请教两个逻辑问题 多谢

Aroca
                        City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property.  In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city.  Critics protest that three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes.  The critics are correct on this point.  Nevertheless, implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca’s schools.  Several large retailers have selected Aroca
                            City as the site for huge new stores, and these are certain to draw large numbers of shoppers from neighboring municipalities, where sales are taxed at rates of six percent and more.  In consequence, retail sales in Aroca
                        City are bound to increase substantially.

In the argument given, the two potions in boldface play which of the following roles?

1. The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that criticism.
2. The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that defense.
3. The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second is a consideration raised by the argument in support of that criticism.
4. The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second presents a consideration that has been raised against that criticism.
5. The first presents a plan whose consequences the argument seeks to evaluate; the second is presented by the argument as one likely consequence that is undesirable.

Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska’s government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five.  Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government’s plan is obviously working.

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

1. A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.
2. Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.
3. The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.
4. Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.
5. Many of the economists who now claim that the government’s plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.

给出的答案是D,但我怎么觉得B也像答案

请先贴题号，大全？GWD? 天山？。。。。

不好意思，没想到题号这么重要。

两上都是GWD18中的，前一个BF是Q16，后一个是Q28

我觉得

1.B

2.D B项无关.题目的结论说是政府新推出的计划确实增加了公民的存款,问哪个削弱结论

B项的意思是那些公司已经提供类似计划的公民就在公司存钱了,所以享受不到政府新计划的利益.

D项公民只是把现有的存款转到新计划的存款帐号上,存款额没有增加(反倒损失了TAX)

明白多了,B是无关选项.关于D,我当时没有考虑到免税这个因素.谢了

第一题也想明白一些了.C,D是主态度错,A是前半部分对,后半部分错.E是扯淡