In the excerpt from the third question made by The Economist
  • “Or might they unleash extraordinary productivity and improvements in living standards that actually narrow inequality?”
the word in bold can be correctly replaced, without meaning change, by
(A) must.
(B) have.
(C) will.
(D) could.
(E) ought.

88 – In his third answer, Walter Scheidel states that
(A) inequality will be narrowed by technology.
(B) artificial intelligence and automation will benefit the owners of robots.
(C) unless workers get updated with technology, they will become the usual losers.
(D) gains from automation will create new jobs and reverse inequality.
(E) only skilled workers will survive automation and protect their income.

•    Gabarito B  
In his third answer, Walter Scheidel states that
(A) inequality will be narrowed by technology.
(B) artificial intelligence and automation will benefit the owners of robots.
(C) unless workers get updated with technology, they will become the usual losers.
(D) gains from automation will create new jobs and reverse inequality.
(E) only skilled workers will survive automation and protect their income.

89 – In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s third answer "As long as the capitalist world system is in place”, the expression in bold can be correctly replaced by
(A) All in all.
(B) After all.
(C) While.
(D) Whenever.
(E) Aside.

•    Gabarito C  
In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s third answer "As long as the capitalist world system is in place”, the expression in bold can be correctly replaced by
(A) All in all.
(B) After all.
(C) While.
(D) Whenever.
(E) Aside.

90 – In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s third answer “gains from greater automation would benefit society evenly instead of funnelling even more income and wealth”, the word in bold means
(A) continuously.
(B) indirectly.
(C) partially.
(D) objectively.
(E) fairly.

•    Gabarito E  
In the excerpt from Walter Scheidel’s third answer “gains from greater automation would benefit society evenly instead of funnelling even more income and wealth”, the word in bold means
(A) continuously.
(B) indirectly.
(C) partially.
(D) objectively.
(E) fairly.
at

Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário