周六中午，当环球教育（原环球教育）颜王团杨亮老师拿到当天考题的时候，内心是呵呵的，又是一个难度系数极其有限的老题重现。坦言之，本题并不是几次三番地出现在题库中的题目，笔者也只是依稀记得应该是2013年的考题。

　　翻看题库，果然是2013年09月的一个考题。这种资源类的题目，在考试中不算少见。但是，多数情况下都是双提问的报告。然而此题算是别出心裁，用了这么一个纠结的提问方式。

　　原题如下：

　　Some people think they have right to use as much fresh water as they want, while others believe that governments should strictly control the use of fresh water as it is limited resource. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. 20161210 / 20130928

　　审题阶段，相信很多考生都会不约而同地叫喊着不能同意题干的第一个观点，而将题干的第二观点视为圣旨一样毋庸置疑。如果从应付考试的角度而言，这是可取的。尽管，事实明显与此不符。其实几乎对于所有考生而言，立场的选择其实对于考生的最终分数影响几乎为零。在此，大家大可不必用尽心机。

　　Of many basic needs without which humans cannot survive at all, fresh water is in deteriorating crisis not only regionally but globally. Consequently, the majority of governments across all nations are making every effort to tackle the problem of water resource scarcity by restraining water consumption in all aspects. Notwithstanding, citizens have never been deprived of right of using fresh water limitlessly.

　　本段为全文首段。先是一个简单的背景介绍，随后就直截了当地说明题干的第二观点是正确的。尽管如此，其实人们从来就没有被剥夺过无休止地用水的权利。看起来，这开头段写的云里雾里，对笔者立场阐述极其不清。其实，继续往下读就能发现，笔者的观点已经讲述完毕了。

　　There is no gainsaying that people do have the right of utilizing fresh water for both their basic needs for surviving and their luxury lifestyle, like owning a private swimming pool. Both social and natural resources are imperative for humans, whereas this does not imply that those resources ought to be distributed with equality. Furthermore, in fact resources have never been shared by every citizen equally since humans came into being. In all countries, the rich are obviously more likely to enjoy relatively abundant resources like fresh water, and by contrast the poor can only get the limited share for basic needs.

　　主段一，重点讨论题干的观点一。得出的结论是，人们就是有这个权利，因为这个权利从未被剥夺过。自然资源也好社会资源也罢，在人类的历史上，就从来没有被平均分配过。虽然我们都是共产主义的接班人，但是我们不是还没接班呢嘛。

　　On the other hand, authorities have to take reasonable measures to make distribution of fresh water satisfy all people’s demand for surviving. Those who are economically limited or live in areas with the shortage of fresh water resources should be given priority by authorities, and then other people’s luxury consumption of water can be provided. In most cases, governments are using policies like grading water price to guarantee everyone can afford basic water consumption, and meanwhile respect people’s right of using water as much as they wish if those people are able to buy the tremendously high water bill. Hereby, economic leverage seems like an effective way for governments to ensure the distribution of fresh water more rational and acceptable by every citizen.

　　主段二，重点讨论题干的观点二。政府是不是应该严控淡水的使用。结论必然是肯定的。其实，大部分政府就是拿经济杠杆为武器，使得淡水资源得到相对较为公平的分配。首先得保证所有人的基本需求，再进而保证一些人的奢侈消费。而对于水的奢侈消费，是一定要付出高成本的。阶梯水价，就是以这个为准则的。

　　Overall, people have the right to consume water for some luxury lifestyle, and in the meantime governments are also authorized to impose high price for them. Only with restrain of fresh water by authorities, can everyone in societies feel fair about the distribution of this precious resource.

　　经过上述纠结的讨论之后，本题得出一个很是清晰的结论。你要是有钱买单，你就天天给你们家的私人泳池换水。没人会剥夺你这个权利，但是钱你一定要付。同时，也只有政府通过此等手段，这个社会资源的分配才能被每个人接受。

　　本文成于回京动车之上，略显仓促，欢迎大家斧正。