Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: As goods and services improved, people were persuaded to spend their money on changing from old to new, and found the change worth the expense. When an airline equipped itself with jets, for example, its costs (and therefore air fare) would go up, but the new planes meant such an improvement that the higher cost was justified. A new car (or wireless, washing machine, electric kettle) made life so much more comfortable than the old one that the high cost of replacement was fully repaid. Manufacturers still cry their goods as persuasively as ever, but are the improvements really worth paying for? In many fields, things have now reached such a high standard of performance that further progress is very limited and very, very expensive. Airlines, for example, go to enormous expense in buying the latest jets , in which vast research costs have been spent on ly small improvements. If we abandon these vast costs we might lose the chance of cutting minutes away from flying times; but wouldn't it be better to see airfares drop dramatically, as capital costs become ly insignificant? Again, in the context of a 70 m. p. h. Limit, with lines of cars traveling so close as to control each other's speeds, improvements in performance are actually irrelevant; improvements in handling are unnecessary, as most production cars grip the road perfectly, and comfort has now reached a very high level. Small improvements here are unlikely to be worth the thousands that anybody replacing an ordinary family car every two years may have spent on them. Let us instead have cars -- or wireless, electric kettles, washing machines, television sets -- which are made to last, and not to be replaced. Significant progress is obviously a good thing, but the insignificant progression from model-change to model-change is not. Question: In the case of cars, the author advises that we _ . - cancel the speed limit - further improve their performance - change models every two years - improve their durability
improve their durability

Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: A disastrous competition is going on in England, with billions of dollars and hundreds of lives in danger. OK, that's not true. But competitors from around the world gathered on Thursday to compete for the title of 2012's World's Biggest Liar. Each participant is given up to five minutes to make up the best lie in the competition, which was started in honor of 19th-century Bridge Inn owner Will Ritson, who was reportedly famous for his lies. Competitors gather at the Bridge Inn every year for the competition, a small pub in northwestern England. Anyone can take part in the competition. Well, almost anyway; the reporters note that lawyers and politicians are banned, who is said to enjoy "an unfair advantage" in the proceedings . A study published this past July in the journal Evolution & Human Behavior found that nearly all lies are detectable through visible facial muscle reactions in the person telling a lie. "Thus, while interpersonal deception often is highly successful, signs of hidden emotional states are communicated clearly to the informed observer," the study concluded. A churchman of Carlisle reportedly holds what may be the greatest lie of all time in the competition, simply stating, "I have never told a lie in my life." In 2003, Abrie Krueger of South Africa became the first non-Brit to win the competition. Ironically, Krueger was accused by some of cheating. In 2006, comedian Sue Perkins became the first female to win the competition, telling a tale about people riding camels to work as a result of climate change. Last year's winning entry came from Glen Boyland, who told a lie about competing in a snail-racing competition with Prince Charles. Question: The article begins with _ . - a piece of news - a lie told by the writer - the passage's topic sentence - a case from the competition
a lie told by the writer

(Q).
Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: My husband and son took a New York-to-Milwaukee flight that was supposed to leave Friday at 11:29 am. The flight boarded after 4 pm and didn't leave the gate until 4:40, and half an hour later the pilot announced it would be another hour until takeoff. At that point a Jewish family, worried about violating the Sabbath , asked to get off. Going back to the gate cost the plane its place in line for takeoff, and the flight was eventually cancelled. Was the airline right to grant that request? M. W, Norwalk, CONN. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Situations like that can bring out the worst in people. But despite the increasing resentment of a plane full of people, the pilot tried to do the right thing. He went out of his way to satisfy one family's urgent need. He should not have done so. Passengers bought tickets in the belief that the airline's primary goal was to get them to their destination as close to the schedule as possible. Once they got on the plane and the doors are locked, it's not correct to announce that the rules have changed and that a personal (as opposed to medical) emergency --no matter how urgent -- might take precedence . _ , since on a plane, even a slight delay can spread outward, from the people in the cabin to those meeting them to the passengers waiting to board the plane for the next leg of its journey and so on. It would also be true if the personal emergency were not religious -- if someone suddenly realized she'd made a professional mistake that might cost her millions, and she had to race back to the office to fix it. If a religious practice does nothing to harm others, then airlines should make a reasonable effort to accommodate it. Though that family has every right to observe the Sabbath, it has no right to enlist an airplane full of captive bystanders to help them do so. By boarding a flight on a Friday afternoon, the family knowingly risked running into trouble. The risk was theirs alone to bear. Question: The author of the reply letter thinks that _ . - It's right for the plane to turn back to the gate to save a passenger's treasure - The Jewish family should give up observing the Sabbath after boarding - The biggest problem of turning back is to bring trouble to the pilot - The Jewish family had better avoid boarding on Friday afternoon
(A).
The Jewish family had better avoid boarding on Friday afternoon