ChaseDream

标题: 请教:大全-d-1 [打印本页]

作者: zcx    时间: 2004-5-31 22:09
标题: 请教:大全-d-1

Contrary to the statements of labor leaders, the central economic problem facing America today is not the distribution of wealth. It is productivity. With the productivity of U.S. industry stagnant, or even declining slightly, the economic pie is no longer growing. Labor leaders, of course, point to what they consider an unfair distribution of the slices of pie to justify their demands for further increases in wages and benefits. And in the past, when the pie was still growing, management could afford to acquiesce. No longer. Until productivity resumes its growth, there can be no justification for further increases in the compensation of workers.



Which of the following statements by a labor leader focuses on the logical weakness in the argument above?



(A) Although the economic pie is no longer growing, the portion of the pie allocated to American workers remains unjustly small.偶怎么觉得这个选项连读起来都不通啊?没有转折的含义?请教这题的思路,谢谢啦。


(B) If management fails to accommodate the demands of workers, labor leaders will be forced to call strikes that will cripple the operation of industry.



(C) Although productivity is stagnant, the U.S. population is growing, so that the absolute size of the economic pie continues to grow as well.



(D) As a labor leader, I can be concerned only with the needs of working people, not with the problems faced by management.A



(E) The stagnation of U.S. industry has been caused largely by factors—such as foreign competition—beyond the control of American workers.




作者: scots    时间: 2004-6-1 04:03

一个让人晕死的问题。。。


已知条件:1)不是分配问题,是生产力问题;2)生产力停滞—蛋糕不再变大;3)分配不公平—对进一步工资增长的需求;4)直到生产力增长,才有进一步要求工资增长的权利


问削弱


原来题目要削弱的结论就是最后一句,前面全是罗嗦的废话!!


(A) Although the economic pie is no longer growing, the portion of the pie allocated to American workers remains unjustly small.尽管经济不再增长,每个工人工资比例低。(也就是在经济增长的时候,工人的工资也没有因为允许争取进一步工资增长而获得公平的财富分配喽)。。晕~~~


A选项单独看是没有啥转折的意思,可是隔在原文里就是有转折的意思了。。



[此贴子已经被作者于2004-6-1 4:07:54编辑过]

作者: liu_9000    时间: 2004-6-1 05:00
scots, wonderful job
作者: Pudding    时间: 2005-2-13 22:42

還是不懂...

尽管经济不再增长,每个工人工资比例低。

怎麼推出: "也就是在经济增长的时候,工人的工资也没有因为允许争取进一步工资增长而获得公平的财富分配" 的啊?

另外C為什麼不對?

直到生产力增长,才有进一步要求工资增长的权利

C說明這塊大餅的絕對值還是增長了啊?


作者: Pudding    时间: 2005-2-19 22:03
Ding....
作者: Pudding    时间: 2005-2-21 16:59

我想我搞懂了...

問題出在比例上而不是絕對值上... 不管實際國民產值多少, 工人的薪資比例就是偏低, and that's what the labor leading striving against...


作者: alicechengx    时间: 2005-7-11 10:26
还是没有搞懂,那个是前提,哪句是结论呀
作者: cmon    时间: 2006-3-8 22:18
以下是引用Pudding在2005-2-13 22:42:00的发言:

還是不懂...



尽管经济不再增长,每个工人工资比例低。


怎麼推出: "也就是在经济增长的时候,工人的工资也没有因为允许争取进一步工资增长而获得公平的财富分配" 的啊?


另外C為什麼不對?



直到生产力增长,才有进一步要求工资增长的权利


C說明這塊大餅的絕對值還是增長了啊?




我明白c的错误,但是A还是没弄清楚那句话的推导。


请nn指点


作者: haze1894    时间: 2006-3-9 02:54
the conclusion is based on the previous elements. (With the productivity of U.S. industry stagnant, or even declining slightly, the economic pie is no longer growing) this sentence is one element. According to auther's logic, problem is not distribution which means when economic pie was growing in the past,  the portion of the pie allocated to American workers was not unjustly small. Here, we need a fact that although the economic pie is no longer growing, the portion of the pie allocated to American workers remains unjustly small to undermine author's conclusion.
作者: huixia06    时间: 2006-8-6 08:02

原文的隐含条件是当经济不增长(即蛋糕没做大时),分配本来就是公平的。

由此有原文的推论:因为蛋糕做大了,原来的份额(比例)就显得小了。所以原来公平的分配就显得不公平了。那么在经济增长情况下,管理层可以默许这种要求。但经济不增长时,就没有所谓的“分配不公平”说法。

答案是直接weaken原文的隐含条件。


作者: ssl507    时间: 2007-7-1 21:48

题目说,劳工领导用分配不公作为要求提高报酬的理由

作者生产率不增长的条件下,劳工领导增加报酬是没有理由的。作者的假设是:生产率不增长的条件下,没有分配不公平(没有理由)

A答案说:生产率不增长时,也有分配不公,直接削弱。


作者: luckyminnie    时间: 2007-12-2 07:41
以下是引用ssl507在2007-7-1 21:48:00的发言:

题目说,劳工领导用分配不公作为要求提高报酬的理由

作者生产率不增长的条件下,劳工领导增加报酬是没有理由的。作者的假设是:生产率不增长的条件下,没有分配不公平(没有理由)

A答案说:生产率不增长时,也有分配不公,直接削弱。

谢谢
作者: zoechancruz    时间: 2011-1-19 09:41
正方:劳动者
反方:资本家(作者)

正方辩词:
 1.unfair distribution of the slices of pie因为分到的饼少(分配不公),所以要求加工资。
2 And in the past, when the pie was still growing, management could afford to acquiesce。 以前经济形势好,饼多的时候,你们加过工资给我们

 隐含意思:饼少,所以工资少。饼多,工资就多。
 
反方辩词:
 Until productivity resumes its growth, there can be no justification for further increases in the compensation of workers.除非你们的生产效率提高了,否则休想加工资。

 隐含意思:生产力低下,所以工资少。而不是经济好不好的问题

题目:Which of the following statements by a labor leader focuses on the logical weakness in the argument above? 问劳动者的辩词里有什么漏洞

选项A: Although the economic pie is no longer growing, the portion of the pie allocated to American workers remains unjustly small. 尽管经济不再增长,(饼不再做大了)分给你们的那部分比例依然就是那么点。

言下之意,反驳正方的第一个辩词,你说是饼大饼小的问题,那么我干脆就把它固定住了,让它不变,再来看结果(你们的工资)会不会变,事实证明,你们的工资比例还是和原来一样。 所以,不关饼子的事情,而是关乎你们生产力的事情。

所以A 对了。

呵呵,个人理解




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