研究所、轉學考(插大)、學士後-英文題庫下載題庫

 Letter 1: 

I read with much interest your article on the devastating effects of Hurricanes Rita and Katrina on New Orleans, and how much land, through water saturation, you have lost. This summer in Great Britain we have suffered much water situation. Our people were without power and drinking water, and in some cases had no homes. Unfortunately, aid seems to be little, and bearing in mind the size of our country and the cost of housing, there is very little room for people to move, as some of your people in New Orleans did. Our problem is that our drainage system is so old and needs replacement, but our central government doesn’t bother. We have inadequate water defenses with our rivers, and many of our homes are built on low-lying floodplains. Developers know the consequences of the weather (though this might not happen again for 40 to 50 years), but our government is still insisting on building more homes on existing floodplain areas. 

I applaud the loyalty and self-reliance of the residents in attempting to resurrect the city. However, I object to potentially having to support the recovery from another disaster with tax dollars, when hurricanes seem so likely to happen. If people want to live there, it should be at their own risk.

 Letter 3:

Residences and decision-making alike must move to higher ground regarding the future of New Orleans. Cool pragmatism must prevail over emotional attachment to place. Those who expect a return to pre-Katrina Hurricane New Orleans life are selfishly myopic. Not only were residents’ lives devastated by the tragedy, but emotional and other costs were also borne by families, friends and fellow citizens throughout the country. Rescue workers put their lives and health in harm’s way. Taxpayers bore the costs of the devastation and will be required to do so once again, inevitably. To rebuild the residential life of New Orleans is nothing less than reckless endangerment.