Lin Congying, Chairman of JOEONE, a Chinese brand focused on men’s trousers created in 1989,     1     (announce) that the company would remove the English word “JOEONE” from its logo, leaving only the Chinese characters     2     part of its new branding (品牌设计) strategy.

This represented a sharp turnaround of the conventional way of branding, where some Chinese companies tended to design their products with a name sounding the     3     (little) “Chinese.” Examples include Metersbonwe and Semir, both     4     (found) in Zhejiang Province. The names almost have no literal association with Chinese.

Recent years have witnessed     5     increasing trend of Chinese companies becoming popular by integrating Chinese elements into their design and marketing     6     (operation), forming styles known as China Chic. Li Ning, a professional sportswear company, in 2012 suffered a major setback with a huge annual loss of over 20 billion yuan. The situation barely improved     7     (significant) in the subsequent years. Later in 2018,     8     (it) new products, combined with Chinese elements, were quickly sold out and the company returned to the center of the fashion world with a brand-new image.

As reported,     9     over half of the oh-oh group believe is that a foreign brand by itself is not an advantage. They tend to focus on the experience of using the products. With the quality of products of local brands     10     (arise), people’s affection for these brands is also growing.

6 . How many people really suffer as a result of labour market problems? This is one of the most critical yet debatable social policy Questions.

In many ways, our social statistics overstate the degree of hardship. Unemployment does not have the same horrible consequences today as it did in the 1930s when most of the unemployed were primary breadwinners, when income and earnings were usually much closer to the margin of survival, and when there were fewer effective social programmes for those failing in the labour market. Increasing wealth, the rise of families with more than one wage earner, the growing dominance of secondary earners among the unemployed and improved social welfare protection have unquestionably relieved the consequences of joblessness. Earnings and income data also overestimate the scale of hardship. Among the millions with hourly earnings at or below the minimum wage level, the majority are from multiple-earner, relatively well-off families. Most of those counted by the poverty statistics are elderly or handicapped or have family responsibilities which keep them out of the labour force, so the poverty statistics are by no means an accurate indicator of labour market problems.

Yet there are also many ways our social statistics underestimate the degree of labour-market-related hardship. The unemployment counts exclude the millions of fully employed workers whose wages are so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and repeated or long-time unemployment frequently interact to weaken the capacity for self-support. Since the number experiencing joblessness at some time during the year is several times that unemployed in any month, those who suffer as a result of forced idleness can equal or exceed average annual unemployment, even though only a minority of the jobless in any month really suffer. For everyperson counted in the monthly unemployment records, there is another working part-time because of the inability to find full-time work, or else outside the labour force but wanting a job. Finally, income transfers in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, neglecting the needs of the working poor, so that the dramatic expansion of cash and non-cash transfers does not necessarily mean that those failing in the labour market are adequately protected.

As a result of such conflicting evidence, it is uncertain whether those suffering seriously as a result of labour market problems number in the hundreds of thousands or the tens of millions, and, hence, whether high levels of joblessness can be tolerated or must be counteracted(抵消)by job creation and economic stimulation. There is only one area of agreement in this debate—that the existing poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are inadequate for one of their primary applications, measuring the consequences of labour market problems.

7 . Around 3,000 school-based health centers operate in more than 30 states all around the U.S. offering primary and preventive care for students who live in medically underserved areas. Starting at the centers that treat flu, asthma, diabetes and other common illnesses, they provide vaccinations (疫苗接种) and screen for dental, vision and hearing problems, and some provide mental health care. These clinics bring services to children who need them most and who have the greatest risk of falling behind in school because their health needs go unmet.

The pandemic was hard on existing school-based health centers, and it’s time for government at all levels, to recognize that all children need accessible and affordable health care. As lawmakers draw up budgets, reallocate (重新分配) funds and begin a new school year, existing clinics should be able to operate without budgetary fears, more dollars should go to school-based clinics, and more community partners should participate financially and physically in efforts to bring health care to the kids who lack it.

Yet most school communities that could desperately use such clinics lack them. In 2021 $5 million was appropriated (拨专款) to support new and expanded services at school-based health centers. That money funded 25 facilities only—yet the program got more than 2,000 applications. And fewer than half of U.S. states currently fund school health centers. Although the clinics can also bill Medicaid (医疗补助制度) and insurance for students who have coverage, they need stable funding for operating expenses, including hiring well-trained staff.

Many existing centers had to close temporarily or permanently during the pandemic for lack of funding. One bright spot is that more than 60 percent of the centers began offering telehealth services, broadening their reach. Getting kids the care they need where they need it has always made sense, and it`s more urgent than ever. The time is right to expand school-based health centers to all underserved students.

9 . ChatGPT, a new chatbot model developed by US-based AI research laboratory OpenAI, has quickly become a hit globally due to its advanced conversational capabilities,

It can write emails, computer codes, even academic papers and poems, and has passed a number of tests within seconds. Academicians worldwide are discussing whether AI should be used in education. Some universities have banned it. The New York City’s Department of Education, for example, banned the chatbot from its public school devices and networks, with some people warning that it could encourage more students to cheat, especially in exams.

Many more welcome this app, claiming that, like most technological advances and groundbreaking innovations in history, ChatGPT is a powerful tool for the development of higher education.

Embracing AI as early as possible is advisable. Higher education institutions should make preparations for including AI in their syllabus (教学大纲). They can start by offering related courses, because by understanding how it works, they can make better use of it. Besides, students with good knowledge of AI are more competitive when it comes to getting a good job, as an increasing number of jobs are being done by computer programmes-some in cooperation with humans, AI-powered education technologies can be adopted to make the learning experience more suitable for each student based on his or her strengths and weaknesses. As for professors, AI can free them from doing some dull tasks so they can concentrate on teaching and interacting with students.

Since we cannot avoid ChatGPT and other AI-powered applications from entering the field of higher education, we should make collective efforts to ensure they have a positive impact on society and the future of education Despite AI helping make learning much more interesting and enjoyable, humans need to work very hard to win the race with technology.

10 . Talking to an adult about feelings can be an uncomfortable experience for children and adolescents. While a mental health professional can provide a confidential(私密的)space, the first few interactions can still bring them a sense of uneasiness. But what if they could share how they honestly feel without interacting directly with another human? With this in mind, a recent study from the University of Cambridge tested a robot’s effectiveness in determining children’s well-being.

The study involved 28 children between the ages of 8 and 13 and their parents or guardians completing a well-being questionnaire focused on the young individuals. Then a human-like robot asked the young participants open-ended questions about happy and sad memories over the last week and had them respond to prompts(提示)around pictures. The parents or guardians and research team members observed the interaction from a separate room.

Children with mental well-being issues were likelier to divulge the extent of these problems while talking to the robot. Researchers also found they felt more negative than stated in the initial questionnaire. On the other hand, children without previously stated mental well-being concerns presented an even more positive image to the robot.

Actually, the idea that children would share more with a robot than parents or mental health professionals is easy to understand. “Not all children have a secure attachment style, meaning they feel safe and connected to their caregivers,” says Dr. Katherine Grill, a behavioral scientist. “Children without secure attachments often find comfort in companions like imaginary friends, In this instance, a robot may serve as a viable option for children to open up about their well-being. Even in cases where children have secure attachment styles, a robot may provide them with a non-judgmental relationship where they’ re willing to share their feelings.”

“While this study demonstrates the benefit of robots, it doesn’t remove the need for human interaction in the mental health field. Technology-enabled services mean digital support and even enhanced care, but they don’t replace work with a human being,” says Dr. Aaron Haddock, associate professor of Clark University. “After all, the relationship between clients and providers is a key driver of positive treatment outcomes.”