标题: 求大神解GWD-TN-16第二题疑惑 [打印本页] 作者: Ryan_V 时间: 2015-11-30 12:10 标题: 求大神解GWD-TN-16第二题疑惑 这题是这样的：
In two months, the legal minimum wage in the country of Kirlandia will increase from five Kirlandic dollars(KD5.00) Per hour to KD5.50 per hour. Opponents of this increase have argued that the resulting rise in wages will drive the inflation rate up. In fact its impact on wages will probably be negligible, since only a very small proportion of all Kirfandic workers are currently receiving less than KD5.50 per hour.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Most people in Kirlandia who are currently earning the minimum wage have been employed at their current jobs for less than a year.
B. Some firms in Kirlandia have paid workers considerably less than KD5.00 per hour, in violation of Kirlandic employment regulations.
C. Many businesses hire trainees at or near the minimum wage but must reward trained workers by keeping their pay levels above the pay level of trainees.
D. The greatest growth in Kirlandia’s economy in recent years has been in those sectors where workers earn wages that tend to be much higher than the minimum wage.
E. The current minimum wage is insufficient for a worker holding only one job to earn enough to support a family, even when working full time at that job.
正确答案是选C， 我看了大家的解答，总之思路就是：trainee的工资如果从最低的5.0涨到了最低的5.5，那么workers的工资就都会高于5.5，因此产生的impact不会negligible. 但是 我认为 文中条件说：
因为 only a very small proportion of all Kirfandic workers are currently receiving less than KD5.50 per hour， 所以产生的影响才是微小的。
这个C答案无论怎么解释，都没有解释到" a small propotion" 这个点子上啊，不管你trainee怎么去涨工资，然后导致其他workers都必须高于5.5，前提是最低工资小于5.5的只是很小的一部分人。C答案并没有构成对原文结论的削弱啊。当然其他答案 我也觉得都没构成削弱。。 好纠结的一道题。。。 求大神们指点迷津！！作者: mnimi 时间: 2015-11-30 15:22
你分析中前一半关于影响小那部分没问题。
重点在后面，trainees工资at or near the minimum wage ，那么新工资法后就是>= KD5.5 那large proportion高于5.5的trained worker工资就可能更高，就可能inflation了。比如，本来 trained worker工资KD5.6，现在trainees工资涨到KD5.6了， 那trained worker可能就涨到KD5.8>KD5.6 那么这种比例一高，就影响通货膨胀了。
好纠结的一道题。。。 求大神们指点迷津！！