Text 4 As the country with the European Union's faslest ageing population,Gennany has repeatedly adjusted its pension system to avert a slow-motion demographic disaster.The biggest reform came during Angela Merkel's first term as chancellor.Then,as now,Christian Democrats were yoked with Social Democrats in a"grand coalition".In 2007 the coalition decided that the normal retirement age should gradually rise from 65 t0 67.Mrs Merkel has since preached similar demographic and econonuc wisdom to most of her EU partners,crilicizing France in particular ror straying off the right path.So it comes as something of a shock that Mrs Merkel,now in her third term and running another grand coalition,is reversing course.On the campaign trail for last September's election,she promised to raise pensions for older mothers.The Social Democrats countered wiLh promises to let certain workers retire at 63 instead of 65.As coalilion partners,they will do both at once.It falls to Andrea Nahles,the labour minister and a Social Democrat who likes to wave the banner of"social justice",to push the pension package through parliament by the summer so that it can take effecl on July lst.A previous reform let women with children born after 1992 treat three of their stay-at-home maternily years if Lhey h8d worked and paid full pension contributions.The new"mother pension"will be for the 8m-9m women who took time off for children before 1992.They will be allowed to count two of those years,instead of just one,as working years for pension purposes.The second part of Mrs Nahles's reforms,retirement at 63,is aimed at people who have contributed to the pension system for at least 45 years.But Mrs Nahles wants to count not only years spent working or caring for children or other family members but also periods of short-term unemploy-ment.Separately,she will also boost the pensions of people who cannot work due to disability,and spend more money to help them to recover.Individually,these proposals may seem noble-minded.But as a package,the plan is"short-sighted and one~sided,"thinks Axel Bersch-Supan,a pension adviser at the Munich Centre for the Economics of Ageing.It benefits the older generation,which is already well looked after,at the expense of younger people who will have to pay higher contributions or taxes."The financial and psychological costs of the pension al 63 are disastrous,"Mr Bersch-Supan says.There wiU no longer be any incentive to keep working longer.In some cases,people may,in effect,retire at 61,register as unemployed for two years,and then draw their full pensions.
Which of the foUowing is the best title for the text?
主旨题。文章讲述德国养老金体系改革，全文反复出现pension system、reform等词。选项[A]The Ageing Problem in Germany:Hard to Handje“德国老龄化问题：难以应对”；该项仅仅与第一段有关联，首段提到德国老龄化问题，是为了引出全文对养老金体系改革的讨论，故该项不能说明全文主旨，可以排除。[B]Cermany's Pension Reform:Noble and Sensible“德国养老金改革：高尚且明智”；该项涉及全文主旨，但是Noble and Sensible为明显正向词汇，而最后一段对养老金改革明确提出质疑，short-sighted and one-sided是明显负面词汇，显然该项与原文感情色彩不一致，非正确答案。[C]The New Pension System:Cood News for Mothers”新养老金体系：对母亲来说是好消息”：该项的Good News for Mothers显然只涉及第三段的内容，并不能概括全文。[D]Germany's Pension Reform:In the Wrong Direction“德国养老金改革：方向错误”；首先上半句符合全文讨论的话题；其次，下半句的wrong direction-词也与全文主旨相符。文章第二段“Mrs Merkel is reversing course.”暗示主旨．其中wrong direction“错误的方向”=reversing course“颠覆其路线”；文章最后一段还提出：But as package，the plan is“short-sighted and one-sided”…该句的short-sighted、one-sided这些负面词汇也与wrong direction相符。综上．[D]为正确答案。
