托福阅读真题第135篇CostsofQuittingaJob（答案文章最后）
huangs
Economic theory predicts that when the costs of quitting one’s job are relatively low, mobility is more likely. This obrvation underlines the analysis of the ri in quit rates during periods of prosperity, and the effects of mobility costs can be en when looking at residential location and job turnover. Industries with high concentrations of employment in urban areas, where a worker’s change of employer does not necessarily require investing in a change of residence, appear to have higher rates of job turnover than industries concentrated in nonmetropolitan areas do.
Beyond the costs that can be associated with such measurable characteristics as age and residential location are tho that are psychic in nature. The latter costs, though unobrvable to the rearcher, are very likely to differ widely across individuals. Some people adapt more quickly to new surroundings than others do, for example. Recent studies have found considerable heterogeneity among workers in their propensity to change jobs, with one study reporting that almost half of all permanent parations that to
ok place over a three-year period involved a small number (13 percent) of workers who had three or more parations during the period (in contrast, 31 percent of workers had no parations at all during the period).
It is also possible that the costs of job changing by employees vary internationally. Data suggest that workers in the United States may well be more likely to change employers than workers elwhere may be. Indeed, data confirm that, on average, American workers have been with their current employers fewer years than workers in most other developed countries, particularly workers in Europe and Japan, have been with theirs. It is not known why Americans are more mobile than most others are, but one possibility relates to the lower levels of company training received by American workers. Another possibility, however, is that the costs of mobility are lower in the United States (despite the fact that Japan and Europe are more denly populated and hence more urban). What would create the lower costs?
One hypothesis that has received at least some investigation is that housing policies in E
viva pinataurope and Japan increa the costs of residential, and therefore job, mobility, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Japan, for example, have controls on the rent increas that proprietors can charge to existing renters while tending to allow proprietors the freedom to negotiates any mutually agreeable rent on their initial lea with the renter. Thus, it is argued that renters who move typically face very large rent increas in the countries. Similarly, subsidized housing is much more common in the countries than in the United States, but since it is limited relative to the demand for it, tho British, German, or Japane workers fortunate enough to live in subsidized units are reluctant (it is argued) to give them up. The empirical evidence on the implications of housing policy for job mobility, however, is both limited and mixed.
It could also be hypothesized that the United States, Australia, and Canada, all of which exhibit shorter job tenures than do most European countries or Japan, are large, sparly populated countries that historically have attracted people willing to emigrate from abroad or rettle internally over long distances. In a country of “movers,” moving may not be en by either worker or employer as an unusual or especially traumatic event.
While questions remain about the caus of different job mobility rates across countries, the social desirability of job mobility can also be debated. On one hand, mobility can be en as socially uful becau it promotes both individual well-being and the quality of job matches. Moreover, the greater the number of workers and employers “in the market” at any given time, the more flexibility an economy has in making job matches that best adapt to a changing environment. Indeed, when focusing on this aspect of job mobility, economists have long worried whether economies have enough mobility. On the other hand, lower mobility costs (and therefore greater mobility) among workers may well rve to reduce the incentives of their employers to provide job training. Whether the prence of job changing costs is a social boon or bane, the costs and the mobility associated with them are factors with which all employers must contend.
【konstParagraph 1工藤新一用日语怎么说】Economic theory predicts that when the costs of quitting one’s job are relatively low, mobility is more likely. This obrvation underlines the analysis of the ri in quit rates during periods of prosperity, and the effects of mobility costs can be en when looking at residential location and job turnover. Industries with high concentratioaff
sqa
valentine什么意思ns of employment in urban areas, where a worker’s change of employer does not necessarily require investing in a change of residence, appear to have higher rates of job turnover than industries concentrated in nonmetropolitan areas do.
1. According to paragraph 1, people are more likely to quit their jobs in which TWO of the following situations? To receive credit, you must lect TWO answers.
timerA. They are living in good economic times.
什么是抑郁症
B. They are moving from urban areas to non-urban areas.bypasd
