请教GWD-9-28

9-Q28:

Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:

Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in

many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are

banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to

be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies

but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce

cheap steel imports.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?

A. Because steel from Krenland is rarely competitive in international markets, only a

very small portion of Krenlandian steelmakers’ revenue comes from exports.

B. The international treaties that some governments are violating by giving subsidies

to steelmakers do not specify any penalties for such violations.

C. For many Krenlandian manufacturers who face severe international competition

in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their

raw material costs.

D. Because of advances in order-taking, shipping, and inventory systems, the cost of

shipping steel from foreign producers to Krenland has fallen considerably in

recent years.

E. Wages paid to workers in the steel industry in Krenland differ significantly from

wages paid to workers in many of the countries that export steel to Krenland.

Answer: C

答案好像只能选C了, 但是不明白画线部分的意思, 怀疑是不是印错了?

But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry.   

请教NN们帮我翻译一下, 讲讲这道题是什么意思呀?读完了,好像云里雾里的,

thanks

But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry.   

不管是什么原因(造成Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports），最终结果是Krenland’s steel industry的就业减少。

非常感谢楚大哥出手襄助, 豆豆明白了,

可是going to be jobs 是不是打印错了, 头一回看到jobs 做动词啊.  funning???

Agree with usdream.

But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry

... the cost is [going to be] jobs [...]

转贴：tony6问: 作者的逻辑是

钢构成了制造商生产成本的大部分，所以限制进口将会抬高钢的价格，使其成本上升，损害制造商的利益，所以不能保护他们的就业率。这中间的GAP是不是太大了？

mindfree         头衔：GMAT总教头   等级：版主   文章：1727   积分：8963   注册：2003-4-8

第 2 楼 What is the gap you mentioned? I do not see a gap in the answer. The gap in the question is that limiting imports will help both the steel industry and overall industry\ial employment. The argument jumps from steel industry employment to overall industry employment. C points out that manufacturers need good steel price to stay competitive. We can safely come to a conclusion that using high price domestic steel will render these manufacturers uncomepetitive and their jobs will be lost.

我问总教头：reder 是render的笔误吧？

另外正确选项C说：For many Krenlandian manufacturers（不仅仅是钢铁行业本身） who face severe international competition in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their raw material costs（如果低价的钢材是一个下游行业工厂的成本而非产品，对它是有利的）. 是这样吧？

原文推理：因为低价的进口钢原材挤掉了K地钢原材生产商的市场，使K地钢铁业失业增多。所以如果政府减少低价钢原材进口，就可减少失业。

C说K地钢原材价格构成了钢材加工品价格的主要部分。在这情况下，如果限制低价钢原材进口，就等于提高钢加工品价格，使钢材加工品竞争力减少，导致更多的失业。从而WEAKEN结论。