『新东方在线托福听力』为托福考生准备了ETS托福TPO/Official 40 Lec 4听力练习：Why does the professor mention highway construction that took place during the 1950s and 1960s?原文题目答案解析，TPO/Official 40 Lec 4听力原文范文音频翻译。

托福TPO/Official 40 Lec 4听力原文Why does the professor mention highway construction that took place during the 1950s and 1960s?【新东方在线】

旁白：接下来请听一段有关于美国政府的讲座。

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in a United States Government class.

教授：我们已经讲过经济运作必须的基础服务和设施，比如道路，桥梁，地铁系统，供水系统，供电网等等。

Professor: We've been talking about the basic services and facilities that an economy needs to function, roads, bridges, rail systems, water supplies, power grids, and so forth.

现在传统上的社会基础设施，尤其是交通系统已经被国家，政府所拥有和运作。

Now, traditionally much of a society's infrastructure, particularly the transportation infrastructure, has been owned and operated by states, by governments.

但最近，地方和州政府已经开始考虑，有时甚至实际上签订了各种协议，将其部分基础设施私有化，特别是在交通运输领域。

But lately, local and state governments have started to consider and sometimes actually enter into various deals to privatize parts of their infrastructure, particularly in the transportation sector.

额，你可能知道1950s，60s爆发了建高速公路的热潮。

Well, as you may know, in the 1950s and 60s there was a tremendous highway building boom.

政府建造了一个巨型的高速公路与桥梁隧道的联结网。

Governments created a huge interlocking network of highways with associated bridges and tunnels.

但是这些设施越来越陈旧，维护的成本越来越高，真的是相当高。

But these facilities are getting old now and they're becoming more and more expensive to maintain, very expensive actually.

公路收费和税收有时候不够支付维修费。

Tolls and tax revenues don't often cover all the needed repairs.

学生：那为什么政府不提高税收和过路费？

Student: So why don't the governments just raise tolls and taxes?

政府官员是被纳税人选举出来的，政府提高税收，纳税人自然不乐意。

Government officials are elected by voters and voters get upset when their taxes go up.

至于高速公路通行费，通勤者尤其不喜欢支付更高的通行费，仅仅提出增加通行费都可能会损害政府官员的政治生涯。

And as for highways tolls, commuters especially don't like paying higher tolls, merely proposing increases can damage political careers.

所以政府背负着巨大的压力去找到另一条方案去维护基础设施。

So there's tremendous pressure on governments to find other ways to maintain infrastructure assets.

一种方法是去卖或者租一部分设施给私人公司，比如像收费桥梁，隧道等。

One solution is to sell or lease a part of the infrastructure, a toll bridge, a tunnel, something like that to a private company, usually a company that specializes in this sort a thing.

这个方法是想让那些买了或者租了桥或者高速公路的公司能容易的维护设施。

The idea is that the company that buys or leases a bridge or a highway or whatever will find it easier to keep it in good repair.

Student: That would make commuters happy.

Professor: Right, there could be better service.

因为私人公司不是政府实体，面临的政治阻力更小，比如说可以提高过路费来提供更好的服务。

Since they are not government entities, private companies face less political resistance, say to raising tolls in order to provide that better service.

除了这个，政府喜欢私有化的原因还有一个。

But besides that, there's another reason governments like these deals.

政府经常没钱付账单，他们可以用卖或者租一部分设施的钱去平衡预算。

States often have trouble paying their bills and they can use money they get from selling or leasing a piece of infrastructure to balance their budgets.

教授：听上去是不错，但是很多人对于私有化基础设施还是持谨慎态度的，也确实是这样。

Professor: It does sound good, but a lot of people are very wary of privatizing pieces of infrastructure and rightly so.

比如，到现在为止大部分的情况都是，私人公司做的第一件事情就是大幅度提高过路费，因为他们说：“哦，我们必须要进行重点维修，要修好多好多年。

For instance, in almost every case thus far, the first thing private companies do is drastically raise user fees because they say, "Oh, we must do critical maintenance that's gone undone for years and years".

因为我们是私人公司，我们不能用税收去修。

And because we're a private company, we can't use tax money to do it.

我们唯一的选择就是提高过路费。

但这对于走高速公路去上班的人会产生什么影响？

But what's the impact on people who use a toll road to get to work?

如果私人公司一夜之间抬高两倍或者三倍的过路费该怎么办？

What if a private owner doubles or triples the toll overnight?

学生：额，通行者会花费他们收入的高比例在上下班上。

Student: Uh, users would have to spend a higher percentage of their income on commuting.

教授：基于他们的收入，这个比例将是非常高的。

Professor: And depending on their income, that percentage could be significant.

学生：但如果过路费上涨了，我可以避免走收费公路，去走不收费的小路。

Student: But if tolls went up, me, I'd just avoid the toll road and take smaller back roads where there aren't any tolls.

支线公路变得更吸引人，并且私人公司是知道的。

Secondary roads would become attractive to lots of other people too, and private companies know this.

他们也知道交通量急剧缩减会触碰到他们的底线。

They also know that dramatic reductions in traffic would hurt their bottom line.

所以市场因素确实起到作用不让私人公司提高太多过路费。

So market forces do play a role in keeping private companies from raising their tolls too much.

但是仅仅是过路费会急剧攀升的前景仍然对政府是个警示，当政府考虑专卖或者出租部分基础设施的时候。

But the mere prospect of astronomical toll hikes is still alarming to governments when they think about selling or leasing parts of an infrastructure.

从商业的出发点来看，购买基础设施是个非常好的投资！

Now, from a business standpoint, infrastructure purchases can be great investments!

如果一个公司从政府那买或者长期租一个收费桥梁，那差不多保障了公司每年都有了一个固定的收入来源，也就意味着说如果公司决定把桥梁卖给另一个公司，比如从现在数十年，是绝对不愁买家的。

If a company buys or gets a long-term lease on a toll bridge from the government, it's got an almost guaranteed steady source of revenue for years and years, which means that if the company decides it wants to sell the bridge to another company, say ten years from now, it'll have no problem finding a buyer.

学生：但是如果这个新的买家，持续收高过路费，但是不做同等量的维修，因为他们想要从这个固定资产里压榨更多的钱，那怎么办？

Student: But what if that buyer, this new owner, continues to charge a high toll but doesn't do the same amount of maintenance because they want to squeeze more money out of the asset?

教授：这种情况下，政府能把它买回来吗？

Professor: In that case, could the governments buy the asset back?

要这么做的话，政府必须筹集资金要么通过增加税收要么通过卖债券，而这两者都是政治敏感的。

Well, to do that, it would have to raise money either by raising taxes or by selling bonds, both of which are politically sensitive.

所以在现实里转卖设施可否真的可以撤回是不清楚的。

So it's unclear in a practical sense whether these deals are truly reversible.

What issue does the professor mainly discuss?

Why does the professor mention highway construction that took place during the 1950s and 1960s?

According to the professor, why do governments consider selling or leasing pieces of infrastructure?

What does the professor imply about some people’s concerns over privatizing parts of an infrastructure?

What does the professor imply about secondary roads?

According to the professor, what is likely to happen when a bridge provides steady revenue for a private company?

Listen to part of the lecture in the United States Government class
Professor 
We’ve been talking about the basic services and facilities that the colonies need to function, roads, bridges, water supplies, power grids and so fort. But what we call infrastructure.
Now traditionally, much of the society’s infrastructure, particularly the transportation infrastructure, has been owned and operated by states ad governments. But lately, local and state start to consider and sometimes actually enter into there is deals to privatize part of their infrastructure, particularly in the transportation sector. And why is this privatization happening?
Well, as you may know, in the 1950s and 1960s, there was a tremendous highway building boom. Government created a huge interlocking network of highways with the associated British internals. But these facilities are getting old now and they are becoming more and more expensive to maintain, very expensive actually. Tolls and tax revenues don’t often cover all the needed repairs.
Student 
So, why doesn’t the government just raise the tolls and revenues?
Professor 
Well, that’s not so simple. Government officials are elected by voters. And voters get upset when their taxes go up. And as for highway tolls, commuters especially, don’t like paying higher tolls. Merely proposing increases can damage political careers, so there is tremendous pressure on government to find other ways to maintain infrastructure assets. One solution is to sell or lease a part of the infrastructure, a toll bridge, a tunnel, something like that, to a private company, usually a company that specializes in a sort of thing. The idea is that the company that buys or leases a bridge or a highway or whatever will find it easier to keep it in good repair.
Student 
That will make …
Professor 
Right, there could be better service. Since there are not government entities, private company face less political resistance, say to raise tolls in order to provide that better service. But besides that, there is another reason government likes these deals. States often have trouble paying their bills, and they can use money they get from selling or leasing a piece of infrastructure to balance their budgets.
Student 
That all sounds good to me.
Professor 
It does sound good. But a lot of people are very weary of privatizing pieces of infrastructure, and rightly so. For instance, in almost every case that’s far, the first thing private companies do is drastically raising user fees, because they say ‘oh we must do critical that’s go on down years and years, and because we are private company, we can’t use tax money to do it, our only option is raising tolls’. But what’s the impact on people who use the toll road to get on work? What if the private owner doubles or triples the toll overnight?
Student 
Um…users would have to spend a higher percentage of their income on commuting.
Professor 
And depending on their income, that percentage could be significant.
Student 
But if the toll wen up, I mean, I just avoid the toll road and take smaller back road where there aren’t any tolls.
Professor 
That’s a good point. Secondary roads will become attractive to lots of other people too. And private companies know this. They also know that dramatic reduction in traffic would hurt their bottom of line. So market forces do play a role in keeping private companies from raising their tolls too much. But the mere prospect of the astronomical toll is still alarming to governments when they think about selling or leasing part of the infrastructure.
Now from a business standpoint, infrastructure purchases can be great investments. If a company buys or gets a long term lease on a toll bridge from the government, it gets an almost guarantee of steady source of revenue for years and years. Which means that if a company decides that it wants to sell the bridge to another company, say, ten years from now, it has no problem finding a buyer.
Student 
But what if that buyer, this new owner, continues to charge a high toll but doesn’t do the same amount of amendments, because they want to squeeze more money out of the asset.
Professor 
In that case, could the government buy the asset back? To do that, it’d have to raise money either by raising taxes or by selling bounds, both of which are politically sensitive. So what’s unclear in the practical sense the deal is truly reversible.
<img src="/upload/image/1516155504157.png" alt="" width="511" height="383" /><img src="/upload/image/1516155527043.png" alt="" width="523" height="392" /><img src="/upload/image/1516155541219.png" alt="" width="515" height="395" />

北美留学考试	英联邦留学考试	专业问答
TOEFL	IELTS	雅思专业问答
GRE	A Level	托福专业问答
GMAT	PTE	GRE专业问答
SAT	Interchange	GMAT专业问答
ACT	英本精英计划
AP/SSAT/IB
美高先修课
美本精英计划
美研精英计划