2020年中国建设银行招聘考试真题汇编

1，9，35，91，189，( )

2018年，我国全社会用电量68449亿千瓦时，同比增长8.5%，增幅同比提高1.9个百分点。具体来看，第一产业用电量728亿千瓦时，同比增长9.8%；第二产业用电量47235亿千瓦时，同比增长7.2%；第三产业用电量10801亿千瓦时，同比增长12.7%；城乡居民生活用电量9685亿千瓦时，同比增长10.4%。

2018年，我国可再生能源发电量达1.87万亿千瓦时，同比增长约1700亿千瓦时；可再生能源发电量占全年发电总量比重为26.7%，同比上升0.2个百分点。

2018年，我国全社会用电量较2016年增加了约（ ）。

2018年，我国全社会用电量68449亿千瓦时，同比增长8.5%，增幅同比提高1.9个百分点。具体来看，第一产业用电量728亿千瓦时，同比增长9.8%；第二产业用电量47235亿千瓦时，同比增长7.2%；第三产业用电量10801亿千瓦时，同比增长12.7%；城乡居民生活用电量9685亿千瓦时，同比增长10.4%。

2018年，我国可再生能源发电量达1.87万亿千瓦时，同比增长约1700亿千瓦时；可再生能源发电量占全年发电总量比重为26.7%，同比上升0.2个百分点。

2017年，我国三大产业及城乡居民生活用电量大小排序正确的是（ ）。

2018年，我国全社会用电量68449亿千瓦时，同比增长8.5%，增幅同比提高1.9个百分点。具体来看，第一产业用电量728亿千瓦时，同比增长9.8%；第二产业用电量47235亿千瓦时，同比增长7.2%；第三产业用电量10801亿千瓦时，同比增长12.7%；城乡居民生活用电量9685亿千瓦时，同比增长10.4%。

2018年，我国可再生能源发电量达1.87万亿千瓦时，同比增长约1700亿千瓦时；可再生能源发电量占全年发电总量比重为26.7%，同比上升0.2个百分点。

2018年，我国发电总量约为（ ）万亿千瓦时。

2018年，我国全社会用电量68449亿千瓦时，同比增长8.5%，增幅同比提高1.9个百分点。具体来看，第一产业用电量728亿千瓦时，同比增长9.8%；第二产业用电量47235亿千瓦时，同比增长7.2%；第三产业用电量10801亿千瓦时，同比增长12.7%；城乡居民生活用电量9685亿千瓦时，同比增长10.4%。

2018年，我国可再生能源发电量达1.87万亿千瓦时，同比增长约1700亿千瓦时；可再生能源发电量占全年发电总量比重为26.7%，同比上升0.2个百分点。

2017年，下列可再生能源发电量同比增幅最大的是（ ）。

假设某银行在2019年年初共有1000亿元正常类贷款，400亿元关注类贷款，本年收回正常类贷款350亿元；截至2019年年末，新发放贷款350亿元，新增贷款全部为正常类贷款；该银行的正常类贷款、关注类贷款年末余额分别为900亿元、350亿元。则该银行2019年的正常贷款迁徙率为（ ）。

为坚持房住不炒的基本原则，我国多地提高了二套房贷款的首付比率，此措施属于哪种货币政策工具？（ ）

2019年8月，四大国有银行普遍执行1.75%的一年期定期存款利率，而当月，中国居民消费价格（CPI）同比增长2.8%，则一年期定期存款的实际利率为（ ）。

2， 12, 36, 80，( )

若某单位从5位优秀毕业生甲、乙、丙、丁、戊中录用三人，这五人被录用的机会均等，则甲、乙中至少一人被录用的概率为()。

某跑步团的3位队员ABC在一环形湿地公园晨跑，三人同时从同-地点出发,AB按逆时针奔跑，C按顺时针方向奔跑。AB两人晨跑速度之比为16 : 13，且他俩的速度(以米/分计)均为整数并能被5整除，其中B的速度小于70米/分，C在出发20分钟后与A相遇，2分钟之后又遇到了B那么，这个湿地公园周长为( )。

2，7, 20，61， 182， ( )

建设银行A分行办公室与人力资源部需要通过门户网站定期向社会发布消息社会发布消息，办公室每隔2天、人力资源部每隔3天有-一个发布日，节假日无休。那么甲办公室和人力资源部在-一个自然月内最多有几天同时为发布日?" ( )

.

为响应建设银行总行扶贫工作，B分行拟定本月29号为分行“扶贫日”，计划开展一系列帮扶活动，着力把扶贫工作落到实践。为此分行积极号召广大员工奉献爱心，参加公益捐款活动。公司业务部小赵、小李、小王、小丁四人率先做出表率，小赵捐款数量是另外三人捐款总额的一半，小李捐款数量是另外三人捐款总额的1/3，小王捐款是另外三人捐款总数的1/4,小丁捐款169元，请问四人一共捐了多少钱? ( )

2，10,30，()

120， 80, 48，24 ( )

建设银行C支行举办业务知识竞赛，所有的选手中没有出现名次并列的情况，小吴发现除了自己之外，其他所有人的排名数字之和正好是70，问小吴排第( ) 名。

-8， 15，39, 65，94，128, 170，( )

某公司举办趣味运动会，有三个项目，其中100个人参加，每人至少参加一个项目，其中未参加羽毛球的有40人，未参加乒乓球的60人，未参加赛跑的有70人。请问至少有多少人参加了不止一项活动? ()

某投资者2018年以同样的价格卖出甲，乙两件艺术品，其中甲艺术品的卖出价比买入价低20%，乙艺术品的卖出价格比买入价格高60%，总卖出价格比总买入价格高6万元，则甲艺术品买入价比乙艺术品高( ) 万元。

甲乙丙三个施工队合作完成某项工程，10 天后甲施工队因为其他任务退出该工程，又过了5天，乙施工队也退出。然后丙施工队工作5天完成了剩下的工程。按照工作量付酬，结果甲施工队获得10万元，乙施工队获得30万元，丙施工队获得50万元，下列说法正确的是()。

建设银行D分行要求员工每年自发通过网络学习平台参加20课时的线上教育课程，其中职业素养10课时，专业技能10课时，可供选择的职业素养课程共8门，每门2课时;可供选择的专业技能课共10门，其中2课时的有5门，1 课时的有5门。问可选择的课程组合共有多少种? ( )

2，13，40, 61, (、)

41，2，37, 7, 33, 12, 29, (), 25, 22, 21

高原反应是人体急速即进入海拔40000米以上高原暴露于低压低氧环境后产生的各种不适，是高原地区地有的常见病。临床发现，父母双方都有高原反应的人让父母双方都没有高原反应的人，发生高原反应的几率高4倍多，因此，有医生推测，高原反应可能是先天性遗传性的。

下列哪项，最能支持医生的推测()

技术创新:在经济发展理论中，指新技术、新发明在生产中的首次应用，是在生产体系中建立新的生产函数或供应函数，引起一种生产要素和生产条件的新组合，经济学强调技术创新具有非独占性、不确定性、市场性和系统性等特点。

根据以上定义，下列行为属于经济学范時的技术创新的是0。

在如今科技高速发展的时代，人们的生活和科技之前已经息息相关，密不可分了。英.国伦敦大学研究发现，过分依赖GPS导航，会阻断脑部海马回形成新的记忆，用惯电子产品会导致许多人只会用零散的语言进行交流，用游戏和电视节目取代传统阅读会造成人的阅读能力和思考能力下降。于是研究者认为，高科技会使人变笨

下列哪些选项，最能质疑上述观点()

价格歧视实质。上是一种价格差异，通常指商品或服务的提供者在同一时间向不同的接受者提价格歧视实质.上是一种价格差异，通常指商品或服务的提供者在同一时间向不同的接受者提供相同等级、相同质量的商品或服务时,在接受者之间实行不同的销售价格或收费标准。

根据上述定义，下列属于价格歧视的是()。

甲乙丙三人的职业分别是律师、教师和银行职员，三人中有人喜欢喝茶，有人喜欢喝咖啡，每人只喜欢喝一-种饮品且每人喜欢喝的饮品都不相同。现已知:甲不喜欢喝茶，丙不喜欢喝咖啡，喜欢喝茶的不是教师，喜欢喝咖啡的是律师，乙不是银行职员。

由此可以推出( )

左边给定的是盒的外表面，右边哪一项是由它折叠而成? ()

科室共有7名工作人员，他们每人调入该科室的年份都不同。最新调入的是小陈。小王是在小何之前一年调入的。小赵是在小章之后调入的。小李是在小王之前一年调入的。.在小刘和小何调入的中间调入了两人。在小李和小章调入的中间也调入了两人。小刘是小陈前一年调入的，在此期间，该科室不曾有人调出。”

由此可以推出，7人中:

在国庆50周年仪仗队的训练营地，某连队一百多个战士在练习不同队形的转换如果他们排成五列人数相等的横队，只剩下连长在队伍前面喊口令;如果他们排成七列这样的横队，只有连长仍然可以在前面领队:如果他们排成八列，就可以有两人作为领队了在全营排练时，营长要求他们排成三列横队

以下哪项是最可能出现的情况?

把下面六个图形分为两类，使每一类图形都有各自的共同特征或规律，分类正确的一项是()。

记者采访时的提问要具体、简沽明了，切忌空泛、笼统、不着边际。《采访技巧》一书中尖锐地剖析了“您感觉如何”等问题的弊端，认为这些提问实际上在信息获取上等于原地踏步，它使采访对象没法回答，除非用含混不清或枯燥无味的话来应付。由此可以推出

某银行的一项研究表明:那些在舒适工作环境里工作的人比在不舒适工作环境里工作的人生产效率高25%。

这表明:日益改善的工作环境可以提高工人的生产率。以下哪项如果为真，则最能削弱以上结论? ()

看似简单的铅笔由笔杆、笔芯、笔帽几个部件组成，但实际原料和制造工艺都非常复杂。世界上没有一个人掌握了制造一支铅笔所需要的全部知识，每-一个参与生产铅笔的人，也不知道自己的努力会促成一支铅笔的产生，这些人生活在世界不同的角落，但共同合作，源源不断制造出铅笔。这体现出了经济学的哪个经典理论?()

2019年在中国上海举办的DOTA2国际邀请赛吸引了全球电子竞技爱好者的目光，近年来，中国的电脑游戏产业发展极其迅猛。电脑游戏市场是典型的垄断竞争市场,垄断竞争市场与完全竞争市场最主要的差别在于( )。

有A和B两个投资方案，A方案固定投资80万元，生产单位产品变动成本为100元，B方案固定投资50万元，生产单位产品变动成本为110元。单位产品售价均为150元。若计划产量为15000个并均能售出，则根据两个方案的保本获利能力，可以得出以下哪个判断?()

2019年8月，人民币对美元汇率“破7”,外汇市场波动幅度明显扩大。若不考虑其他因素，人民币贬值对我国进出口的影响是( )。

宏观调控需要财政政策和货币政策相互协调配合以达到预期效果，下列情况适用采用“双紧”政策类型的是( )。

2019年，我国加力提效实施积极的财政政策，适度扩大财政支出规模。假设年底政府准备控制债务规模，适度弥补财政赤字，则采取以下哪种方式最易引起通货膨胀?()

十九大报告把防范化解重大风险放在了三大攻坚战之首，并且强调防范金融风险是防范化解重大风险攻坚战的重点。在日常生活中，人们进行风险管理的技术主要包括:风险规避、损失预防与控制、风险保留和风险转移，在金融体系发挥作用的主要是风险转移。以下描述正确的是( )。

假设经济已实现充分就业，且总供给曲线是垂直线，下列选项中， 符合扩张性货币政策效应的是( )。

目前，我国划分货币层次的标准是()。

商业银行不可以将同业拆入资金用于(”)。

H公司2018年营业利润率比2017年下降3%，总资产周转率提高8%，假定其他条件不变，那么以下说法正确的是()。

2018年9月1日，H公司外购了- -幢写字楼并于当日直接租赁给G公司，租赁期为3年，每年租金为150万元。H公司对投资性房地产采用公允价模式进行后续计量后，该写字楼的实际取得成本为3000万元。2018 年12月31日，该写字楼的公允价值为3200万元。.假设不考虑相关税费，该投资性房地产对H公司2018年度利润总额的影响金额为( )。

甲公司向乙公司转让了一项技术秘密。技术转让合同履行完毕后，经查该技术秘密是甲公司通过不正当手段从丙公司获得的，但乙公司对此并不知情，且支付了合理对价。下列表述正确的是( )。

我国《票据法》规定，承兑是指汇票付款人承诺在汇票到期日支付汇票金额的票据行为。下列关于承兑的说法正确的是( )。

各类数据在企业生产经营中起着至关重要的作用，近乎所有的经营活动都要依赖数据，它犹如企业经营者的眼睛一样，通过数据可反映出经营的问题。当我们获取数据后，为顺利分析数据，需要先对数据进行清洗。数据清洗工作-般不包括( )。

在信息技术高速发展的今天，有人发明了一种新的商业模式。服务器买好了，操作系统装好了，各种系统都开发好了，你只需要通过网络连接到这里，选择你需要的服务，用多少服务给多少钱，用多少天给多少天的钱。这就是典型的( )。 .

很多人都骑过共享单车，打开软件就可以看到单车的位置，扫码可以自动开锁，停车锁车自动缴费。共享单车是( ) 的典型应用。

由建行大学和新金融人才产教结合联盟在上海发起了声势浩大的( ) 活动，该活动于2019年5月底发出招聘启事，于2019年6月24日在上海决定的新金融人才产教融合联盟暨论坛上正式启动，得到了全国高校和在校学子的热烈响应，吸引了来自境内外1200余所高校、各类专业的万名学子参加。

2019年7月11日，由中国建设银行携手中国移动，共同创新打造的( )。 在北京清华园正式推出。它具有“联接无*，服务无界，安防无忧，体验升级”四大特点。实现了营业网点内的“万物互联，智慧涧察”通过金融太空船、智能家居、共享空间直播、客户成长互动、数字沙盘、汽车金融体验等场景为客户提供沉浸式金融服务，全面引领金融服务模式创新。

我听说建行提供免费水，是真的?”“是的，我帮您把水壶灌满，喝完了您随时来!”“随时都能来吗?”“书架上的书是免费的吗?”“只要我们营业就对外开放，欢迎您随时来歇息看书，服务都是免费的!”一-这- -幕幕传递温暖的画面，几乎每天都在遍布全国的中国建设银行网点上演，成为网点员工新的服务常态，以上描述的是中田建设银行推进网点银行服务资源对公众开放，打造的服务民生的新品牌，该品牌的名字是( )。

中国建设银行是一家在香港和内地上市的大型因有控股商业银行。下列关于中国建设银行的表述，错误的是( )。

2018年，我国全社会用电量68449亿千瓦时，同比增长8.5%，增幅同比提高1.9 个百分点。具体来看，第一产业用电量728亿千瓦时，同比增长9.8%;第二产业用电量47235亿千瓦时，同比增长7.2%第三产业用电量10801亿千瓦时，同比增长12.7%;城乡居民生活用.电量9685亿千瓦时，同比增长10.4%。2018年，我国可再生能源发电量达1.87万亿千瓦时，同比增长约1700亿千瓦时;可再生能源发电量占全年发电总量比重为26.7%，同比上升0.2个百分点

根据以上材料，下列说法不正确的是( )。

贷前调查是银行信贷业务的重要风险防线。在贷前调查中，客户的财务报表是银行了解客户的重要工具。客户经理赵小平在走访目标客户F公司时，获得以下信息: .

F公司主营服装加工，2018年营业收入为7200万元，营业成本为3600万元，假设一年按360天算，其他业务数据见下表: .

请根据上述数据，计算该企业货币资金和营运资金数额分别是( )万元。

贷前调查是银行信贷业务的重要风险防线。在贷前调查中，客户的财务报表是银行了解客户的重要工具。客户经理赵小平在走访目标客户F公司时，获得以下信息: .

F公司主营服装加工，2018年营业收入为7200万元，营业成本为3600万元，假设一年按360天算，其他业务数据见下表: .

该企业现金周转期为()天。

贷前调查是银行信贷业务的重要风险防线。在贷前调查中，客户的财务报表是银行了解客户的重要工具。客户经理赵小平在走访目标客户F公司时，获得以下信息: .

F公司主营服装加工，2018年营业收入为7200万元，营业成本为3600万元，假设一年按360天算，其他业务数据见下表: .

企业下列经济业务中，会影响其偿债能力的是( )。

For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople 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 eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.

Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics 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 acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly 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 cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments 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 benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim 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 govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments 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 priccs 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. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr 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 uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.

Last, the phasc-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 govermments 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, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.

According to Paragraph 2, which of the fllowing staterments is FALSE? ( )

For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople 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 eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.

Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics 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 acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly 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 cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments 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 benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim 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 govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments 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 priccs 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. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr 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 uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.

Last, the phasc-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 govermments 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, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.

Which of the following is the correct understanding of two forces that are“making cashdie out?( )

For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople 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 eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.

Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics 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 acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly 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 cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments 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 benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim 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 govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments 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 priccs 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. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr 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 uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.

Last, the phasc-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 govermments 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, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.

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

For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople 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 eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.

Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics 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 acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly 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 cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments 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 benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim 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 govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments 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 priccs 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. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr 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 uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.

Last, the phasc-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 govermments 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, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.

According to the article, which of the following is NOT supporting the point that“the phase-out of cash should be gradual?"

For the past 3, 000 years, when pcople 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 eash into an endangered specics in some rich cconomics. That will make the cconomy more efieicnt - -but it also poscs new problems that could hold the transition hostage.

Countries are eliminating ceash at varying speeds. But the direction of travel is clear, and in some cases the joumey is nearly complete. In Sweden the number of retail cash transactions per person has fallen by 80% in the past ten years. Cash accounts for just 6% of purchases by value in Norway. Britain is probably four or six years behind the Nordic countries. America is perhaps a deeade behind. Outside the rich world, cash is still king. But even there its dominance is being croded. In China digital payments rose from 4% of all payments in 2012 to 34% in 2017.

Cash is dying out beause of two forees. One is demand- younger consumers want payment systems that plug scamlessly into their digital lives. But equally important is that supplirs such as banks and tech firms (in developed markets) and telccoms companics (in emerging oncs) are developing fast, easy-to-use payment technologics 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 acept coins. Most financial firms are keen to abandonit, or deter old-fashioned customers with hefly 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 cstimated to cost about 0.5% of GDP. But that does not begin to capture the gains. When payments dematerialize, people and shops are less vulnerable to theft. Govermments 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 benefts are a bundle of worries. Eleotronic payment systems may be vulnerable to technical failures power blackouts and cyber- atacks- this weck Capital One，an American bank, became the latest fim 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 govemments snoop on people's shopping habits and private titans exploit their personal data.

These problems have three remedies. First, govermments need to ensure that central banks' monopoly over coins and notes is not replaced by private monopolies over digital money. Rather than ltting a few credil-card firms have a stranglehold on the eleetronic pipes for digital payments, as America may yet allow; gov emments 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 priccs 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. Sccond, govemments should maintain banks' obligation to keep customcr 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 uscrs. Some customers will favour free services that track their purchases; others will want to pay to be left alonc.

Last, the phasc-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 govermments 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, govemments need to prepare for the day when erumpled bank noles change hands for the last time.

According to the article, what is the crrt method for banks and digtal firms to deal with customers' privacies? ( )

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 75% of the world's coal demand. The Chinese goverment 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 9% last year. In Vietnam it swelld by altmost a quarter.

To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than 1.59C relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which mcans starting to act now.

Today's trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, cstimates UBS, a bank. Asia's coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly avcrage age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out govemment I 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. Indoncsia doles out more than S2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korca finance coal projccts outside their borders.

Govermment support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. W ind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pumelling 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.

Neverheless, govermments 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-dioside emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more tham 1.5%C.

There is an cconomio 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 thre-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year, state-backed banks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.

And then there is politics. Voters do not like breathing soot. More of them are concemed about elimnate change, too, as they face unpredictable growing seasons, foods and droughts.

According to this passage, which energy is the key factor to climate change?( )

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 75% of the world's coal demand. The Chinese goverment 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 9% last year. In Vietnam it swelld by altmost a quarter.

To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than 1.59C relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which mcans starting to act now.

Today's trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, cstimates UBS, a bank. Asia's coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly avcrage age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out govemment I 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. Indoncsia doles out more than S2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korca finance coal projccts outside their borders.

Govermment support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. W ind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pumelling 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.

Neverheless, govermments 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-dioside emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more tham 1.5%C.

There is an cconomio 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 thre-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year, state-backed banks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.

And then there is politics. Voters do not like breathing soot. More of them are concemed about elimnate change, too, as they face unpredictable growing seasons, foods and droughts.

The second paragraph tells us that( )。

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 75% of the world's coal demand. The Chinese goverment 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 9% last year. In Vietnam it swelld by altmost a quarter.

To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than 1.59C relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which mcans starting to act now.

Today's trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, cstimates UBS, a bank. Asia's coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly avcrage age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out govemment I 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. Indoncsia doles out more than S2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korca finance coal projccts outside their borders.

Govermment support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. W ind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pumelling 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.

Neverheless, govermments 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-dioside emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more tham 1.5%C.

There is an cconomio 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 thre-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year, state-backed banks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.

And then there is politics. Voters do not like breathing soot. More of them are concemed about elimnate change, too, as they face unpredictable growing seasons, foods and droughts.

Which of the followving statements is true?( ).。

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 75% of the world's coal demand. The Chinese goverment 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 9% last year. In Vietnam it swelld by altmost a quarter.

To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than 1.59C relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which mcans starting to act now.

Today's trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, cstimates UBS, a bank. Asia's coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly avcrage age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out govemment I 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. Indoncsia doles out more than S2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korca finance coal projccts outside their borders.

Govermment support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. W ind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pumelling 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.

Neverheless, govermments 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-dioside emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more tham 1.5%C.

There is an cconomio 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 thre-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year, state-backed banks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.

And then there is politics. Voters do not like breathing soot. More of them are concemed about elimnate change, too, as they face unpredictable growing seasons, foods and droughts.

Govemment supporing coal may face three risks except ()

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 75% of the world's coal demand. The Chinese goverment 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 9% last year. In Vietnam it swelld by altmost a quarter.

To keep the rise in global temperatures to no more than 1.59C relative to pre-industrial times, climatologists insist that almost all coal plants must shut by 2050, which mcans starting to act now.

Today's trends would keep the last coal plant open until 2079, cstimates UBS, a bank. Asia's coal-fired power regiment has a sprightly avcrage age of 15, compared with a creaky 40 years in America, close to retirement.

There are several reasons for this, but one stand out govemment I 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. Indoncsia doles out more than S2bn annually for consumption of coalfired power. Japan and South Korca finance coal projccts outside their borders.

Govermment support is hardly surprising. State-backed coal firms make money and create jobs. W ind turbines and solar panels provide power only intermittently; for now, dirtier power plants are needed as back up. Gas is pumelling 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.

Neverheless, govermments 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-dioside emissions likely to push global temperatures up by more tham 1.5%C.

There is an cconomio 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 thre-quarters of loans to Indian renewables projects last year, state-backed banks doled out two-thirds of those for coal.

And then there is politics. Voters do not like breathing soot. More of them are concemed about elimnate change, too, as they face unpredictable growing seasons, foods and droughts.

Coal may cause the following problems except ( ),

There's been a steady drumbeat of warmings about a surge in risky corporate borrowing-but not much clarity serious the threat is. At issue is the more than S1 million market in leveraged loans. That's Wall Street jargon for loans to business with less than rook-solid finances, Federal Reserve and European Central Hank officials have drawn to the rise in corporate debt and the deterioration or lending standards. The loans are often bundled into securities ollateralized loan obligations (CLOs).

Most of the watchdogs are carceful to say a repeat of the 2007-2008 crisis is unlikely because most of the debt banks. But that creates another problem Regulators focused on banks are largely in the dark when it comes to where the risks he and how they might ripple through the financial system when the economy turns down. A big over-indebted businesses could face severe stress and, in some cases, insolvency, threatening jobs and deepen downturn.

The mechanics of the leveraged loan market will be familiar to students of the housing crisis.

With interesting investors are willing to take greater risks to get higher yields. That makes lots of money available for lending. we makes it easier for less creditworthy companies to borrow .Rather than keep the risky loans on their books, lender them to asset managers that package them into securities -C1Ds-that are sold to investors such as insurers and hedge funds.

Yields on the riskicst portions of CLOs can approach 9% a year. And the growth of leveraged lending has been post crisis bank regulations that helped the rise or shadow lenders financial companics that aren't regulated like market for levcraged loans has more than doubled since 2012.

The risk taking could get worse: With demand by borrowers for levcraged loans declining this year, those still financing have been able to extract looser learns.

About 85% of leveraged loans are held by nonbanks, according to Wells Fargo rescarch.

But banks may play a larger robe than may assumc, according to Gaurav V asisht, drector for financial regulation at the Volcker Alliance, a good-governance group, Banks are involved in all stages of the process. They underwrite loans, sell them to the CLOs, invest in those securities, and then hedge those risks in the market.“One common narrative is that banks don't have much risk or aren't exposed 1o it. Vasisht said at the hearing, "Banks are exposed to it."

Just beeause banks are safer doesn't necessarily mean the financial system is, says Karen Petron, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics, a regulatory- analysis firm. Debt investors might not be as resilient in a crisis, and their problems could create shock waves. "Banking regulators are being a htte myopic when they 're looking only at the banking system for systemic risk," she says.- Sally Bakewell and Thomas Beardsworth.

What is the main idea of this artiole? ( )

There's been a steady drumbeat of warmings about a surge in risky corporate borrowing-but not much clarity serious the threat is. At issue is the more than S1 million market in leveraged loans. That's Wall Street jargon for loans to business with less than rook-solid finances, Federal Reserve and European Central Hank officials have drawn to the rise in corporate debt and the deterioration or lending standards. The loans are often bundled into securities ollateralized loan obligations (CLOs).

Most of the watchdogs are carceful to say a repeat of the 2007-2008 crisis is unlikely because most of the debt banks. But that creates another problem Regulators focused on banks are largely in the dark when it comes to where the risks he and how they might ripple through the financial system when the economy turns down. A big over-indebted businesses could face severe stress and, in some cases, insolvency, threatening jobs and deepen downturn.

The mechanics of the leveraged loan market will be familiar to students of the housing crisis.

With interesting investors are willing to take greater risks to get higher yields. That makes lots of money available for lending. we makes it easier for less creditworthy companies to borrow .Rather than keep the risky loans on their books, lender them to asset managers that package them into securities -C1Ds-that are sold to investors such as insurers and hedge funds.

Yields on the riskicst portions of CLOs can approach 9% a year. And the growth of leveraged lending has been post crisis bank regulations that helped the rise or shadow lenders financial companics that aren't regulated like market for levcraged loans has more than doubled since 2012.

The risk taking could get worse: With demand by borrowers for levcraged loans declining this year, those still financing have been able to extract looser learns.

About 85% of leveraged loans are held by nonbanks, according to Wells Fargo rescarch.

But banks may play a larger robe than may assumc, according to Gaurav V asisht, drector for financial regulation at the Volcker Alliance, a good-governance group, Banks are involved in all stages of the process. They underwrite loans, sell them to the CLOs, invest in those securities, and then hedge those risks in the market.“One common narrative is that banks don't have much risk or aren't exposed 1o it. Vasisht said at the hearing, "Banks are exposed to it."

Just beeause banks are safer doesn't necessarily mean the financial system is, says Karen Petron, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics, a regulatory- analysis firm. Debt investors might not be as resilient in a crisis, and their problems could create shock waves. "Banking regulators are being a htte myopic when they 're looking only at the banking system for systemic risk," she says.- Sally Bakewell and Thomas Beardsworth.

12. Which one is false about the leveraged loans?(。)

There's been a steady drumbeat of warmings about a surge in risky corporate borrowing-but not much clarity serious the threat is. At issue is the more than S1 million market in leveraged loans. That's Wall Street jargon for loans to business with less than rook-solid finances, Federal Reserve and European Central Hank officials have drawn to the rise in corporate debt and the deterioration or lending standards. The loans are often bundled into securities ollateralized loan obligations (CLOs).

Most of the watchdogs are carceful to say a repeat of the 2007-2008 crisis is unlikely because most of the debt banks. But that creates another problem Regulators focused on banks are largely in the dark when it comes to where the risks he and how they might ripple through the financial system when the economy turns down. A big over-indebted businesses could face severe stress and, in some cases, insolvency, threatening jobs and deepen downturn.

The mechanics of the leveraged loan market will be familiar to students of the housing crisis.

With interesting investors are willing to take greater risks to get higher yields. That makes lots of money available for lending. we makes it easier for less creditworthy companies to borrow .Rather than keep the risky loans on their books, lender them to asset managers that package them into securities -C1Ds-that are sold to investors such as insurers and hedge funds.

Yields on the riskicst portions of CLOs can approach 9% a year. And the growth of leveraged lending has been post crisis bank regulations that helped the rise or shadow lenders financial companics that aren't regulated like market for levcraged loans has more than doubled since 2012.

The risk taking could get worse: With demand by borrowers for levcraged loans declining this year, those still financing have been able to extract looser learns.

About 85% of leveraged loans are held by nonbanks, according to Wells Fargo rescarch.

But banks may play a larger robe than may assumc, according to Gaurav V asisht, drector for financial regulation at the Volcker Alliance, a good-governance group, Banks are involved in all stages of the process. They underwrite loans, sell them to the CLOs, invest in those securities, and then hedge those risks in the market.“One common narrative is that banks don't have much risk or aren't exposed 1o it. Vasisht said at the hearing, "Banks are exposed to it."

Just beeause banks are safer doesn't necessarily mean the financial system is, says Karen Petron, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics, a regulatory- analysis firm. Debt investors might not be as resilient in a crisis, and their problems could create shock waves. "Banking regulators are being a htte myopic when they 're looking only at the banking system for systemic risk," she says.- Sally Bakewell and Thomas Beardsworth.

The ollteralized loan obligations (CLOs)( ).

There's been a steady drumbeat of warmings about a surge in risky corporate borrowing-but not much clarity serious the threat is. At issue is the more than S1 million market in leveraged loans. That's Wall Street jargon for loans to business with less than rook-solid finances, Federal Reserve and European Central Hank officials have drawn to the rise in corporate debt and the deterioration or lending standards. The loans are often bundled into securities ollateralized loan obligations (CLOs).

Most of the watchdogs are carceful to say a repeat of the 2007-2008 crisis is unlikely because most of the debt banks. But that creates another problem Regulators focused on banks are largely in the dark when it comes to where the risks he and how they might ripple through the financial system when the economy turns down. A big over-indebted businesses could face severe stress and, in some cases, insolvency, threatening jobs and deepen downturn.

The mechanics of the leveraged loan market will be familiar to students of the housing crisis.

With interesting investors are willing to take greater risks to get higher yields. That makes lots of money available for lending. we makes it easier for less creditworthy companies to borrow .Rather than keep the risky loans on their books, lender them to asset managers that package them into securities -C1Ds-that are sold to investors such as insurers and hedge funds.

Yields on the riskicst portions of CLOs can approach 9% a year. And the growth of leveraged lending has been post crisis bank regulations that helped the rise or shadow lenders financial companics that aren't regulated like market for levcraged loans has more than doubled since 2012.

The risk taking could get worse: With demand by borrowers for levcraged loans declining this year, those still financing have been able to extract looser learns.

About 85% of leveraged loans are held by nonbanks, according to Wells Fargo rescarch.

But banks may play a larger robe than may assumc, according to Gaurav V asisht, drector for financial regulation at the Volcker Alliance, a good-governance group, Banks are involved in all stages of the process. They underwrite loans, sell them to the CLOs, invest in those securities, and then hedge those risks in the market.“One common narrative is that banks don't have much risk or aren't exposed 1o it. Vasisht said at the hearing, "Banks are exposed to it."

Just beeause banks are safer doesn't necessarily mean the financial system is, says Karen Petron, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics, a regulatory- analysis firm. Debt investors might not be as resilient in a crisis, and their problems could create shock waves. "Banking regulators are being a htte myopic when they 're looking only at the banking system for systemic risk," she says.- Sally Bakewell and Thomas Beardsworth.

According to the article, which of the following statements is true?( d )

There's been a steady drumbeat of warmings about a surge in risky corporate borrowing-but not much clarity serious the threat is. At issue is the more than S1 million market in leveraged loans. That's Wall Street jargon for loans to business with less than rook-solid finances, Federal Reserve and European Central Hank officials have drawn to the rise in corporate debt and the deterioration or lending standards. The loans are often bundled into securities ollateralized loan obligations (CLOs).

Most of the watchdogs are carceful to say a repeat of the 2007-2008 crisis is unlikely because most of the debt banks. But that creates another problem Regulators focused on banks are largely in the dark when it comes to where the risks he and how they might ripple through the financial system when the economy turns down. A big over-indebted businesses could face severe stress and, in some cases, insolvency, threatening jobs and deepen downturn.

The mechanics of the leveraged loan market will be familiar to students of the housing crisis.

With interesting investors are willing to take greater risks to get higher yields. That makes lots of money available for lending. we makes it easier for less creditworthy companies to borrow .Rather than keep the risky loans on their books, lender them to asset managers that package them into securities -C1Ds-that are sold to investors such as insurers and hedge funds.

Yields on the riskicst portions of CLOs can approach 9% a year. And the growth of leveraged lending has been post crisis bank regulations that helped the rise or shadow lenders financial companics that aren't regulated like market for levcraged loans has more than doubled since 2012.

The risk taking could get worse: With demand by borrowers for levcraged loans declining this year, those still financing have been able to extract looser learns.

About 85% of leveraged loans are held by nonbanks, according to Wells Fargo rescarch.

But banks may play a larger robe than may assumc, according to Gaurav V asisht, drector for financial regulation at the Volcker Alliance, a good-governance group, Banks are involved in all stages of the process. They underwrite loans, sell them to the CLOs, invest in those securities, and then hedge those risks in the market.“One common narrative is that banks don't have much risk or aren't exposed 1o it. Vasisht said at the hearing, "Banks are exposed to it."

Just beeause banks are safer doesn't necessarily mean the financial system is, says Karen Petron, managing partner at Federal Financial Analytics, a regulatory- analysis firm. Debt investors might not be as resilient in a crisis, and their problems could create shock waves. "Banking regulators are being a htte myopic when they 're looking only at the banking system for systemic risk," she says.- Sally Bakewell and Thomas Beardsworth.

What does the undcrlined word "'myopie" mean in the last paragraph?( )