The public distribution system, which provides food at low
prices, is a subject of vital concern. There is a growing realization that
thought Pakistan has enough food to feed its masses three square meals a day,
the monster of starvation and food insecurity continues to haunt the poor in
our country.
Increasing the purchasing power of the poor through
providing productive employment leading to rising income, and thus good standard
of living is the ultimate objective of public policy. However, till then, there
is a need to provide assured supply of food through a restructured more
efficient and decentralized public distribution system (PDS).
Although the PDS is extensive – it is one of the largest
such systems in the world – it has yet to reach the rural poor and the far off
places. It remains an urban phenomenon, with the majority of the rural poor
still out of its reach due to lack of economic and physical access. The poorest
in the cities and the migrants are left out, for they generally do not possess
ration cards. The allocation of PDS supplies in big cities is larger than in
rural areas. In view of such deficiencies in the system, the PDS urgently needs
to be streamlined. In addition, considering the large food grains production
combined with food subsidy on one hand and the continuing slow starvation and dismal
poverty of the rural population on the other, there is a strong case for making
PDS target group oriented.
The growing salaried class is provided job security, regular
income, and percent insulation against inflation. These gains of development
have not percolated down to the vast majority of our working population. If one
compares only dearness allowance to the employees in public and private sector
and looks at its growth in the past few years, the rising food subsidy is
insignificant to the point of inequity. The food subsidy is a kind of D.A. to
the poor, the self-employed and those in the unorganized sector of the economy.
However, what is most unfortunate is that out of the large budget of the so –
called food subsidy, the major part of it is administrative cost and wastages.
A small portion of the above budget goes to the real consumer and an even
lesser portion to the poor who are in real need.
It is true that subsidies should not become a permanent feature
except for the destitute, disabled widows and the old. It is also true that
subsidies often create a psychology of dependence and hence is habit – forming,
killing the general initiative of the people. By making PDS target group
oriented, not only the poorest and neediest would be reached without additional
cost, but it will actually cut overall costs incurred on large cities and for
better off localities. When the food and food subsidy are limited the rural and
urban poor should have the priority in the PDS supplies. The PDS should be
closely linked with programs of employment generation and nutrition
improvement.
Which of the following,
according to the passage, it compared with dearness allowance?
A great deal of discussion countries as to the real extent
of global environmental degradation and its implicational. What few people
challenge however is that the renewable natural resources of developing
countries are today subject to stresses of unprecedented magnitude. These
pressures are bought about, in part, by increased population and the quest for
an ever expanding food supply. Because the healthy, nutrition and general
well-being of the poor majority are directly depends on the integrity and
productivity of their natural resources, the capability of governments to manage
them effectively over the long term becomes of paramount importance.
Developing countries are becoming more aware of the ways in
which present and future economic development must build upon a sound and
sustainable natural resources base. Some are looking at our long tradition in
environmental protection and are receptive to US assistance which recognizes
the uniqueness of the social and ecological systems in these tropical
countries. Developing countries recognize the need to improve their capability
to analyze issues and their own natural resource management. In February 1981,
for example AID funded a national Academy of Sciences panel to advise Nepal on
their severe natural resource degradation problems. Some countries such as
Senegal, India, Indonesia and Thailand, are now including conservation concerns
in their economic development planning process.
Because so many governments of developing nations have
recognized the importance of these issues, the need today is not merely one of
raising additional consciousness, but for carefully designed and sharply
focused activities aimed at management regimes that are essential to the
achievement of sustained development.
How much environmental
pollution has taken place in the developing and the developed world?
Recent advances in science and technology have made it
possible for geneticists to find out abnormalities in the unborn foetus and
take remedial action to rectify some defects which would otherwise prove to be
fatal to the child. Though genetic engineering is still at its infancy,
scientists can now predict with greater accuracy a genetic disorder. It is not
yet an exact science since they are not in a position to predict when exactly a
genetic disorder will set in. While they have not yet been able to change the
genetic order of the gene in germs, they are optimistic and are holding out
that in the near future they might be successful in achieving this feat. They
have, however, acquired the ability in manipulating tissue cells. However,
genetic mis-information can sometimes be damaging for it may adversely affect
people psychologically. Genetic information may lead to a tendency to brand
some people as inferiors. Genetic information can therefore be abused and its
application in deciding the sex of the foetus and its subsequent abortion is
now hotly debated on ethical lines. But on this issue geneticists cannot be
squarely blamed though this charge has often been leveled at them. It is mainly
a societal problem. At present genetic engineering is a costly process of
detecting disorders but scientists hope to reduce the costs when technology
becomes more advanced. This is why much progress in this area has been possible
in scientifically advanced and rich countries like the U.S.A., U.K. and Japan.
It remains to be seen if in the future this science will lead to the
development of a race of supermen or will be able to obliterate disease from
this world.
Which of the following is the same in meaning as the word ‘obliterate’
as used in the passage?
Democratic societies from the earliest times have expected
their governments to protect the weak against the strong. No ‘era of good
feeling’ can justify discharging the police force or giving up the idea of
public control over concentrated private wealth. On the other hand, it is
obvious that a spirit of self – denial and moderation on the part of those who
hold economic power will greatly soften the demand for absolute equality. Men
are more interested in freedom and security than in an equal distribution of
wealth. The extent to which Government must interfere with business, therefore,
is not exactly measured by the extent to which economic power is concentrated
into a few hands. The required degree of government interference depends mainly
on whether economic powers are oppressively used, and on the necessity of
keeping economic factors in a tolerable state of balance.
However, with the necessity of meeting all these dangers and
threats to liberty, the powers of government are unavoidably increased,
whichever political party may be in office. The growth of government is a
necessary result of the growth of technology and of the problems that go with
the use of machines and science. Since the government in our nation, must take
on more powers to meet its problems, there is no way to preserve freedom except
by making democracy more powerful.
The growth of government is necessitated to
When we are young, we learn that
tigers and sharks are dangerous animals. We might be scared of them because
they are big and powerful. As we get older, however, we learn that sometimes
the most dangerous animals are also the smallest animals. In fact, the animal
that kills the most people every year is one that you have probably killed
yourself many times: the mosquito.
While it may seem that all
mosquitoes are biters, this is not actually the case. Male mosquitoes eat plant
nectar. One the other hand, female mosquitoes feed on animal blood. They need
this blood to live and produce eggs. When a female mosquito bites a human
being, it transmits a small amount of saliva into the blood. The saliva may or
may not contain a deadly disease. The result of the bite can be as minor as an
itchy bump or as serious as death.
Because a mosquito can bite many
people in the course of its life, it can carry diseases from one person to
another very easily. Two of the most deadly diseases carried by mosquitoes are
malaria and yellow fever. More than 700 million people become sick from these
diseases every year. At least 2 million of these people will die from these
diseases.
Many scientists are working on
safer and better ways to kill mosquitoes, but so far, there is no sure way to
protect everyone in the world from their deadly bites. Mosquito nests can be
placed over beds to protect people against being bitten. These nets help people
stay safe at night, but they do not kill any mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have many
natural enemies like bats, birds, dragonflies, and certain kinds of fish.
Bringing more of these animals into places where mosquitoes live might help to
cut down the amount of mosquitoes in that area. This is a natural solution, but
is does not always work very well. Mosquitoes can also be killed with poisons
or sprays. Even though these sprays kill mosquitoes, they may also harm other
plants or animals.
Although mosquitoes may not seem
as scary as larger, more powerful animals, they are far more dangerous to human
beings. But things are changing. It is highly likely that one day scientists
will find a way to keep everyone safe from mosquitoes and the diseases they
carry.
Which of the following words best
described the author’s overall attitude towards the prospect of solving the
mosquito problem?
Chocolate – there’s nothing quite like it, is there?
Chocolate is simply delicious. What is chocolate? Where does it come from?
Christopher Columbus was probably the first to take cacao
beans from the New World to Europe in around 1502. But the history of chocolate
goes back at least 4,000 years! The Aztecs, who lived in America, through that
their bitter cacao drink was a divine gift from heaven. In fact, the scientist
Carolus Linnaeus named the plant Theobroma, which means “food of the gods”
The Spanish explorer Hernando Cortex went to America in
1519. He visited the Mexican emperor Montezuma. He saw that Montezuma drank
cacao mixed with vanilla and spices. Cortez took some cacao home as a gift to the
Spanish King Charles. In Spain, people began to drink Cortez’s chocolate in
drink with chili peppers. However, the natural taste of cacao was too bitter
for most people. To sweeten the drink, Europeans added sugar to the cacao
drink. As a sweet drink, it became more popular. By the 17th
century, rich people in Europe were drinking it.
Later, people started using chocolate in pastries, like pies and cakes. In 1828, Dutch chocolate
makers started using a new process for removing the fat from cacao beans, and
getting to the center of the cacao bean. The Dutch chocolate maker Conrad J.
Van Houten made a machine that pressed the fat from the bean. The resulting powder
mixed better with water than cacao did. Now, some call van Houten’s chocolate “Dutch
chocolate.”
It was easy to mix Dutuch chocolate powder with sugar. So
other chocolate makers started trying new recipes that used powdered chocolate. People started
mixing sweetened chocolate with cocoa butter to make solid chocolate bars. In
1849, an English chocolate maker made the first chocolate bar. In the 19th
century, the Swiss started making milk chocolate by mixing powdered milk with
sweetened chocolate. Milk chocolate has not changed much since this process was
invented.
Today, two countries – Brazil and Ivory Coast – account for
almost half the world’s chocolate. The United States imports most of the
chocolate in the world, but the Swiss eat the most chocolate per person. The
most chocolate eaten today is sweet milk chocolate, but people also eat white
chocolate and dark chocolate.
Cocoa and dark chocolate are believed to help prevent heart
attacks, or help keep from happening. They are supposed to be good for the
circulatory system. On the other hand, the high fat content of chocolate can
cause weight gain, which is not good for people’s health. Other health claims
for chocolate have not been proven, but some research shows that chocolate
could be good for the brain.
Chocolate is a popular holiday gift. A popular Valentine’s
Day gift is a box of chocolate candies with a card and flowers. Chocolate is
sometimes given for Christmas and birthdays. Chocolate eggs are sometimes given
at Easter.
Chocolate is toxic to some animals. An ingredient in chocolate
is poisonous to dogs, cats, parrots, small rodents, and some livestock. Their
bodies cannot process some if the chemicals found in chocolate. Therefore, they
should never be fed chocolate.
When you prevent something, you
The history of the modern world is a
record of highly varied activity, of incessant change, and of astonishing
achievement. The lives of men have, during the last few centuries, increasingly
diversified, their powers have greatly multiplied, their powers have greatly
multiplied, their horizon been enormously enlarged. New interests have arisen
in rich profusion to absorb attention and to provoke exertion. New aspirations
and new emotions have come to move the soul of men. Amid all the bewildering phenomena,
interest, in particular, has stood out in clear and growing pre-eminence, has expressed
itself in a multitude of ways and with an emphasis more and more pronounced,
namely, the determination of the race to gain a larger measure of freedom than
it has ever known before, freedom in the life of the intellect and spirit,
freedom in the realm of government and law, freedom in the sphere of economic
and social relationship. A passion that has prevailed so widely, that has transformed
the world so greatly, and is still transforming it, is one that surely merits
study and abundantly rewards it, its operations constitute the very pith and
marrow of modem history.
Not that this passion was unknown to
the long ages that proceeded the modern periods. The ancient Hebrews, the
ancient Greeks and Roman blazed the was leaving behind them a precious heritage
of accomplishments and suggestions and the men who were responsible for the
Renaissance of the fifteenth century and the Reformation of the sixteen century
contributed their imperishable part to this slow and difficult emancipation of
the human race. But it is in modern times the pace and vigour, the scope and
sweep of this liberal movement have so increased unquestionably as to dominate
the age, particularly the last three centuries that have registered great
triumphs of spirit.
What kinds of freedom have been
mentioned in the passage?
At the time Jane Austen’s novels
were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any
academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain
religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so-called
immoral characters so interesting that young readers would identify with them;
these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even
Coleridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when the asserted
that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s powers.”
These attitudes towards novels help
explain why Austen received little attention from early nineteenth-century
literary cities. (In any case a novelist published anonymously, as Austen was,
would not be likely to receive much critical attention.) The literary response
that was accorded to her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth-century
criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience,”
for example. Scott made an insightful remark about the merits of Austen’s
fiction.
Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to
the reader an accurate and exact picture of ordinary everyday people and
places, reminiscent of seventeenth-century Flemish painting.” Scott did not use
the word ‘realism’, but he undoubtedly used a standard of realistic probability
in judging novels. The critic Whately did not use the word ‘realism’, either,
but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities
for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s ‘realistic method’ her
characters, wrote Whately, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are
ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that we feel an interest in their fate as
if it were our own.” Moral instruction, explained Whately, is more likely to be
effective when conveyed through recongnizably human and interesting characters
than when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whitely especially praised Austen’s
ability to create character who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and
virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whitely concluded his remarks by
comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Dickens’, starting his preference
for Austen’s.
Yet, the response of
nineteenth-century literary critics to Austen was not always so laudatory, and
often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century literary critics. An
example of such a response was Lewes complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of
subject and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added
that, nonetheless her focus was too often only upon the unlofty and the
commonplace. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain
about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper middle class.)
In any case having being rescued by literary critics from neglect and indeed
gradually lionized by them, Austen steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth
century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.
It can be inferred from the passage
that Whately found Dickens’ characters to be
