We’ve considered several ways of paying to cut in line：hiring line standers，buying tickets from scalpers (票贩子)，or purchasing linecutting privileges directly from，say，an airline or an amusement park.Each of these deals replaces the morals of the queue (waiting your turn) with the morals of the market (paying a price for faster service)．
Markets and queues—paying and waiting—are two different ways of allocating things，and each is appropriate to different activities.The morals of the queue，“First e，first served，”have an egalitarian(平等主义的) appeal.They tell us to ignore privilege，power，and deep pockets.
The principle seems right on playgrounds and at bus stops.But the morals of the queue do not govern all occasions.If I put my house up for sale，I have no duty to accept the first offer that es along，simply because it’s the first.Selling my house and waiting for a bus are different activities，properly governed by different standards.
Sometimes standards change，and it is unclear which principle should apply.Think of the recorded message you hear，played over and over，as you wait on hold when calling your bank：“Your call will be answered in the order in which it was received.”This is essential for the morals of the queue.It’s as if the pany is trying to ease our impatience with fairness.
But don’t take the recorded message too seriously.Today，some people’s calls are answered faster than others.Call center technology enables panies to“score”inings calls and to give faster service to those that e from rich places.You might call this telephonic queue jumping.
Of course，markets and queues are not the only ways of allocating things.Some goods we distribute by merit，others by need，still others by chance.However，the tendency of markets to replace queues，and other nonmarket ways of allocating goods is so mon in modern life that we scarcely notice it anymore.It is striking that most of the paid queuejumping schemes we’ve considered—at airports and amusement parks，in call centers，doctors’offices，and national parks—are recent developments，scarcely imaginable three decades ago.The disappearance of the queues in these places may seem an unusual concern，but these are not the only places that markets have entered.
【小题1】According to the author，which of the following seems governed by the principle“First e，first served”？A．Taking buses.B．Buying houses.C．Flying with an airline.D．Visiting amusement parks.【小题2】The example of the recorded message in Paragraphs 4 and 5 illustrates .A．the necessity of patience in queuing B．the advantage of modern technologyC．the uncertainty of allocation principle D．the fairness of telephonic services【小题3】The passage is meant to .A．justify paying for faster services B．discuss the morals of allocating thingsC．analyze the reason for standing in line D．criticize the behavior of queue jumpingA
网友回答
(答案→)A
解析：本文是一篇议论文，题材是生活中购物、买票等时的插队问题，作者通过举例、道理分析来解读道德和市场的平衡问题。要想得到快速的服务，就要额外付更多的费用，并由此对在道德和市场竞争之间产生的矛盾进行了探讨。
【小题1】解析：选A。细节理解题。题干中的关键词为“First e，first served”，定位于第二、三段。第二段描述的是排队的道德问题，又根据第三段第一句The principle seems right on playgrounds and at bus stops.及第四句Selling my house and waiting for a bus are different activities，properly governed by different standards.(卖房和等公交车是不同的活动，受不同标准的制约。)可知，等公交车是受“先到先得”这一标准制约的，而卖房不在此列。由上面的分析排除B项房屋买卖的问题；再根据第一段第一句可知，直接从航空公司和游乐园买票的特权可以避免排队等候的问题，故排除C、D两项。
【小题2】解析：选C。细节理解题。题干中的关键词为illustrates，定位于第四、五段。第四段第一句Sometimes standards change，and it is unclear which principle should apply.说明了适用规则的不确定性，第五段第一句But don’t take the recorded message too seriously.又说不要太把这个事例当回事，也说明了这一点。A项“排队耐心等待的必要性”与这两段的描述内容不符，可排除；B项“现代科技的优势”不是作者叙述的重点，只是一个举例论证的方法；D项“电话服务业的公平性”也不对，应该说是其时效性和优质的服务性等。
【小题3】解析：选B。主旨大意题。题干中的关键词为is meant to，定位于全篇文章。第二段和第六段的第一句都表明了这篇文章的核心话题就是对分配性事务的道德问题的探讨，找出文中的复现句，其反复讨论的话题大多就是文章的主旨。A项“快速支付服务的证明”，这样的总结过于片面；C项“分析排队的理由”，是对第一段内容的误解；D项“批评插队行为”也是过于狭隘，这三项均不能从整体上把握全篇的主旨。