标题: 求助TN版GWD7-Q28 [打印本页] 作者: linya76 时间: 2010-6-30 21:23 标题: 求助TN版GWD7-Q28 Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper: Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?
A. Because steel from Krenland is rarely competitive in international markets, only a very small portion of Krenlandian steelmakers’ revenue comes from exports. B. The international treaties that some governments are violating by giving subsidies to steelmakers do not specify any penalties for such violations. C. For many Krenlandian manufacturers who face severe international competition in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their raw material costs. D. Because of advances in order-taking, shipping, and inventory systems, the cost of shipping steel from foreign producers to Krenland has fallen considerably in recent years. E. Wages paid to workers in the steel industry in Krenland differ significantly from wages paid to workers in many of the countries that export steel to Krenland. 答案给的是C，完全没有头绪，分析不出来，请好心人赐教作者: sayysong 时间: 2010-6-30 21:45
Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports. 别国的出口补贴政策导致别国可以以低价出口-->K国低价进口-->K国之间的钢材销量受挫。如果K国减少廉价钢材的进口，则可以保护钢铁企业和就业。
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument? 要weaken这个argument，实际就是找出他因。
A. Because steel from Krenland is rarely competitive in international markets, only a very small portion of Krenlandian steelmakers’ revenue comes from exports. 题目说的是domestic sales，A说的是exports，不相关，out。
B. The international treaties that some governments are violating by giving subsidies to steelmakers do not specify any penalties for such violations. 提到的是与别国的subsidies相关的政策，与K国的无关，out。
C. For many Krenlandian manufacturers who face severe international competition in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their raw material costs. cost在于原材料(他因)价高，故无法施惠于人工，也就无法解决就业问题，weaken，Bingo。
D. Because of advances in order-taking, shipping, and inventory systems, the cost of shipping steel from foreign producers to Krenland has fallen considerably in recent years. 别国出口价更便宜了，会K国更难减少进口，弱weaken。
E. Wages paid to workers in the steel industry in Krenland differ significantly from wages paid to workers in many of the countries that export steel to Krenland. 将cost归于人工，正是题目中所提到的，是strengthen，out。
一些浅见，共同讨论。。作者: linya76 时间: 2010-6-30 22:05
钻到牛角尖里去了…… C项是说即使cheap steel imports减少了，但由于raw material成本高，仍不能帮助employment吗？还是不太理解成本与就业之间的联系，是因为But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry这句话吗？这句话我也不太理解，烦劳再详细解说一下，谢谢作者: sayysong 时间: 2010-6-30 23:39
原料成本高，那么人工成本就被挤薄了，简单来说，可以发的工资就少了--雇的人就少了--就业问题得不到缓解。 原料成本低--有更多的钱可以来雇人--多雇点儿人，多就业。
，哪位懂会计的tx可以来具体解释一下成本组成的关系。。。