Comprehension Test Questions and Answers प्रश्न और उत्तर का अभ्यास करें
8 प्र:The conclusion of World Trade Organization’s 11th biennial ministerial conference at Buenos Aires was worrisome. From an Indian standpoint, there was no loss as status quo continues in the most important issue: the right to continue the food security programme by using support prices. But the inability of the negotiators to reach even one substantive outcome suggests that WTO’s efficacy is under question. As a 164-country multilateral organisation dedicated to crafting rules of trade through consensus, WTO represents the optimal bet for developing countries such as India. Strengthening WTO is in India’s best interest.
Perhaps the biggest threat to WTO’s efficacy today is the attitude of the US. The world’s largest economy appears to have lost faith in the organisation and has begun to undermine one of its most successful segments, the dispute redressal mechanism. This is significant as the US has been directly involved in nearly half of all cases brought to WTO. Separately, large groups of countries decided to pursue negotiations on e-commerce, investment facilitation and removal of trade obstacles for medium and small scale industries. By itself this should not weaken WTO. But it comes at a time when there is growing frustration with gridlock at WTO.
India did well to defend its position on its food security programme. The envisaged reform package which will see a greater use of direct cash transfers to beneficiaries will be in sync with what developed countries do. But it’s important for India to enhance its efforts to reinvigorate WTO. In this context, India’s plan to organise a meeting of some countries early next year is a step in the right direction. WTO represents the best available platform to accommodate interests of a diverse set of nations. Therefore, India should be at the forefront of moves to fortify it.
What is the biggest threat to WTO’s efficacy today?
773 060228e31ad295556282b3145
60228e31ad295556282b3145Perhaps the biggest threat to WTO’s efficacy today is the attitude of the US. The world’s largest economy appears to have lost faith in the organisation and has begun to undermine one of its most successful segments, the dispute redressal mechanism. This is significant as the US has been directly involved in nearly half of all cases brought to WTO. Separately, large groups of countries decided to pursue negotiations on e-commerce, investment facilitation and removal of trade obstacles for medium and small scale industries. By itself this should not weaken WTO. But it comes at a time when there is growing frustration with gridlock at WTO.
India did well to defend its position on its food security programme. The envisaged reform package which will see a greater use of direct cash transfers to beneficiaries will be in sync with what developed countries do. But it’s important for India to enhance its efforts to reinvigorate WTO. In this context, India’s plan to organise a meeting of some countries early next year is a step in the right direction. WTO represents the best available platform to accommodate interests of a diverse set of nations. Therefore, India should be at the forefront of moves to fortify it.
- 1Negotiators of WTO are not decision takers.false
- 2WTO’s lame attitude towards global trade.false
- 3India being not working in its best interest.false
- 4Lost of faith in WTO by US.true
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 4. "Lost of faith in WTO by US."
प्र:A passage is given with Five questions following it. Read the passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the four alternatives and click the button corresponding to it.
It's nothing short of a revolution in how we eat, and it's getting closer every day. Yes, a lot of people are obese, and yes, the definition of "healthy eating" seems to change all the time. But in labs and research centres around the world, scientists are racing to match our genes and our taste buds, creating the perfect diet for each of us, a diet that will fight disease, increase longevity, boost physical and mental performance, and taste great to boot. As food scientist J.Bruce German says, "The foods we like the most will be the most healthy for us."
Is that going to be a great day, or what?
All this will come to pass, thanks to genomics, the science that maps and describes an individual's genetic code. In the future, personalized DNA chips will allow us to assess our own inherited predispositions for certain diseases, then adjust our diets accordingly. So, if you're at risk for heart disease, you won't just go on a generic low-fat diet. You'll eat foods with just the right amount and type of fat that's best for you. You'll even be able to track your metabolism day-to-day to determine what foods you should eat at any given time, for any given activity. "Since people differ in their genetics and metabolism, one diet won't fit all," says German.
As complex as all this sounds, it could turn out to be relatively simple.
Why won't a common diet fit everybody?
773 05efd6bc3eb90be58c5920395
5efd6bc3eb90be58c5920395It's nothing short of a revolution in how we eat, and it's getting closer every day. Yes, a lot of people are obese, and yes, the definition of "healthy eating" seems to change all the time. But in labs and research centres around the world, scientists are racing to match our genes and our taste buds, creating the perfect diet for each of us, a diet that will fight disease, increase longevity, boost physical and mental performance, and taste great to boot. As food scientist J.Bruce German says, "The foods we like the most will be the most healthy for us."
Is that going to be a great day, or what?
All this will come to pass, thanks to genomics, the science that maps and describes an individual's genetic code. In the future, personalized DNA chips will allow us to assess our own inherited predispositions for certain diseases, then adjust our diets accordingly. So, if you're at risk for heart disease, you won't just go on a generic low-fat diet. You'll eat foods with just the right amount and type of fat that's best for you. You'll even be able to track your metabolism day-to-day to determine what foods you should eat at any given time, for any given activity. "Since people differ in their genetics and metabolism, one diet won't fit all," says German.
As complex as all this sounds, it could turn out to be relatively simple.
- 1Because different people eat different foodfalse
- 2Because their genes are differentfalse
- 3Since they differ in genetics and metabolismtrue
- 4Because of their different moodsfalse
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 3. "Since they differ in genetics and metabolism"
प्र:Read the following passage carefully and give answer the following questions.
Two hundred years after Malthus predicted that population growth would overtake food production by a margin of 256 to 9, the simple fact is that food production had always been ahead of the population growth. Malthus’ doomsday prediction simply did not come true due to two major reasons: first, population did not grow geometrically and birth rates in all Western countries fell during the 20- Century, resulting in very slow population growth. Over the past quarter century, birth rates have been falling in the developing countries too. Second, modern agricultural practices and better irrigation have resulted in tremendous growth in food production in almost all parts of the globe, with the notable exception of sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, at the global level, the Malthusian doomsday never befell on us.
India’s population grew by about two and a half times in the past 45 years — from 361 million in 1951 to an estimated 916 million in 1995. But during the same period, India’s food grain production grew by nearly four times — from 51 million tonnes in 1951 to 191 million tonnes in 1995. As a result, the per capita food grain availability in India has gone up considerably since the Independence. That is, the Malthusian prediction has not come true even in India.
In the past forty-five years, India’s population has grown about
772 05f56f89bc6226409bb493a51
5f56f89bc6226409bb493a51Two hundred years after Malthus predicted that population growth would overtake food production by a margin of 256 to 9, the simple fact is that food production had always been ahead of the population growth. Malthus’ doomsday prediction simply did not come true due to two major reasons: first, population did not grow geometrically and birth rates in all Western countries fell during the 20- Century, resulting in very slow population growth. Over the past quarter century, birth rates have been falling in the developing countries too. Second, modern agricultural practices and better irrigation have resulted in tremendous growth in food production in almost all parts of the globe, with the notable exception of sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, at the global level, the Malthusian doomsday never befell on us.
India’s population grew by about two and a half times in the past 45 years — from 361 million in 1951 to an estimated 916 million in 1995. But during the same period, India’s food grain production grew by nearly four times — from 51 million tonnes in 1951 to 191 million tonnes in 1995. As a result, the per capita food grain availability in India has gone up considerably since the Independence. That is, the Malthusian prediction has not come true even in India.
- 1three and a half timesfalse
- 2two and a half timestrue
- 3five timesfalse
- 4one and a half timesfalse
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 2. "two and a half times"
प्र:Read the passage carefully and give the answer of following questions.
Poverty can be defined as a social phenomenon in which a section of the society is unable to fulfil even its basic necessities of life. When a substantial segment of the society is deprived of the minimum level of living and continues at a bare subsistence level, that society is said to be plagued with mass poverty. The countries of the third world exhibit invariably the existence of mass poverty, although pockets of poverty exist even in the developed countries of Europe and America.
Attempts have been made in all societies to define poverty, but all of them are conditioned by the vision of minimum or good life obtaining in society. For instance, the concept of the poverty in the U.S.A. would be significantly different from that in India because the average man is able to afford a much higher level of living in the United States. There is an effort in all definitions of poverty to approach the average level of living in a society and as such these definitions reflect the coexistence of inequalities in a society and the extent to which different societies are prepared to tolerate them. For instance, inn India, the generally accepted definition of poverty emphasizes minimum level of living rather than a reasonable level of living. This attitude is borne out of a realization that it would not be possible to provide even a minimum quantum of basic needs for some decades and therefore, to talk about a reasonable level of living or good life may appear to be wishful thinking at the present stage. Thus, political considerations enter the definitions of poverty because programmes of alleviating poverty may become prohibitive as the vision of a good life widens.
Definition of poverty in India emphasizes minimum level of living because
768 05fbddca2ef75884f813fc533
5fbddca2ef75884f813fc533- 1It is impossible at this stage to provide a reasonable quantum of living.true
- 2Political considerations enter the definitions of poverty.false
- 3There is a reasonable level of good living.false
- 4Programmes of alleviation of poverty have been initiated.false
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 1. "It is impossible at this stage to provide a reasonable quantum of living."
प्र:Read the passage carefully and give the answer of following questions.
Poverty can be defined as a social phenomenon in which a section of the society is unable to fulfil even its basic necessities of life. When a substantial segment of the society is deprived of the minimum level of living and continues at a bare subsistence level, that society is said to be plagued with mass poverty. The countries of the third world exhibit invariably the existence of mass poverty, although pockets of poverty exist even in the developed countries of Europe and America.
Attempts have been made in all societies to define poverty, but all of them are conditioned by the vision of minimum or good life obtaining in society. For instance, the concept of the poverty in the U.S.A. would be significantly different from that in India because the average man is able to afford a much higher level of living in the United States. There is an effort in all definitions of poverty to approach the average level of living in a society and as such these definitions reflect the coexistence of inequalities in a society and the extent to which different societies are prepared to tolerate them. For instance, inn India, the generally accepted definition of poverty emphasizes minimum level of living rather than a reasonable level of living. This attitude is borne out of a realization that it would not be possible to provide even a minimum quantum of basic needs for some decades and therefore, to talk about a reasonable level of living or good life may appear to be wishful thinking at the present stage. Thus, political considerations enter the definitions of poverty because programmes of alleviating poverty may become prohibitive as the vision of a good life widens.
Societies in the third world can be characterised as plagued by mass poverty, because
767 05fbddb684d67184d07befb20
5fbddb684d67184d07befb20- 1Europe and America have pockets of poverty.false
- 2Poverty is a mass social phenomenon.false
- 3There is a wide variation in the definition of poverty.false
- 4Societies live at a bare subsistence level.true
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 4. "Societies live at a bare subsistence level."
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 4. "Standards "
प्र:Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it.
If the census tells us that India has two or three hundred languages, it also tells us, I believe, that Germany has about fifty or sixty languages. I do not remember anyone pointing out this fact in proof of the disunity or disparity of Germany. As a matter of fact, a census mentions all manner of petty languages, sometimes spoken by a few thousand persons only; and often dialects are classed for scientific purposes as different languages. India seems to me to have surprisingly few languages, considering its area. Compared to the same area in Europe, it is far more closely allied in regard to language, but because of widespread illiteracy, common standards have not developed and dialects have formed. The principal languages of India are Hindustani (of the two varieties, Hindi and Urdu), Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi, Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada. If Assamese, Oriya, Sindhi, Kashmiri, Pushtu and Punjabi are added, the whole country is covered except for some hill and forest tribes. Of these, the Indo-Aryan languages, which cover the whole north, centre and west of India, are closely allied; and the southern Dravidian languages, though different, have been greatly influenced by Sanskrit, and are full of Sanskrit words.
Which of the following is not true in reference to the passage?
765 060c87c59e12dfd4e6c4e8632
60c87c59e12dfd4e6c4e8632If the census tells us that India has two or three hundred languages, it also tells us, I believe, that Germany has about fifty or sixty languages. I do not remember anyone pointing out this fact in proof of the disunity or disparity of Germany. As a matter of fact, a census mentions all manner of petty languages, sometimes spoken by a few thousand persons only; and often dialects are classed for scientific purposes as different languages. India seems to me to have surprisingly few languages, considering its area. Compared to the same area in Europe, it is far more closely allied in regard to language, but because of widespread illiteracy, common standards have not developed and dialects have formed. The principal languages of India are Hindustani (of the two varieties, Hindi and Urdu), Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi, Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada. If Assamese, Oriya, Sindhi, Kashmiri, Pushtu and Punjabi are added, the whole country is covered except for some hill and forest tribes. Of these, the Indo-Aryan languages, which cover the whole north, centre and west of India, are closely allied; and the southern Dravidian languages, though different, have been greatly influenced by Sanskrit, and are full of Sanskrit words.
- 1Census mentions all manner of pertly languages.false
- 2India has few languages compared to its area.false
- 3The Indo-Aryan languages are closely alliedfalse
- 4Sanskrit has hot been influenced by other languages.true
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice
उत्तर : 4. "Sanskrit has hot been influenced by other languages. "
- उत्तर देखें
- Workspace
- SingleChoice