Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government ‘s effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Some of the by-products of processing cashews are used for manufacturing plants and plastics
B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants
C. More people in kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them
D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices
E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in kernland off their land and into the cities
lift此处取“取消”之意思。题目的推理是这样的：如果政府 removing the tariff ，那么它竭力减少城市失业问题的努力会受到阻碍，因为domestic processing plants主要在城市，可能会使那里的工人失业；但是E选项说：缺少利润会使increasing number of small farmers 进入城市，而原文说了如果关税被取消的话farmers 可以得到利润，那么如果关税不取消farmers 就increasingly涌入城市，城市的失业问题也不会好转，甚至有更危险的可能。这样E就削弱了原文论断了，不说政府应该一定取消关税，至少政府需要重新考虑它的政策影响。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |