input question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: Would you jump off the Great Wall of China for 300 pounds a day? A stunt person is a man or woman who does all the dangerous bits of acting work in films or on TV. This can be anything from a simple fall into a swimming pool, or walking off the top of a tall building. It sounds like a job that you would have to be made to try, but there are actually lots of people who want to do it. Sarah France, twenty-four, is one of Britain's sixteen professional stunt women ---there are one hundred and sixty stunt men in the country. We asked Sarah how she came to be a stunt woman. "When I was young I was trained to be a dancer, and for seven years after school I was hardly out of work. A dancer's life is pretty short, though, and my father suggested I should think about doing stunt work after I'd given up dancing. I thought about it for the next two years and decided to have a go. For six months, I worked really hard every day. I had to learn different skills---swimming, jumping, horse -riding, etc." Sarah finished the course in just five months and applied to the office which decides whether you're accepted as a professional stunt person or not. Two weeks after she was accepted, Sarah was throwing off the Great Wall of China in Superman IV. "I was very lucky to get work so quickly. I had a small part, playing a traveler who fell off the Wall after an earthquake. The traveler's life was saved by Superman, of course! Actually, I fell forty-five feet into a pile of cardboard boxes! You can't use anything softer than that or you will be brought back into view of the cinema. Instead you just have to learn to fall properly. It's quite dangerous but I enjoy it." Options: A Healthy B Adventurous C Skillful D Successful Answer: B Adventurous Question:???
output answer: Which of the following words best describes Sarah?

Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: There are four types of persons who go to work part-time. These include retirees who want a bit more income or socialization, parents who want to spend more time with their children, college and high school students and temporary agency workers who want more experience. Many people enjoy the advantages of working part-time, but benefits are rarely offered to part-time employees. Most people are hoping for health insurance and retirement benefits when taking a job. Traditionally, companies only offer benefits to employees who work 30 hours or more a week. This is only a 25% reduction in hours, so it doesn't free up a lot of time for the employee who needs part-time hours. Even when a part-timer is offered health benefits, he is rarely offered paid time off and retirement benefits. Dental benefits are almost never offered to part-time employees. Many businesses hire part-time employees for the simple reason of saving money. If they work less than a certain number of hours, the employers don't need to pay for benefits. There are companies, however, that are beginning to offer benefits to part-time employees. This includes benefits for health, paid time off and retirement plans. Some companies have begun to offer this in order to take in high quality, trained professionals who just want part-time hours. If a company wants a qualified employee, it will have to compete with other companies. People who may only want to work part-time may be forced to take a full-time job to get the benefits. Companies who offer benefits to part-timers have an advantage by offering more choices to their employees in terms of hours. Conducting an Internet search is probably the quickest way to find companies that provide benefits for part-time employees. Many large corporations like Starbucks, Barnes & Noble and Whole Foods offer benefits to part-time employees among other things. Look for companies that offer a team approach to their employees. Employees are given choices and part of decision-making in the business. Businesses that... Options: A don't want to spend more time on work B have so many household and social affairs C hope to have more money, time and experience D only expect to make more friends Answer: C hope to have more money, time and experience Question:
----
Answer: People prefer to work part-time mainly because they _ .

Problem: Given the question: Write a multi-choice question for the following article, with the given choices and answer: Article: Cowboy or spaceman? A dilemma for a children's party, perhaps. But also a question for economists, argued Kenneth Boulding, a British economist, in an essay published in 1966. We have run our economies, he warned, like cowboys on the open grassland: taking and using the world's resources, confident that more lies over the horizon. But the Earth is less a grassland than a spaceship--a closed system, alone in space, carrying limited supplies. We need, said Boulding, an economics that takes seriously the idea of environmental limits. In the half century since his essay, a new movement has responded to his challenge. "Ecological economists", as they call themselves, want to revolutionise its aims and assumptions. What do they say--and will their ideas achieve lift-off? To its advocators, ecological economics is neither ecology nor economics, but a mix of both. Their starting point is to recognise that the human economy is part of the natural world. Our environment, they note, is both a source of resources and a sink for wastes. But it is ignored in conventional textbooks, where neat diagrams trace the flows between firms, households and the government as though nature did not exist. That is a mistake, say ecological economists. There are two ways our economies can grow, ecological economists point out: through technological change, or through more intensive use of resources. Only the former, they say, is worth having. They are suspicious of GDP, a crude measure which does not take account of resource exhaustion, unpaid work, and countless other factors. In its place they advocate moreholistic approaches, such as the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), a composite index that includes things like the cost of pollution, deforestation and car accidents. While GDP has kept growing, global GPI per person peaked in 1978: by destroying our environment we are making ourselves poorer, not richer. The solution, says Herman Daly, a former World Bank economist and eco-guru, is a "steady-state" economy, where the use of... Options: A GDP is crude measure that is not worth using B car accident should by all means include in GDP C we are gaining material wealth by destroying nature D resources and energy will one day be totally used up Answer: C we are gaining material wealth by destroying nature Question:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
The comparison between GDP and GPI data in 1978 has warned us that .