ChaseDream

标题: GWD8-Q19 [打印本页]

作者: viviansecret    时间: 2009-8-6 04:45
标题: GWD8-Q19

GWD-8-Q19

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65.  Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians.  Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.

A.      They rely entirely on the government pension for their income

B.      Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check

C.      They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation

D.     The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high

E.      In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living

答案:E。想请教下E的含义。原文不是说了政府提高20% inflation-adjusted pension payment吗?那E选项我理解的是想表达这笔费用不够,可是这个是政府提供的啊,怎么又变成children supplyment了呢?我觉得E是无关选项啊。我怎么觉得应该选C呢?请多多指教!


作者: viviansecret    时间: 2009-8-8 08:07

up!


作者: payo    时间: 2009-8-8 09:54

无视我的回答么个就算了


[此贴子已经被作者于2009/8/9 13:06:59编辑过]

作者: viviansecret    时间: 2009-8-9 13:00
有谁可以帮忙回答一下这道题吗?
作者: yingS    时间: 2009-8-9 15:20

因为作者最后说

nevertheless,这些人经济情况no better than 没有比之前好

主要的原因是---因为这些中老年人要养孩子 increase的钱只能维持他们基本生活

C选项完全是干扰,前面作者已经表示Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible 通货膨胀没什么影响

这是一个前提,在经济基本稳定没有什么通货膨胀的时候,政府给了钱为什么没有很大的改善呢???

因为。。。


作者: keykeyxx    时间: 2009-11-19 18:55

因为作者最后说

nevertheless,这些人经济情况no better than 没有比之前好

主要的原因是---因为这些中老年人要养孩子 increase的钱只能维持他们基本生活
C选项完全是干扰,前面作者已经表示Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible 通货膨胀没什么影响

这是一个前提,在经济基本稳定没有什么通货膨胀的时候,政府给了钱为什么没有很大的改善呢???

因为。。。
-- by 会员 yingS (2009/8/9 15:20:00)



这样理解不对吧~~E是说老人的生活来源主要是子女给的补贴supplement,政府给的少,子女就会多补贴;政府给的多了,子女就会相应少给补贴,所以,老人的总收入不改变。
作者: emmacao    时间: 2009-12-19 22:50
E中,说孩子给老人提供赡养,但仅仅只够舒适的生活条件而已,所以20%的弥补不足以使他们在财政上好很多。即,孩子的赡养才是改善老人条件的关键
作者: 方向盘指向南    时间: 2010-3-18 21:04
好难啊。。。
作者: changyou    时间: 2010-4-10 00:10
这个GWD-TN 24套里有详细的解释,很诡异的逻辑,看完了一边就记住了,后面19套又再出来答案居然不同,我就崩溃了……
作者: xyloaries    时间: 2010-7-18 14:47
选项E我怎么想都觉得不太对,它说子女给老人的赡养费只够让老人过上还算舒服的生活,如果这样的话有了政府给的额外的补助,老人的生活才应该过得更好才对啊。除非明确说子女给老人的赡养费是老人最主要的经济来源,政府补贴可以忽略不计。但我们自己是不能做此假设的。所以我还是觉得C是对的。有没NN可以帮忙再看一下啊?
作者: forrestgan    时间: 2010-7-26 19:58
应该是说老人收入来源一是政府补贴,二是孩子资助作为补充。当政府给的多了,孩子补充部分就少了。所以整体没有什么改变。
作者: greenhandcomes    时间: 2010-7-26 21:25
GWD-8-Q19: GWD-2-12
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65.  Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians.  Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.
A.    They rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B.    Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C.    They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation
D.    The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high
E.    In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living
孩子对老人的赡养费是一个(对政府津贴的)补充,结果只是使老人过上舒适的日子。孩子赡养和政府津贴是此消彼长的关系,因此即使政府津贴增加了也没有明显改变老人的经济条件
作者: luopite    时间: 2010-10-7 18:21
GWD-8-Q19: GWD-2-12
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Concerned about financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65.  Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians.  Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because ________.
A.    They rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B.    Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C.    They buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation
D.    The pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high
E.    In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living
孩子对老人的赡养费是一个(对政府津贴的)补充,结果只是使老人过上舒适的日子。孩子赡养和政府津贴是此消彼长的关系,因此即使政府津贴增加了也没有明显改变老人的经济条件
-- by 会员 greenhandcomes (2010/7/26 21:25:38)


不知道这个此消彼长的关系是怎么看出来的,我是没有看出来。难道政府的补贴多了孩子给的钱就一定会少?
作者: 澹泓幽客    时间: 2010-10-10 11:46
我是来问一下为什么不能选D?
政府说给所有老年人的补助增长20%,D里面说老年人人数增长了很多,那平均给每个老年人的就少了啊。。。所以他们的经济条件没什么改变。
作者: mayy    时间: 2010-10-11 22:58
个人认为
C:他们所购买的物品在通货膨胀时会涨的很厉害。原文说通货膨胀可忽略,因此无关。
D:政府增加补助的时候是低于贫困线的老人人数最多的时候。无论老人是否低于贫困线,增加补助都应该使经济条件好转。
E:孩子通常给老人补贴,但只足以提供老人舒适的生活。即孩子的目的是使老人达到“舒适的生活”,因此如果政府补贴增加,那么要孩子给的补贴就会减少,所以老人经济条件没有变好。
作者: 懒小猫爽爽    时间: 2011-8-5 11:53
这个此消彼长的关系是从 “supplement ”这个词得出来的吧。老人总收入不变,政府给得多,孩子就给的少。整体保证老人有个基本conformtable living就好了
作者: 逆水潜龙    时间: 2011-11-19 11:20
老人的收入等于孩子的收入加上政府补贴,孩子的收入只补够老人温饱用,所以即使补贴多了,孩子给的就少了,总量还是一样的




欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3