Please answer this: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: Sometimes people give us nicknames in order to be mean or make fun of us, which can really hurt. Four eyes. Metal Mouth. Dumbo, Slow Poke, Crater Face. We've all heard kids calling unpleasant nicknames like these. Maybe you've even used similar nicknames on other kids, or been stuck with one yourself. A playground _ or cut usually disappears after a couple of days, but the pain and anger coming from being called a cruel nickname can last a lot longer than that. If you've ever picked on another kid by making up or using a tease nickname, or of you've ever been on the receiving end of one, you know that names like Fatso, Smelly, and Short Stuff can be very hurtful. Plus, they have a habit of sticking to us like glue! People use negative nicknames as a way of keeping someone out of a group of gaining power over someone, or of making themselves feel more important. You may know a kid in your class who always comes up with nicknames for the other kids. This student likes to feel cool by acting like the official "nicknamer." This can give a student a feeling of power, but that power comes at the cost of making other kids feel bad. Kids who give others hurtful nicknames are often trying to cover up the fact that they really feel bad about themselves. Like other kinds of insults , a cruel nickname can be used to make a kid feel being left out or angry. Sometimes they're even nastier than most ways of being mean, because they can be so hard to shake off.
++++++++
Answer: Question: The author believes that_.Options:A those who have hurtful nicknames are not confidentB those who give others hurtful nicknames are confidentC the "official nicknamers" are usually very coolD the "official nicknamers" usually feel bad about themselvesAnswer:D

Problem: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: Annual holidays have become a luxury and are no longer a staple of family life, according to government research. A getaway of a week or more is no longer considered essential by many families and is often beyond their reach, said the analysis of what parents and children say they really need. Fashionable clothes for the children, expensive birthday parties and lots of toys are also on the list of luxuries families don't have to have. Instead, recession -hit parents are thinking of the future, and the things they want for their children centre around learning to behave properly, good education and good health. Their picture of what a family ought to have includes a space to eat together away from the television, plenty of fruit and vegetables, and bicycles so children can get exercise. The breakdown of necessities and luxuries was prepared by researchers from the Department for Work and Pensions(DWP) who were trying to establish an up-to-date picture of what parents say they really need. Their findings show how families have scaled down their expectations in the face of economic difficulties -- how parents are now concentrating their attention and money firmly on the long-term interests of their children. Many believe that while it is vital for a family to do things together, day trips or weekend breaks are enough. Spending on furniture or decorating the house was also considered luxurious, unless the state of the home was so bad it became difficult to invite visitors in. Instead, researchers said: A family home should have an area where the family can eat together, not on their laps in front of a television. Families should be able to go on outings, overnight trips and possibly short holiday: the fact of being able to share these experiences is more important than the precise activity and its cost.

A: Question: What does the author mainly discuss in the text?Options:A Cycling is very important for children's health.B Family holidays once a year have become a luxury.C It is vital for parents to eat together with children.D Parents are concerned with children's future.Answer:B

Problem: Given the question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: My father was a St. Bernard , and my mother was a collie . This was what my mother had told me. I did not know these nice differences myself. My mother like to say them and see other dogs look surprised and jealous , wondering how she got so much education. But, indeed, it was not real education. She got the words by listening in the dining room and the sitting room when there were people talking, and by going with the children to school and listening there. Whenever she heard a word showing great knowledge, she said it to herself many times so that she could keep it until there was a meeting in the neighbourhood. Then, she would show off her knowledge and surprise them all, from small-sized dogs to large-sized dogs. If there was a stranger being doubtful and getting his breath to ask her what it meant, she always explained to him in detail. He had never expected this but thought he would make fool of her. However, in the end, he was the one who was fooled. The others knew what was going to happen, because they had experienced that. When she explained the meaning of a big world, no dogs doubted if it was right. It was natural, because, for one thing, she answered very quickly and confidently, and for another, there were no knowledgeable dogs pointing out the answer was wrong. When I was older, she brought home the word, "unintellectual", and worked on it very hard all the week at different meetings. It was at this time that I realized she made up a fresh meaning of the same word every time. It showed that she was more calm than knowledgeable. (From A Dog's Tale, by Mark Twain)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Question: Why were other dogs jealous of "my" mother?Options:A Because her child was not a dog.B Because "my" mother knew everything.C Because they knew nothing about "me".D Because they thought "my" mother was educated.Answer:D

Q: Write a multi-choice question for the following article: Article: Everyone agrees that it's necessary to reduce carbon emissions around the world. There is less agreement over exactly how nations should go about achieving a more carbon - free planet. Thus, the environmental equivalent: cap - and - trade carbon emissions, or place a carbon tax on all users? With cap - and - trade programs, governments limit the level of carbon produced by an industry. Companies that hold their emissions below the _ can sell their remaining allowance on a carbon market, while companies that go beyond their limit must purchase credits on that market. Carbon taxes are more straightforward: a set tax rate is placed on the consumption of carbon with the idea that raising the price will encourage industries and individuals to consume less. At the moment, cap-and-trade has the upper hand, but doesn't defeat the tax just yet. Supporters of the tax argue that a cap - and - trade system would be too difficult to administer - and too easily gamed by industries looking to sidestep emissions caps. Cap-and-trade advocates contradict that like all other flat taxes, a carbon collection would relatively burden lower - income families, who spend a greater percentage of their income on energy than rich households. So which system will have a larger effect on carbon consumption? A 10% carbon tax might reduce the demand for carbon about 5 % or less, according to an analysis by the Carbon Tax Center, an environmental advocacy group. That may not be enough. Businesses and governments haven't figured out how the two competing systems can work together, but in the end, the world may need both.
A:
Question: The passage focuses on _ .Options:A programs of collecting taxesB systems of reducing carbon emissionsC reasons for reducing carbon emissionsD contradictions between the two systemsAnswer:B