【#新概念英語(yǔ)# #職場(chǎng)新概念英語(yǔ)（63）#】新概念系列教材的經(jīng)典早已家喻戶曉。其文章的短小精悍，語(yǔ)句的幽默詼諧，語(yǔ)法的全面而系統(tǒng)，歷來(lái)被公認(rèn)為是適合絕大多數(shù)朋友學(xué)習(xí)英語(yǔ)的資料之一。你或許還沒(méi)有加入到學(xué)習(xí)中來(lái)，但是任何時(shí)候的學(xué)習(xí)都不會(huì)晚�？靵�(lái)學(xué)習(xí)吧！©無(wú)憂考網(wǎng)為您整理了以下內(nèi)容，僅供參考。希望對(duì)您的學(xué)習(xí)有幫助！如果您想要了解更多相關(guān)內(nèi)容，歡迎關(guān)注©無(wú)憂考網(wǎng)！
【篇一】2017年中國(guó)新銳中產(chǎn)調(diào)查報(bào)告發(fā)布
A survey of China's "new middle class" claims that 72% suffer from sleeping problems and 31% have sex just once a month.
According to the survey report published by recruitment site zhaopin.com, most of the around 50,000 respondents said they suffer from high levels of pressure over skyrocketing house prices and arranging their children's education.
The survey sets the threshold of a personal annual income of 100,000 yuan to 500,000 yuan for the "new middle class."
Around two thirds of the respondents are male and roughly half of them in their 30s.
Salary accounts for 93% of the income of the new middle class, who spend most of their money on repaying housing and car debt, shopping and education of their children, said the report.
Forty percent of the people surveyed are not satisfied with their income, and almost half of them believe they are undervalued in the workplace, said the survey.
【篇二】譯文
一份關(guān)于國(guó)內(nèi)新銳中產(chǎn)階層的調(diào)查稱，72%的新銳中產(chǎn)睡眠有問(wèn)題，31%的新銳中產(chǎn)性 生活頻率僅每月一次。
根據(jù)這份由招聘網(wǎng)站智聯(lián)招聘發(fā)布的調(diào)查報(bào)告，約5萬(wàn)名受訪者中的多數(shù)人稱自己因飛漲的房?jī)r(jià)和孩子的教育問(wèn)題承受很大壓力。
該調(diào)查將個(gè)人年收入10萬(wàn)元至50萬(wàn)元設(shè)為“新銳中產(chǎn)階層”的門(mén)檻。
受訪者中，大約三分之二是男性，其中約一半的人的年齡在30歲左右。
報(bào)告稱，工資占新銳中產(chǎn)收入的93%，而他們的主要開(kāi)銷是償還房貸車貸、購(gòu)物和子女教育。
該報(bào)告指出，40%的受訪者對(duì)他們的收入并不滿意，其中將近一半的人認(rèn)為他們?cè)谄涔ぷ鲌?chǎng)所被低估了。
【篇三】覺(jué)得自己的工作毫無(wú)意義?越來(lái)越多人這么想
A great deal has been written in recent years about the perils of automation. With predicted mass unemployment, declining wages, and increasing inequality, clearly we should all be afraid.
By now it’s no longer just the Silicon Valley trend watchers and technoprophets who are apprehensive. In a study that has already racked up several hundred citations, scholars at Oxford University have estimated that no less than 47% of all American jobs and 54%?of those in Europe are at a high risk of being usurped by machines.
I admit, we’ve heard it all before. Employees have been worrying about the rising tide of automation for 200 years now, and for 200 years employers have been assuring them that new jobs will naturally materialize to take their place. After all, if you look at the year 1800, some 74% of all Americans were farmers, whereas by 1900 this figure was down to 31%, and by 2000 to a mere 3%. Yet this hasn’t led to mass unemployment. In 1930, the famous economist John Maynard Keynes was predicting that we’d all be working just 15-hour weeks by the year 2030. Yet, since the 1980s, work has only been taking up more of our time, bringing waves of burnouts and stress in its wake.
Meanwhile, the crux of the issue isn’t even being discussed. The real question we should be asking ourselves is: what actually constitutes “work” in this day and age?
What is “work” anyway?
In a 2013 survey of 12,000 professionals by the Harvard Business Review, half said they felt their job had no “meaning and significance,” and an equal number were unable to relate to their company’s mission, while another poll among 230,000 employees in 142 countries showed that only 13% of workers actually like their job. A recent poll among Brits revealed that as many as 37% think they have a job that is utterly useless.
So, will there still be enough jobs for everyone a few decades from now? Anybody who fears mass unemployment underestimates capitalism’s extraordinary ability to generate new bullshit jobs. If we want to really reap the rewards of the huge technological advances made in recent decades (and of the advancing robots), then we need to radically rethink our definition of “work.”
The paradox of progress
It starts with an age-old question: what is the meaning of life? Most people would say the meaning of life is to make the world a little more beautiful, or nicer, or more interesting. But how? These days, our main answer to that is: through work.
That’s one of the biggest taboos of our times. Our whole system of finding meaning could dissolve like a puff of smoke.
The irony is that technological progress is only exacerbating this crisis. Historically, society has been able to afford more bullshit jobs precisely because our robots kept getting better. As our farms and factories grew more efficient, they accounted for a shrinking share of our economy. And the more productive agriculture and manufacturing became, the fewer people they employed. Call it the paradox of progress: the richer we become, the more room we have to waste our time. It’s like Brad Pitt says in Fight Club: too often, we’re “working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need.”
I believe in a future where the value of your work is not determined by the size of your paycheck, but by the amount of happiness you spread and the amount of meaning you give. I believe in a future where the point of education is not to prepare you for another useless job, but for a life well lived. I believe in a future where “jobs are for robots and life is for people.”
And if basic income sounds Utopian to you, then I’d like to remind you that every milestone of civilization – from the end of slavery to democracy to equal rights for men and women – was once a Utopian fantasy too. Or, as Oscar Wilde wrote long ago: “Progress is the realization of Utopias.”
【篇四】譯文
近年來(lái)，自動(dòng)化所帶來(lái)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)不斷被提及。顯然，我們應(yīng)該為此感到恐懼，因?yàn)槿藗冾A(yù)言，自動(dòng)化會(huì)造成大規(guī)模失業(yè)，減少工資，以及加劇不平等現(xiàn)象。
如今，觀察員和科技預(yù)言家們已經(jīng)不再只憂心于硅谷的趨勢(shì)了。一項(xiàng)研究已經(jīng)取得了上百個(gè)例證，牛津的學(xué)者們估計(jì)至少有47%的美國(guó)崗位和54%的歐洲崗位會(huì)被機(jī)器取代。
我承認(rèn)，以上這些消息我們?cè)缫岩?jiàn)怪不怪了。從200年以前，雇員們就開(kāi)始擔(dān)心不斷發(fā)展的自動(dòng)化，雇主們也不斷說(shuō)服自己會(huì)有新的工作應(yīng)運(yùn)而生，取代他們的位置。讓我們回顧一下，1800年，那時(shí)美國(guó)的農(nóng)民大約占總?cè)丝诘?4%，而到了1900年這一比率降到了31%，到了2000年農(nóng)民只占全美總?cè)丝诘?%。然而農(nóng)民的減少并沒(méi)有造成大規(guī)模失業(yè)。1930年，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家約翰·凱恩斯曾預(yù)言：到2030年我們一周只需工作15小時(shí)，而自從20世紀(jì)80年代開(kāi)始，工作在我們生活中所占的比重只增不減，還帶來(lái)了過(guò)度疲勞和壓力過(guò)大等一系列問(wèn)題。
但同時(shí)，我們甚至沒(méi)有討論到問(wèn)題的核心。我們需要捫心自問(wèn)的真正問(wèn)題是：如今，是什么驅(qū)動(dòng)著我們繼續(xù)“工作”？
到底什么是“工作”？
2013年，《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》雜志對(duì)12000名專業(yè)人員進(jìn)行了調(diào)查，感覺(jué)自己的工作“既無(wú)意義也不重要”的人約占50%，剩下的50%則不能將自己的工作和他們公司的使命聯(lián)系起來(lái)。而在另一項(xiàng)調(diào)查中，來(lái)自142個(gè)國(guó)家的23萬(wàn)的人中只有13%的人真正熱愛(ài)自己的工作。最近一項(xiàng)對(duì)于英國(guó)人的民 意調(diào)查顯示，37%的人認(rèn)為自己的工作是毫無(wú)用處的。
幾十年后，世界上是否還有足夠的工作？那些擔(dān)心會(huì)出現(xiàn)大規(guī)模失業(yè)現(xiàn)象的人低估了資本主義創(chuàng)造新工作的卓越能力。如果在近幾十年，我們想從科技的巨大進(jìn)步中撈取好處，就必須主動(dòng)地重新思考“工作”的真正含義。
進(jìn)步的悖論
一切都要?dú)w為一個(gè)古老的問(wèn)題：生命的意義是什么？大部分人會(huì)回答說(shuō)生命的意義在于使生活變得更美，或更好，或更加有趣。但是，如何實(shí)現(xiàn)呢？如今，大部分人會(huì)回答說(shuō)：“通過(guò)工作�！�
那是我們這個(gè)時(shí)代特征之一，我們尋找意義的理論體系可能會(huì)如煙般散去。
諷刺的是，科技進(jìn)步正在加劇這個(gè)危機(jī)。過(guò)去，社會(huì)之所以能夠提供更多的工作正是由于我們的機(jī)器人越來(lái)越先進(jìn)。隨著農(nóng)場(chǎng)和工廠變得越來(lái)越有效率，它們?cè)诮?jīng)濟(jì)中的所占的比重也隨之減少。農(nóng)業(yè)和制造業(yè)效率越高，它們所需要的人力就越少。這就是進(jìn)步的悖論：我們?cè)绞歉挥�，可供揮霍的時(shí)間就越多。正如布拉德·皮特在《搏擊俱樂(lè)部》中所說(shuō)，我們經(jīng)�！案芍约翰幌矚g的工作來(lái)買(mǎi)自己壓根不需要的東西�！�
我相信，一定會(huì)有那么一天，我們工作價(jià)值的大小不再取決于薪資的高低，而是取決于你散播了多少快樂(lè)，給世界帶來(lái)了多少意義。到那時(shí)候，教育的目的不再是給你一份毫無(wú)用途的工作，而是為了讓你過(guò)上更好的生活。有那么一天，我們會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)“工作是屬于機(jī)器人的，而生活才是屬于全人類的”這一理念。
如果最基本的工資對(duì)你來(lái)說(shuō)是一個(gè)空想，我可以提醒你：人類文明進(jìn)程中的每一個(gè)里程碑——從廢除奴隸制到實(shí)現(xiàn)男女平等——曾經(jīng)也都是如空想一般的存在。或許，正如奧斯卡·王爾德所說(shuō)：“進(jìn)步就是將一個(gè)個(gè)不切實(shí)際的夢(mèng)想實(shí)現(xiàn)的過(guò)程。”
