Questão 0814ee90-b6
Prova:UECE 2009
Disciplina:Inglês
Assunto:Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
A sudden surge of births within the next few years
could bring forth
A sudden surge of births within the next few years
could bring forth
TEXT
One reason growth forecasts for rich
nations are so grim is the common assumption
that birth rates are falling. Fewer people will
produce less income, and shrinking economies.
Only the assumption of aging populations may be
wrong, according to a recent report by Goldman
Sachs that looks at key demographic trends for
the 21st century.
Since bottoming out in 2001, fertility
rates in a number of developed economies have
actually been on the rise. Among rich economies,
the jump is most pronounced in places like the
United Kingdom, France, Spain, and the U.S.
Larger immigrant populations in these nations
have something to do with this, as they tend to
have more children. Yet the effect is only short
term, as migrants adopt the fertility rates of their
new homes within a generation or so.
Goldman’s new analysis shows that
another reason for the unexpected jump, and one
that will play a bigger role in the future, is that women in rich countries have been having
children later and later in life, something that
traditional economic models don’t account for.
Standard estimates of fertility are still tabulated
assuming that most women are having children in
their early 20s, rather than late 20s or even 30s
and 40s, as has become more common in rich
countries with lots of women in the workforce. “In
parts of Europe (this method of calculation) has
probably understated true fertility by about 15 to
20 percent,” notes Goldman Sachs economist
Peter Berezin.
Those are big numbers, with potentially
very significant ramifications. For starters, it could
be that some of the problems faced by aging
nations with shrinking tax bases (like, for
example, overblown health-care spending,
crumbling infrastructure, and budget shortfalls)
may not be quite as bad as once envisioned. In
fact, there is some evidence to suggest that we
may soon start seeing mini baby booms, which, in
20 years or so, could have a significant impact on
the size of rich nations’ workforces, a shift that
can’t come too soon for countries now struggling
with unprecedented levels of national debt.
Another bright spot – recent surveys by
Eurobarometer show that European women
between the ages of 25 and 39 want to have more
children, if only it were easier to find a better
work-life balance. Note to European leaders: stop
worrying about the effects of immigration and
start creating better-paid part-time work.
Newsweek, September 28, 2009
TEXT
One reason growth forecasts for rich
nations are so grim is the common assumption
that birth rates are falling. Fewer people will
produce less income, and shrinking economies.
Only the assumption of aging populations may be
wrong, according to a recent report by Goldman
Sachs that looks at key demographic trends for
the 21st century.
Since bottoming out in 2001, fertility
rates in a number of developed economies have
actually been on the rise. Among rich economies,
the jump is most pronounced in places like the
United Kingdom, France, Spain, and the U.S.
Larger immigrant populations in these nations
have something to do with this, as they tend to
have more children. Yet the effect is only short
term, as migrants adopt the fertility rates of their
new homes within a generation or so.
Goldman’s new analysis shows that
another reason for the unexpected jump, and one
that will play a bigger role in the future, is that women in rich countries have been having
children later and later in life, something that
traditional economic models don’t account for.
Standard estimates of fertility are still tabulated
assuming that most women are having children in
their early 20s, rather than late 20s or even 30s
and 40s, as has become more common in rich
countries with lots of women in the workforce. “In
parts of Europe (this method of calculation) has
probably understated true fertility by about 15 to
20 percent,” notes Goldman Sachs economist
Peter Berezin.
Those are big numbers, with potentially
very significant ramifications. For starters, it could
be that some of the problems faced by aging
nations with shrinking tax bases (like, for
example, overblown health-care spending,
crumbling infrastructure, and budget shortfalls)
may not be quite as bad as once envisioned. In
fact, there is some evidence to suggest that we
may soon start seeing mini baby booms, which, in
20 years or so, could have a significant impact on
the size of rich nations’ workforces, a shift that
can’t come too soon for countries now struggling
with unprecedented levels of national debt.
Another bright spot – recent surveys by
Eurobarometer show that European women
between the ages of 25 and 39 want to have more
children, if only it were easier to find a better
work-life balance. Note to European leaders: stop
worrying about the effects of immigration and
start creating better-paid part-time work.
Newsweek, September 28, 2009
A
a significant increase of the workforce
in approximately two decades
B
a decrease in health-care investments
C
a sudden crumbling of the
infrastructure
D
a shrinking of the budget
Gabarito comentado
A
Aline SilvaMonitor com apoio de IA
Gabarito: A
Fundamento decisivo: O critério decisivo é localizar no último parágrafo a consequência explicitamente indicada para “mini baby booms”: o texto diz que eles poderiam ter “a significant impact on the size of rich nations’ workforces” “in 20 years or so”. Assim, a alternativa correta é a que preserva esse efeito futuro e esse horizonte temporal.
Tema central: consequência futura do baby boom
Análise das alternativas
A
Certa
A alternativa A reproduz com fidelidade a consequência explicitamente indicada no texto. O trecho decisivo é: “we may soon start seeing mini baby booms, which, in 20 years or so, could have a significant impact on the size of rich nations’ workforces”. Há equivalência entre “surge of births” e “mini baby booms”, e entre “in 20 years or so” e “in approximately two decades”. Além disso, “significant impact on the size of ... workforces” sustenta a ideia de aumento relevante da força de trabalho.
B
Errada
Incorreta porque o texto não afirma diminuição de investimentos em saúde. Ele menciona “overblown health-care spending” como um problema de países envelhecidos que talvez “may not be quite as bad as once envisioned”. Isso não equivale a “a decrease in health-care investments”, nem é apresentado como efeito direto do aumento de nascimentos.
C
Errada
Incorreta porque “crumbling infrastructure” aparece no texto como exemplo de problema já enfrentado por nações envelhecidas com base tributária em retração, não como consequência futura de um aumento repentino de nascimentos. A alternativa inverte a relação causal do texto.
D
Errada
Incorreta porque “budget shortfalls” é mencionado como dificuldade existente nas nações envelhecidas, não como efeito produzido por um baby boom. O texto sugere justamente que esses problemas podem não ser tão graves quanto se imaginava, e não que haverá encolhimento do orçamento por causa do aumento de nascimentos.
Pegadinha da questão
A banca mistura a consequência direta do trecho decisivo com palavras do mesmo parágrafo ligadas a outros problemas (“health-care”, “infrastructure”, “budget”). Essas expressões aparecem no texto, mas não como efeito do possível baby boom; o único efeito futuro explicitado é o impacto sobre a workforce em cerca de 20 anos.
Dica para questões semelhantes
- Localize primeiro o trecho em que o texto explicita causa e consequência, em vez de escolher alternativas por palavras soltas repetidas no parágrafo.
- Verifique se a alternativa preserva o marcador temporal do texto; aqui, “in 20 years or so” foi decisivo.
- Diferencie problema já existente de efeito futuro projetado: nem tudo que aparece no mesmo parágrafo responde ao que foi perguntado.
