ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1039|回复: 4
打印 上一主题 下一主题

lsat-1-4-20

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2005-2-14 00:34:00 | 只看该作者

lsat-1-4-20

20. Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.


Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?


(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.


(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.(这个为什么不对呢?)

沙发
发表于 2005-2-14 22:50:00 | 只看该作者
isn't it possible that the government borrow money to pay their employees when the original income is cut short?
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2005-2-17 01:44:00 | 只看该作者

我选e是因为觉得他是paraphase.请再清楚地说明你认为e不对的原因

地板
发表于 2005-2-17 23:27:00 | 只看该作者

{if  no taxes----》public employees could not be paid.} doesn‘t meant that taxes  is the only way that public employees are paid by ,so,that’s why I think E is wrong

(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

5#
发表于 2005-2-21 17:15:00 | 只看该作者

My two cents:

我猜可能是因為題目問的是:a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above

如果選E的話, 只要第二句話就夠用了, 第一句話用不上... 忽然想到這有點像數學的DS, 呵呵...

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

所属分类: 法学院申请

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-1-9 20:04
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部