1 . America has long been opposing adequate poverty policies because of its strong worry of thinking that the poor are responsible for their own situations, but a child poverty is too harmful and punishing to ignore. I, and a growing number of scholars, believe there is a solution: the government should give monthly cash allowances(津贴), without conditions, to every family with kids. (Higher-income families would have much of the money taxed away.)

A mountain of evidence now shows that poverty can lead to cognitive(认知的) and emotional damage in children. Despite policies that have expanded access to insurance, poor kids are still less healthy than the rest of the young population. They also drop out of school at higher rates, earn less money over time and are incarcerated(监禁) far more often than their better-off peers. That should be enough for us to recognize the moral tragedy that is child poverty, but we should note the broad effect too: reliable analyses show that the nation’s GDP is up to $1 trillion lower because of child poverty.

Poor children have many needs, but research shows that money may matter most. For example, a 2013 review of dozens of studies by London School of Economics researchers found that “Poorer children have worse cognitive, social-behavioral and health outcomes in part because they are poorer, and not just because poverty is related to other household and parental characteristics”.

It can also help reduce family stress and help parents provide a psychologically raising environment in which learning and social development can breed.

The historian Michael Katz correctly notes, “One of the odd aspects of the history of writing about poverty is the avoidance of the simple view that people are poor because they lack money,” yet both the left and the right defamed(诽谤) direct cash aid as a waste and a cause of laziness and abuse. It is good that Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang has stressed the benefits of a universal basic income, quoting studies that show such cash allowances do not cause the avoidance of work, but his plan could cost $2.8 trillion a year and the poor would have to return welfare assistance like food stamps to receive the money. For far less money—about $100 billion—the number of children living in official poverty could be cut in half. Such a policy would be a humane(人道的), practical, efficient victory for a nation too willing to neglect its poor.

3 . Have you ever paid for educational podcasts (播客) or live videos? Ask some people and most of them will say yes. “Pay-for-knowledge” has been more and more fashionable these years. The contents of these “pay-for-knowledge” products are from language learning to gardening or baby-caring. Everything you think of can be found online at this moment. “Pay-for-knowledge” is on the rise (兴起).

Why is “pay-for-knowledge” industry developing so rapidly? First, its development is based on the Internet. With a fast network and a smartphone, anyone who has passed the identity(身份)check can be an online teacher, and anyone with an online account can buy “pay-for-knowledge” products that he or she wants at an affordable price. Second, people are afraid to miss any information. On one hand, people hope for more useful information.                    

On the other hand, such information is usually at the hands of experts (专家) who serve well-known companies and universities. Moreover, the need to learn new skills in today's job market also pushes people to learn on such educational podcasts.

The industry of “pay-for-knowledge” has proved to be lucrative. It promises possibilities of turning information into money. It is good for the development of our country and it can help sellers make lots of money. Besides ，buyers can enjoy self-growth from it. What's more, this is a reflection (反映) of respect for knowledge and talents.

However, the rapid development of “pay-for-knowledge” has a few problems. For one thing, the market is full of eye-catching words such as “How to be an Industry's Expert in 5 Hours” and “15 Classes to Be a Master of Appreciating (欣赏) Classical Music”, which sound like if you pay for it, you are sure to succeed. For another, a large number of customers buy them just for showing off. In fact, those who have really had self-growth after buying online courses may be the kind of people who need them least. In other words, with or without these courses，they can make it anyway, because they are those who have the ability to learn by themselves.

In general, the best is the one that suits you most. “Pay-for-knowledge” may be used as a good start for self-growth. Be careful! Otherwise, your dream of success may not come true.

We tend to think about success in terms of wealth and accomplishments. That’s a fair measurement, but the problem is that when we addict into the     1     (victory), we tend to overlook the sacrifices required in order to get there. In fact,     2     (neglect) to account for the existing sacrifices is one reason why so many of us have a hard time sticking to     3     (health) habits and following up on goals.

Time is a factor when it comes to making sacrifices. As Warren Buffett famously     4     (say), “It’s the only thing you can’t buy. I mean, I can buy anything I want, basically, but I can’t buy time.” He’s     5     (absolute) right. Should you watch another section of your favorite Netflix show     6     give up TV for two months so you can plant that garden you always dreamed about?

Making the decision isn’t easy, but the good news is     7     we already do this naturally. A 2009 study found that people are “far    8     (little) willing to keep many choices open” when some have bigger rewards than others. If the payoffs are unknown, however, we have a harder time giving them up. That’s why doing an activity check is so important. You have to actually take the time     9     (figure) out the opportunity costs, gains of each and what to pursue over the     10    .

6 . The UK government has a plan to reduce waste that shifts the responsibility for disposal(处置）from the state to the companies that make it.

The legislation requires waste producers to pay into the system themselves or through their suppliers that is what the government termed, a “polluter pays” principal. Businesses will have to change their waste processing before the tax comes into play. This is similar to the anti-waste legislation passed in France in February 2020 that prohibits the destruction(销毁）of unsold clothing, cosmetics, hygiene products and electrical products. Companies will have to reuse,or recycle the items.

Dealing with waste is a global problem and we must deal with the over 2 billion metric tons of solid waste generated every year. The World Bank estimates that overall waste will increase to 3.4 billion tons if nothing is done to change the situation.

The demand for legislation like the tough attitude the UK is taking has been increasing according to Positive News. And it is not just environmental groups calling for the changes. This is a consumer driven movement and people are willing to pay more for sustainable brands. Josh Bowden,co-founder of Noissue told Positive News.

What is absolutely certain is that local governments will save a lot of money as the responsibility shifts to the polluters. That could be better invested in things like social care or parks or libraries.” Other countries have made great progress in reducing waste. Sweden's recycling program is so efficient that the country is running out of trash. The recycling rate is almost 99 percent and they are rapidly approaching zero waste. Today, large companies are greening their brands and moving to sustainable packaging including Colgate,Waitrose,Nestle, and Unilever which now has recyclable black packaging. The government of the UK hopes that other companies will follow their example. A partnership between government legislation and private companies will go a long way to reducing the tons of waste going into our environment every year. Laws like the ones in the UK and France can be implemented around the world.

7 . Maijlis Jonsson is a 73-year-old living in the centre of Sweden's capital Stockholm. She leads an active life with her friends, travelling around the city and meeting in coffee shops. However, one issue causes her stress.

Sweden has been steadily moving towards a completely cashless society for a number of years. Cash is now used in less than one in five of all cash transactions(交易) in stores—half the number as five years ago. The law says shops can refuse to accept cash. Life can be hard for those unwilling or unable to adapt to the changes. Not everyone hates cash. Majlis Jonsson is one such person. She must go to a bank in order to pay her friend back for a train ticket bought digitally. “I just don't know how to do it."

Niklas Arvidsson, Sweden's leading expert on the payment system, acknowledges that some people are in danger of being left behind, like the elderly. “We've also got a problem with smaller businessmen in rural areas where perhaps the telecommunication systems are not working," he says.

Is Sweden benefiting from all this? According to Arvidsson, it is. “Electronic transactions are quicker and cost less in general and make the payment system more efficient." He also points out that “it is a little bit more difficult in general for the people to get away with not paying taxes or making small thefts without cash."

Of course, with an increase in digital transactions, the question of data security comes into play. As we freefall through an increasingly virtual world—and payments over the cloud instead of payments with paper—who has access to our information? It is a global problem with no easy solution.

But Arvidsson remains largely positive about cashless transactions. “It's like a virtual infrastructure is being built... if a highway or a railroad has the capacity to bring people in business closer and increase output, the same thing will happen with technology. I really do believe that once the technology genie is out of the bottle, how do you put it back?"

In 2012, nearly one hundred million rural people lived in poverty,     1    （account） for approximately 10% of rural population. However, recent years has seen the continual decrease in this figure, with poverty already     2    （relieve）in most rural areas. It can be seen that China has done a     3    （remark）job in fighting against poverty.

    4     is no doubt that the achievements are due to China’s rapid economic development in these years, as without economic     5    （grow）, we would not have won the battle. And so far, people in poverty     6    （enjoy）the great benefit of the economic development thanks to the fact     7     our government is actively promoting industrialization and urbanization. Many rural people are attracted to urban areas,     8     are more likely to have a booming economy. In addition, our country has attached great importance     9     infrastructure establishment in poor areas, such as roads, communication, and electricity facilities, which will     10    （effective） narrow the gap between the rich and the poor.