ChaseDream
搜索
12345下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

A certain mayor has proposed a fee of five dollars per day on private vehicles entering the city, claiming that the fee will alleviate the city's traffic congestion. The mayor reasons that, since the fee will exceed the cost of round-trip bus fare from many nearby points, many people will switch from using their cars to using the bus.

Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the mayor's reasoning is flawed?

正确答案: B

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 17427|回复: 42
打印 上一主题 下一主题

OG-77

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2003-7-23 15:04:00 | 只看该作者

OG-77

77. A certain mayor has proposed a fee of five dollars per day on private vehicles entering the city, claiming that the fee will alleviate the city’s traffic congestion. The mayor reasons that, since the fee will exceed the cost of round-trip bus fare from many nearby points, many people will switch from using their cars to using the bus.
Which of the following statements, if true, provides the best evidence that the mayor’s reasoning is flawed?

(A) Projected increases in the price of gasoline will increase the cost of taking a private vehicle into the city.

(B) The cost of parking fees already makes it considerably more expensive for most people to take a private vehicle into the city than to take a bus.

(C) Most of the people currently riding the bus do not own private vehicles.

(D) Many commuters opposing the mayor’s plan have indicated that they would rather endure traffic congestion than pay a five-dollar-per day fee.

(E) During the average workday, private vehicles owned and operated by people living within the city account for twenty percent of the city’s traffic congestion.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
这道题我当时选了E。我是认为20%的交通拥塞是由住在城内的居民的私人汽车造成的,那么mayor所提出的对进城的私人汽车收取“进城费”的方案就起不到效果(因为是城里人的汽车造成了交通堵塞)。

看过OG的解释后,我承认B确实是正确的。但同时我觉得E之所以不对,是因为20%这一比例太低,不足以构成形成交通拥塞问题的主因。而不是如OG的解释所说,是支持了mayor的方案。

我想请大家帮忙解释一下如何理解E是起到了support作用。


[此贴子已经被作者于2003-7-23 15:05:37编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2003-7-23 16:10:00 | 只看该作者
因为外来车辆确实造成了拥堵(E),所以mayor建议通过加收费用来降低拥堵是完全正确的。所以是support
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2003-7-23 17:40:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用anchoret在2003-7-23 16:10:00的发言:
因为外来车辆确实造成了拥堵(E),所以mayor建议通过加收费用来降低拥堵是完全正确的。所以是support


这正是OG解释没让我明白的地方,你看:
E说的是:private vehicles owned and operated by people living within the city

题目中说:(five dollars per day)private vehicles entering the city

已经living with in the city的车还用再交entering the city的钱吗?

所以就像我说的,如果living within the city的车造成了拥堵,通过限制entering the city的车,就不能缓解拥堵。除非20%的比例太低,不构成拥堵的主因。

呵呵,我是不是过于偏执了?


地板
发表于 2003-7-23 18:18:00 | 只看该作者
不,20% within the city,所以一定有out of the city的情况。
5#
发表于 2003-7-23 20:16:00 | 只看该作者
同意楼上的,这就是为什么E错的原因
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2003-7-23 23:38:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用anchoret在2003-7-23 18:18:00的发言:
不,20% within the city,所以一定有out of the city的情况。


那看来确实像我想的一样,是因为20%比例太低,不能构成主要原因。
这道题看来也就是这样了。以后做题的时候再仔细些吧!
多谢an兄了
7#
发表于 2004-6-13 23:09:00 | 只看该作者
是说那80%造成了拥堵,所以是支持。对吧
8#
发表于 2004-10-17 08:14:00 | 只看该作者

请问d的解释怎么理解?

9#
发表于 2004-10-17 13:14:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用blur在2004-10-17 8:14:00的发言:

请问d的解释怎么理解?


对啊,D如何解释呢?我觉得D才是对的。这部分人觉得“我宁愿再付这¥5,我也要自已驾车,即使路再睹”,这不就说明市长大人的这一计划不能得逞了吗?

10#
发表于 2004-10-17 15:58:00 | 只看该作者
顶一下!
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-3 23:54
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部