______

No sooner had he seen the horrible sight while he stood motionlessly.

______

Young people are vulnerable to the influences of radio and television.

中国对香港、澳门和台湾的政策　　我们要继续贯彻“一国两制”、“港人治港、“澳人治澳”、高度自治的方针，严格按照特别行政区基本法办事，全力支持香港、澳门两个特别行政区行政长官和政府依法施政。　　我们坚持“和平统一、一国两制”的基本方针和现阶段发展两岸关系、推动祖国和平统一进程的八项主张，坚持一个中国原则决不动摇、争取和平统一的努力决不放弃、贯彻寄希望于台湾人民的方针决不改变、反对“台独”分裂活动决不妥协。我们将努力争取在一个中国原则基础上恢复两岸对话与谈判；推动全面、直接、双向“三通”进程；支持海峡西岸和其他台商投资相对集中地区的经济发展；依法保障台湾同胞正当权益，竭诚为台湾同胞服务。两岸关系朝羞和平稳定、互利共赢方向发展是人心所向，任何人妄图破坏这种大趋势是注定要失败的。

The pie had been in the oven for twenty minutes，with ten another pies to go，and Kasia was reading to Jim，when a knock sounded on the apartment door.

We cannot compromise with those whose principles are directly opposed to our own.

I urged all the students to take the initiative in their own hands to determine their goals for further pursuit rather than to depend on their teachers and their parents.

私立学校并不一定比公立学校好，但上私立学校肯定比上公立学校贵。公立学校的办学经费用的是每一个公民纳税的钱，而私立学校却不是这样。家长如果想把自己的孩子送到私立学校去念书，他们就得自己付钱。　　即使家长有钱付学费，私立学校也不一定非得把孩子收下来。大部分的私立学校一般都只收学习成绩较好而又遵守纪律的学生。有的私立学校只收男生，而有的私立学校又只收女生。与公立学校相比，私立学校每个班的人数要少些，学生也能遵守课堂纪律。这样，学生在学校里就能学到更多的知识。　　公立学校不设宗教课程。所以，有些家长就把自己的孩子送到私立的教会学校去上学。这类教会学校一般都属于某个教派，在学校里，他们就给学生上自己教派的宗教课程。当然，其他学校教的所有的课程，教会学校也都得教。

______

Is More Growth Really Better?　　A number of writers have raised questions about the desirability of faster economic growth as an end in itself, at least in the wealthier industrialized countries. Yet faster growth does mean more wealth, and to most people the desirability of wealth is beyond question. “I’ve been rich and I’ve been poor—and I can tell you, rich is better,” a noted stage personality is said to have told an interviewer, and most people seem to have the same attitude about the economy as a whole. To those who hold this belief, a healthy economy is one that is capable of turning out vast quantities of shoes, food, cars, and TV sets. An economy whose capacity to provide all these things is not expanding is said to have succumbed to the disease of stagnation.　　Economists from Adam Smith to Karl Marx saw great virtue in economic growth. Marx argued that capitalism, at least in its earlier historical stages, was a vital form of economic organization by which society got out of the rut in which the medieval stage of history had trapped it. Marx believed that “the development of the productive powers of society... alone can form the real basis of a higher form of productive powers of society”. Marx went on to tell us that only where such great productive powers have been unleashed can one have “a society in which the full and free development of every individual forms the ruling principle.” In other words, only a wealthy economy can afford to give all individuals the opportunity for full personal satisfaction through the use of their special abilities in their jobs and through increased leisure activities.　　Yet the desirability of further economic growth for a society that is already wealthy has been questioned on grounds that undoubtedly have a good deal of validity. It is pointed out that the sheer increase in quantity of products has imposed an enormous cost on society in the form of pollution, crowding, proliferation of wastes that need disposal, and debilitating psychological and social effects. It is said that industry has transformed the satisfying and creative tasks of the artisan into the mechanical and dehumanizing routine of the assembly line. It has dotted our roadsides with junkyards, filled our air with smoke, and poisoned our food with dangerous chemicals. The question is whether the outpouring of frozen foods, talking dolls, radios, and headache remedies is worth its high cost to society. As one well-known economist put it:　　The continued pursuit of economic growth by Western Societies is more likely on balance to reduce rather than increase social welfare... Technological innovations may offer to add to men’s material opportunities. But by increasing the risks of their obsolescence it adds also to their anxiety. Swifter means of communications have the paradoxical effect of isolating people; increased mobility has led to more hours commuting; increased automobilization to increased separation; more television to less communication. In consequence, people know less of their neighbors than ever before.　　Virtually every economist agrees that these concerns are valid, though many question whether economic growth is their major cause. Nevertheless, they all emphasize that pollution of air and water, noise and congestion, and the mechanization of the work process are very real and very serious problems. There is every reason for society to undertake programs that grapple with these problems. 11