标题: 新破解PREP CR1-89 [打印本页] 作者: toplessi 时间: 2009-12-28 19:51 标题: 新破解PREP CR1-89 Goronian lawmaker: Goronia's Cheese Importation Board, the agency responsible for inspecting all wholesale shipments of cheese entering Goronia from abroad and rejecting shipments that fail to meet specified standards, rejects about one percent of the cheese that it inspects. Since the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible, whereas the cost of maintaining the agency is not, the agency's cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides.
Knowing the answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the lawmaker's argument?
A. Are any of the types of cheeses that are imported into Goronia also produced in Goronia?
B. Has the Cheese Importation Board, over the last several years, reduced its operating costs by eliminating inefficiencies within the agency itself?
C. Does the possibility of having merchandise rejected by the Cheese Importation Board deter many cheese exporters from shipping substandard cheese to Goronia?
D. Are there any exporters of cheese to Goronia whose merchandise is never rejected by the Cheese Importation Board?
E. How is the cheese rejected by the Cheese Importation Board disposed of?
完全看不懂,请教各位.(望详细点,本人CR一贯不行)作者: toplessi 时间: 2009-12-28 21:27
真着急哈,,,,,作者: dabiantou 时间: 2009-12-29 11:52
Question: which of the following would be most useful in evaluating "the agency's cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides"
Key word: cost, eliminating A,D,E as "out of scope" B cost reduced->cost outweighs benefit "the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible"=>"benefit of rejecting would be negligible" cost outweighs benefit no matter how cost reduces.
C as"strengthen" deter exporters-> extra harm which strengthens "cost outweighs benefit"
So I choose C 个人浅见...欢迎探讨
作者: prayer 时间: 2009-12-29 14:08
Goronian lawmaker: Goronia's Cheese Importation Board, the agency responsible for inspecting all wholesale shipments of cheese entering Goronia from abroad and rejecting shipments that fail to meet specified standards, rejects about one percent of the cheese that it inspects. Since the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible, whereas the cost of maintaining the agency is not, the agency's cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides.
Knowing the answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the lawmaker's argument?
A. Are any of the types of cheeses that are imported into Goronia also produced in Goronia? 【在哪里生产是无关词】
B. Has the Cheese Importation Board, over the last several years, reduced its operating costs by eliminating inefficiencies 【效率也是无关词】within the agency itself?
C. Does the possibility of having merchandise rejected by the Cheese Importation Board deter many cheese exporters from shipping substandard cheese to Goronia?
D. Are there any exporters of cheese to Goronia whose merchandise is never rejected 【无关】by the Cheese Importation Board?
E. How is the cheese rejected by the Cheese Importation Board disposed of【无关】?
完全看不懂,请教各位.(望详细点,本人CR一贯不行)
-- by 会员 toplessi (2009/12/28 19:51:22)
文章让你评价lawmaker的结论，他从前面一些论据，得出最后一句：the agency's cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides，成本跟利润的比较。
如果低标准cheese进口增加，agency就会reject，从而降低由低标准cheese带来的诸多额外cost，此时agency's cost<benefit，weaken作者: jiangmingjia 时间: 2010-11-8 10:16
如低标准奶酪是否被reject与agency的决定有关，则agency有存在的价值； 如低标准奈落是否被reject与agency的决定无关，则agency没有存在的价值。作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2010-11-8 11:15
This question is similiar to the following one, whose correct answer should be D.
OG12 逻辑37
Thyrian lawmaker:Thyria's Cheese Importation Board inspects all cheese shipments to Thyria and rejects shipments not meeting specified standards. Yet only 1 percent is ever rejected. Therefore, since the health consequences and associated economic costs of not rejecting that 1 percent are negligible, whereas the board's operating costs are considerable, for economic reasons alone the board should be disbanded.
Consultant: I disagree. The threat of having their shipments rejected deters many cheese exporters from shipping substandard product.
The consultant responds to the lawmaker's argument by?
(A) rejecting the lawmaker's argument while proposing that the standards according to which the board inspectsi mported cheese should be raised
(B) providing evidence that the lawmaker's argument has significantly overestimated the cost of maintaining the board
(C) objecting to the lawmaker's introducing into the discussion factors that are not strictly economic
(D) pointing out a benefit of maintaining the board, which thel awmaker's argument has failed to consider
(E) shifting the discussion from the argument at hand to an attack on the integrity of the cheese inspectors作者: jxc729 时间: 2010-12-29 17:51
C. Does the possibility of having merchandise rejected by the Cheese Importation Board deter many cheese exporters from shipping substandard cheese to Goronia? 如果答案是yes.即，不建立这个board，进入G国的不合标准的奶酪要比1%多,反对结论：Since the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible。结果不negligible作者: GMAT要上700 时间: 2017-7-13 19:56
哪位大哥能麻烦解释一下B为什么错了？作者: Ggggggggaaaa 时间: 2017-8-21 20:08
文章说cost outweight benefit可是文章光说cost没说benefit C就是benefit作者: はな 时间: 2017-9-6 16:12
而本文最后一句话涉及到了两点 好处和坏处（cost）的一个衡量 它是认为花费超过了好处 所以重点不是在监管方面花的钱少不少 而是监管花了钱是否能够带来利益 这个利益使得这个钱花得值 我觉得b选项最大的错误是读完这个选项 它是说通过什么减少了监管的花费 但是这不是一个可以用来评估的 可以评估的答案 应该是既可以用来削弱 又可以加强 所以要先找这个题的结论 才知道答案要什么 才能预估一下你的答案大体有什么感觉 要解决什么问题 改编 ron说过的
