ChaseDream

标题: GWD-1-13 [打印本页]

作者: WONDERLAND2004 时间: 2004-7-12 22:17
标题: GWD-1-13

In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years. Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.

The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.

There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.

The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.

The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-7-12 22:50
前面讨论过，答案为C。它指出FLORIDA的local businesses作游客的生意多点，所以去F的退休人员的减少不会noticablely的影响生意

作者: gaoshisan 时间: 2004-7-16 00:44

??是么?

作者: tulipmontreal 时间: 2004-9-5 07:17
应该是D

作者: lawyer_1 时间: 2004-9-6 05:59

sorry, 我没注意到结论的经济影响是针对these businesses（即cater to retirees），所以C中的cater to tourists 无关，如果结论是negative economic effect on LOCAL businesses。则答案为C。所以该题答案应为D。就是说，虽然PERCENTAGE减少了，但总人数增加了，所以来Florida 的退休人员还是可能增加，WEAKEN结论。

D是对的，感谢GAOSHISAN和TULIPMONTREA

作者: Beijiajia 时间: 2004-11-23 23:57

I go to answer A.

according to answer D, even though the total numer of people retired has increased, they still move out of the state of Florida therefore, the local business who cater for retireness will not benifit from the increased amout of people.

In Answer A. it says Florida attracts more people coming into the states( than the other states do), which provides more customers ( business) for the local business. Thus, it weakens the assumption that the local business will be harmed by a smaller amount of retirement from Florida residents.

作者: ethyl 时间: 2005-8-11 15:34

A比较错误。要跟自己的过去比较，不是跟别的州比较。

作者: 爱睡觉的猫 时间: 2005-11-7 16:13

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-9-6 5:59:00的发言：

D是对的，感谢GAOSHISAN和TULIPMONTREA

每次看到lawyer GG 解释就清楚了不亏是大牛呵呵

作者: yuanlipinglily 时间: 2005-12-13 10:37

我也认为是A.

作者: bluevironika 时间: 2006-2-3 17:02
标题: 回复：（ethyl）[QUOTE]In Answer A. it says Florid...

以下是引用ethyl在2005-8-11 15:34:00的发言：

A比较错误。要跟自己的过去比较，不是跟别的州比较。

同意。因为说的是本州的趋势比较。

作者: pengfei1102 时间: 2006-6-30 17:42

The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.

为什么 D 不理解为：f州的退休人增加，并去另一个的州的退休人增加。这不是支持结论吗？

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-6-30 17:41:56编辑过]

作者: dreaminger 时间: 2006-7-17 14:22

原文中说来佛州的人数下降了3％，D中说退休搬家到其它洲的总人数上升，两者并不对立。个体不能代表全部，全部也不能代表个体。C中说游客为为主要生意来源，所以退休人员下降不会造成负面影响。注：削弱题不能用无关排除法，加强题可以。

作者: vivian_chi 时间: 2006-7-18 20:51

我这个孩子比较笨，这道题我想了一个晚上，请大家指正：

答案是D.

C原题中没有说tourists的问题，我们没有办法预料tourist会给these business究竟产生什么影响（我还是菜鸟级选手，顺便想问问，这种题能用常识猜测么？比如说我们的常识告诉我们什么一定能对什么产生什么样的影响？）

D中是total出了问题，题中确实说了total和florida的情况，范围扩大了，我觉得削弱明显。

不过我也在思考这个问题，是不是应该找说的最离谱的选？A说了什么我想了好几遍也不明白，所以排除了，但是这算不算最含糊的？所以应该选A？

作者: vivian_chi 时间: 2006-7-18 20:51
大家还是说说最可靠的方法吧，1分半钟怎么选出正确的来？

作者: 挥着猪翅膀 时间: 2006-7-18 20:59
我第一次做这个题的时候选的C，当时天真地以为C嘛，他因削弱。却忘了最重要的一个东西，那就是必须和原文有联系。后来仔细总结后发现，C实属irrelevant，它转移了论述范围，并且与Premise矛盾：Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees。

作者: roric 时间: 2006-8-24 21:05

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-9-6 5:59:00的发言：

sorry, 我没注意到结论的经济影响是针对these businesses（即cater to retirees），所以C中的cater to tourists 无关，如果结论是negative economic effect on LOCAL businesses。则答案为C。所以该题答案应为D。就是说，虽然PERCENTAGE减少了，但总人数增加了，所以来Florida 的退休人员还是可能增加，WEAKEN结论。

D是对的，感谢GAOSHISAN和TULIPMONTREA

还是lawyer一针尖血-------结论的特殊性

1分半里要看得细又要看得快真不容易啊

作者: ecochem 时间: 2006-9-14 23:54

以下是引用roric在2006-8-24 21:05:00的发言：

还是lawyer一针尖血-------结论的特殊性

1分半里要看得细又要看得快真不容易啊

有同感呀，我一开始也是心急火燎地看完，以为是讲对FL整个经济的影响，选了C

还以为他因削弱，肯定对的

到后来才仔细看清是economic effect on these businesses，昏倒！

看来看题干还是仔细仔细再仔细呀

作者: 王一兔 时间: 2007-8-16 22:08

大家提起排除c的时候，为什莫要用无关排除呢？weaken是不能靠无关排除的。

这道题最关键的地方就是在于最后那句：effect on these business----these指的是cater to 退休的business。

作者: helenzane 时间: 2008-10-2 21:25

以下是引用pengfei1102在2006-6-30 17:42:00的发言：

The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.

为什么 D 不理解为：f州的退休人增加，并去另一个的州的退休人增加。这不是支持结论吗？

我开始也选的C，后来看了半天大家的帖子，想了半天D，觉得可能是这么回事：比如以前美国每年1000个人退休，只有100个人退休后愿意搬来搬去，然后有40个人搬Florida这儿来了，40%，现在下降了3%，变成37%了，但现在美国每年有1000个退休之后没事干愿意搬来搬去，那也就是370个人都搬Florida这儿来了，虽然下降了3%，但基数大了。

是这么个理儿不

我对于数字和百分数没啥关系这句话还是不敏感，看来还要多做题！

作者: charlie6989 时间: 2008-11-5 13:35
个人觉得这题重点在于these business
是这类的行业所以D 退休人口增加不管移去哪 these business都是赚钱的

作者: AMBER513 时间: 2019-9-10 15:25

Beijiajia 发表于 2004-11-23 23:57
I go to answer A. according to answer D, even though the total numer of people retired has increased ...

even though Florida attracts MORE people than does any other state, if the total number of moving retiree decreases siginificantly, according to this 3% decrease, the retirees moving to florida might still decrease(not weaken the argument), not increase!

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