2020年中国建设银行秋季招聘笔试试题

材料

For the past 3，000 years，when people thought of money they thought of cash. From buying food to settling bar tabs，day-to-day dealings involved creased paper or clinking bits of metal. Over the past decade，however，digital payments have taken off—tapping your plastic on a terminal or swiping a smartphone has become normal. Now this revolution is about to turn cash into an endangered species in some rich economies. That will make the economy more efficient—but it also poses new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating cash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear，and in some cases the journey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by  in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just  of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a decade behind. Outside the rich world， cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being eroded. In China digital payments rose from  of all payments in 2012 to  in 2017、Cash is dying out because of two forces. One is demand—younger consumers want payment systems that plug seamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that suppliers such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telecoms companies (in emerging ones) are developing fast，easy-to-use payment technologies from which they can pull data and pocket fees. There is a high cost to running the infrastructure behind the cash economy—ATMs ， vans carrying notes， tellers who accept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandon it， or deter old-fashioned customers with hefty fees.

In the main， the prospect of a cashless economy is excellent news. Cash is inefficient. In rich countries， minting， sorting， storing and distributing it is estimated to cost about  of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Governments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion. Digitalisation vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders. It also creates a credit history， helping consumers borrow.

Yet set against these benefits are a bundle of worries. Electronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures， power blackouts and cyber-attacks—this week Capital One， an American bank，became the latest firm to be hacked. In a cashless economy the poor，the elderly and country folk may be left behind. And eradicating cash，an anonymous payment method， for a digital system could let governments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First， governments need to ensure that central banks’ monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than letting a few credit-card firms have a stranglehold on the electronic pipes for digital payments， as America may yet allow， governments must ensure the payments plumbing is open to a range of digital firms which can build services on top of it. They should urge banks to offer cheap，instant ， bank-to-bank digital transfers between deposit accounts ， as in Sweden and the Netherlands. Competition should keep prices low so that the poor can afford most services，and it should also mean that if one firm stumbles others can step in， making the system resilient.

Second ， governments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customer information private， so that the plumbing remains anonymous. Digital firms that use this plumbing to offer services should be free to monetise transaction data， through， for example， advertising， so long as their business model is made explicit to users. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alone.

Last， the phase-out of cash should be gradual. For a period of ten years， banks should be obliged to accept and distribute cash in populated areas. This will buy governments time to help the poor open bank accounts， educate the elderly and beef up internet access in rural areas. The rush towards digital money is the result of spontaneous demand and innovation. To pocket all the rewards， governments need to prepare for the day when crumpled bank notes change hands for the last time.

146、According to Paragraph 2, which of the following statements is FALSE?（    ）

A、America has been left behind perhaps a decade comparing to Britain regarding the number of retail cash transaction.

B、The speeds of eliminating cash in several countries are different.

C、The dominance of cash is being eroded even in the non-rich areas.

D、There is a rise of numbers of digital payments in China form 2012 to 2017、

147、Which of the following is the correct understanding of two forces that are “making cash die out”?（    ）

A、Most financial firms prefer to use cash in the transactions of buying and selling.

B、Cash economy is bringing high cost comparing to the cashless economy.

C、One of the forces is the new generation of consumers who are eager for using online payments because they suggest cash is causing sanitary problems.

D、Few people could catch up with the trend of the wide use of online payments.

148、Which of the following is NOT one of the advantages of cashless economy based on the article?（    ）

A、Governments can keep closer tabs on fraud or tax evasion.

B、Cashless economy vastly expands the playground of small businesses and sole traders by enabling them to sell beyond their borders.

C、When payments dematerialise people and shops are less vulnerable to theft.

D、Countries are hiring more tellers to accept coins for them.

149、According to the article, which of the following is NOT supporting the point that “the phase-out of cash should be gradual”?（    ）

A、In rural areas the internet access still need time to be enhanced.

B、The rush towards digital money should be targeting at the most beneficial results of government.

C、It could buy government time for helping those impoverished people open bank accounts, and to teach elderly people to prepare for the electronic payments systems.

D、Banks are obliged to offer assistance in the long process towards the final eliminating of cash.

150、According to the article, what is the correct method for banks and digital firms to deal with customers’ privacies?（    ）

A、Banks, under the government’s supervisions, need to fulfill the obligations of keeping customer information private.

B、Banks should cooperate with advertisement companies to sell customers’ privacies for better profits.

C、Digital firms do not have to protect users’ privacies as long as their business model is made explicit to users.

D、Banks should assume that all the customers are glad to enjoy free services even their privacies are being tracked.

材料

A growing number of countries want to phase out coal entirely, a transition eased by cheap natural gas and cost of wind and solar power. That is good news. Coal has been the largest engine of change to date, accounting for nearly a third of the rise in average temperatures since the Industrial Revolution. Any pressure on it therefore counts as progress.

Asia accounts for  of the world's coal demand. The Chinese government has taken steps to limit pollution and support renewables. Yet coal consumption there rose in 2018, as it did the year before. In India coal demand grew by  last year. In Vietnam it swelled by almost a quarter. To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than  relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which means starting to act now. Today’s trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, estimates UBS, a bank. Asia’s coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly average age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out government  support. In India state-owned companies invest more than $6bn in coal mining and coal-fired power each year, statebacked banks provide some $10.6bn in financing. Indonesia doles out more than $2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korea finance coal projects outside their borders.

Government support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. Wind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pummelling coal in America, but remains a bit-player in India and much of South-East Asia, since it has to be imported and is relatively expensive.

Nevertheless, governments betting on coal face three big risks. One is environmental. Emissions from coal plants that are already built—let alone new ones—will ensure that the world exceeds the level of carbon-dioxide emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more than .

There is an economic risk, too. Public-sector zeal for coal is matched only by private-sector distaste. Banks, including Asian ones, have increasingly said they will stop funding new coal plants. Wind and solar farms make coal look increasingly expensive. A study has found that private banks provided three-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year; state-backedbanks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.