Translation
Quote:
In the 1970s, the idea of building so-called “New Towns” to absorb growth was considered a potential cure-all for urban problems in the United States. It was erroneously assumed that by diverting residents from existing centers, current urban problems would at least get no worse. It was also wrongly assumed that, since European New Towns had been financially and socially successful, the same could be expected in the United States.
They planned to build new-towns as the various Govs made in Europe, to solve mainly two problems: overcrowded cities and success as they met in Europe
Quote:
However, the ill-considered projects not only failed to relieve pressures on existing cities, but also weakened those cities further by drawing away high income citizens. This increased the concentration of low-income groups—who were unable to provide the necessary tax base to support the cities. Taxpayers who remained were left to carry a greater burden, while industry and commerce sought to escape.
Two problems arose: the only citizen escaped from the cities were the riches, leaving there the poor class. Not only that, the poor low-income class should pay the taxes to maintain that actual city. Not sustainable. Moreover, the businesses tried to get out from that quagmire
Quote:
As it turned out, the promoters of New Towns were the developers, builders, and financial institutions, all whose main interest was financial gain. Not surprisingly, development occurred in areas where land was cheap and construction profitable rather than where New Towns were genuinely needed. Moreover, poor planning and legislation produced not the sort of successful New Towns seen in Britain but rather nothing more than sprawling suburbs. Federal regulations designed to promote the New Town concept failed to consider social needs as the European plans did. In fact, the regulations specified virtually all of the ingredients of the typical suburban community.
The New tows were promoted only for financial gain NOT to create something useful for all the citizens alike, of every class.
A complete failure because they did not plan seriously as the European Govs made.
That is the passage above explained. Now the questions should be easier: one is medium-level and one is hard. Nonetheless, I think in 30 seconds we are able to nail them
2. Based only on the information in the passage, with which of the following statements about New Towns in the United States would the author most likely agree?
(A) They helped
dissuade businesses in urban centers from relocating to other areas.
Wrong. The firms wanted to escape NOT to rest
(B) They provided a
thriving social center away from the problems of the older city.
wrong
(C) They helped
reduce air pollution by relocating workplaces to suburbs, where most workers lived.
never seen pollution
(D) They
thwarted economic redevelopment plans for decaying urban centers.
wrong
(E) They provided affluent urban residents an escape from the city.
3. Which of the following phenomena is most closely analogous to the New Towns established in the United States?
(A) A business that fails as a result of insufficient
demand for its products or services
Wrong. Not mentioned
(B) A new game that fails to attain
widespread popularity because its rules are unfair
Wrong Not mentioned
(C) New utility software that
solves one computer problem but creates anotherCorrect. We do have a similar situation: create a new town to try to solve a problem but we get another one, even worse
Notice how I do not like completely this question. It has some room of ambiguity. The passage says :
was considered a potential cure-all for urban problems in the United States.. Also They thought implementing X they maybe solved Y but indeed they upfront did not solve any problem. They assumed wrongly since the beginning
(D) A new drug whose side effects are severe enough
to discourage people from using it
Wrong. Nobody uses anything here
(E) A scientific theory that lacks supporting empirical evidence
Not mentioned
Hope this helps
08 Feb 2020, 06:47
59% (02:20) correct
