- UID
- 1353484
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2018-7-29
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
628. Proposed new safety rules for Beach City airport would lengthen considerably the minimum time between takeoffs from the airport. In consequence, the airport would be able to accommodate 10 percent fewer flights than currently use the airport daily. The city's operating budget depends heavily on taxes generated by tourist spending, and most of the tourists come by plane. Therefore, the proposed new safety rules, if adopted, will reduce the revenue available for the operating budget.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
(A) There are no period of the day during which the interval between flight taking off from the airport is significantly greater than the currently allowed minimum.
(B) Few, if any, of the tourists who use Beach City airport do so when their main destination is a neighboring community and not Beach City itself.
(C) If the proposed safety rules are adopted, the reduction in tourist number will not result mainly from a reduction in the number of tourists who spend relatively little in Beach City.
(D) Increasing the minimum time between takeoffs is the only way to achieve necessary safety improvement without a large expenditure by the city governments on airport enhancements.
(E) The response to the adoption of the new safety rules would not include a large increase in the number of passengers per flight.
Answer: (E).
自己的分析是这样：
背景信息：新政策会大幅度提升两架飞机起飞的最小时间间隔；BEACH CITY的大部分税收来源于游客消费产生的税收；大部分游客是坐飞机来的
逻辑链：①最小时间间隔增加→②机场可以吐纳的航班数量减少10%（→③游客数量减少→④消费总金额减少）→⑤税收减少
看到E选项的时候其实知道答案应该是选E，因为直接弥补了中间的GAP
想向各位大神求助：
（1）A选项是否是一个加强？因为如果飞机时间都是大大超过最小时间间隔的话，那么实际上新政策不会导致机场吞吐能力下降，巩固了提干中给出①到②的推理，
（2）B选项这个do so应该如何理解？我认为这个do so是承坐飞机飞到BC
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2018-8-14 22:55:15
收藏
收藏
