Gus Wenner runs Rollingstone.com; his father gave him the job. But Jann Wenner, the magazine's cofounder and publisher, was quick to assure critics of the appointment process that his son is terribly talented and had to prove himself before being given the post. Apparently Gus worked his way up from more junior positions with the company, and demonstrated, according to his father, the “drive and discipline and charm, and all the things that show leadership.” Gus Wenner is 22 years old. He is certainly not the only kid out of college, or even out of high school, working at daddy's firm. Family contacts are a common way of finding both temporary internships and longtime careers. Opportunities for the children of top 1 percent are not the same as they are for the 99 percent. This is hardly a shock, but it is precisely the type of inequality that reveals the hardtodefine promise of the “Just Do It” version of the American dream and deepens our cynicism( 愤世嫉俗 ) about how people get ahead. As a consequence, it weakens support for public policies that could address the lack of upward mobility among children born at the bottom, who ought to be given priority. A strong tie between adult outcomes and family background annoys Americans. When an organization conducted a nationally representative survey asking about the meaning of “the American dream” , some typical answers included: “Being free to say or do what you want” and “Being free to accomplish almost anything you want with hard work , ” but also “ Being _ able _ to _ succeed _ regardless _ of _ the _ economic _ circumstances _ in _ which _ you _ were _ born. ” This is exactly the reason that “the American dream” is not only a defining metaphor for the country, but also why Americans have long been willing to tolerate a good deal more economic inequality than citizens of many other rich countries. A belief in the possibility of upward mobility not only morally justifies inequality as the expression of talents and energies, but also extends a promise to those with lower incomes. After all, why would you be a strong advocate for reducing inequality if you believe that you, or eventually your children, were likely to climb the income ladder? Hard work and perseverance( 毅力 ) will always be ingredients for success, but higher inequality has made having successful parents, if not essential, certainly a central part of the recipe. The belief that talent is something you are born with, and that opportunities are open to anyone with ambition and energy, also has a dangerous consequence. When the public policy is focused on the difficult situation of the poor, this belief can help the concept resurface that the poor are “undeserving” and are the authors of their own situation. Yet we actually know a good deal about why children of the poor have a higher chance of being stuck on poverty as adults. The recipes for breaking this intergenerational trap are clear: a nurturing( 培养 ) environment in the early years combined with accessible and highquality health care and education promote the capacities of young children, heighten the development of their skills as they grow older, and eventually raise their chances of upward mobility. Talent is nurtured and developed, and even genes are expressed differently depending upon environmental influences. The 1 percent are the goal for these uppermiddleclass families, who after all have also experienced significant growth in their relative standing. The graduate and other higher degrees that they hold, for which they put in considerable effort, have put them on the upside of the wave of globalization and technical change that has transformed the American job market. An age of higher inequality gives them both more resources to promote the capacities of their children, and more encouragement to make these investments since their children now have all the more to gain. For them, an American dream based on effort and talent still lives, and as a result they are less likely, with their considerable cultural and political influence, to support the reshaping of American public policy to meet its most pressing need: the future of those at the bottom. ( )65. What do we know about Gus Wenner? A. He will prove himself competent in the future. B. He has some work experience in the company. C. He is the cofounder and publisher of the magazine. D. He is too young to be in charge of the company. ( )66. The phenomenon illustrated by the appointment of Gus Wenner ________ . A. stops people from dreaming the American dream B. encourages the government to carry out public policies C. reduces the level of people's tolerance of economic inequality D. narrows the possibilities of people at the bottom moving upward ( )67. By saying “Being able to succeed regardless of the economic circumstances in which you were born , ” the respondents of the survey ________ . A. showed their upset about the inequality B. expressed their gratitude for the fairness C. indicated their determination to succeed D. gave their satisfaction with the circumstances ( )68. Which of the following opinions does the author hold? A. Lack of talent leads to people's difficult situations. B. When someone is born, his future has been decided. C. The environment where one is brought up determines his fate. D. Opportunities are open to anyone ambitious and energetic. ( )69. We can infer from the passage that the public policy for the poor faces opposition from ________ . A. the lower class B. all classes of society C. the top one percent D. the upper middle class ( )70. What is the best title for the passage? A. How old are you? B. What is your talent? C. Who is your daddy? D. Where is your future?