ChaseDream

标题: [求教] OG10 104題(版上無討論) [打印本页]

作者: ashleyyuan 时间: 2009-9-22 23:53
标题: [求教] OG10 104題(版上無討論)
我沒理解lawyer在OG10的解釋,這題答案是D,我想請教C錯在哪?
我並不是很能理解題目的思路是怎樣,求教各位.
謝謝

104. Spending on research and development by United States businesses for 1984 showed an increase of about 8 percent over the 1983 level. This increase actually continued a downward trend evident since 1981 – when outlays for research and development increased 16.4 percent over 1980 spending. Clearly, the 25 percent tax credit enacted by Congress in 1981, which was intended to promote spending on research and development, did little or nothing to stimulate such spending.

The conclusion of the argument above cannot be true unless which of the following is true?
(A) Business spending on research and development is usually directly proportional to business profits.
(B) Business spending for research and development in 1985 could not increase by more than 8.3%.
(C) Had the 1981 tax credit been set higher than 25%, business spending for research and development after 1981 would have increased more than it did.
(D) In the absence of the 25% tax credit, business spending for research and development after 1981 would not have been substantially lower than it was.
(E) Tax credits market for specific investments are rarely effective in inducing businesses to make those investments.

作者: dandan2010 时间: 2009-9-25 20:07

没有看过lawyer的解释。

个人理解：题目说，第一层意思：用于研究和发展的开支1984比1983长了8％，这是一个涨幅下降的趋势（自1981以来），而1981比1980涨了16.4％。。第二层意思：在1981时，国会决定用25％的税收抵免来刺激用于研究和发展的开支，但是前面的数据使作者觉得：结论：就是这25％的税收抵免并没有刺激研究和发展的开支增加。

理解题目后，D的意思是：没有25％的税收抵免。用于研究和发展的开支不会比现在少。（说明这个税收抵免有没有都一样，就是没有刺激了）

而C的意思是，如果税收抵免的比率增加那么，用于研究和发展的开支也会增加的，这个其实是承认税收抵免还是有作用的啊。

[此贴子已经被作者于2009/9/26 8:58:58编辑过]

作者: tufengfeng 时间: 2009-9-26 10:03
楼上说的很有道理，同意

作者: Flameco绿光 时间: 2017-5-10 11:27

dandan2010 发表于 2009-9-25 20:07
没有看过lawyer的解释。个人理解：题目说，第一层意思：用于研究和发展的开支1984比1983长了8％，这是一个 ...

老姐稳

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)