求教GWD29-16

看了一个讨论帖，还是十分雾水

Political Advertisement:

Mayor Delmont’s critics complain about the jobs that were lost in the city under Delmont’s leadership.  Yet the fact is that not only were more jobs created than were eliminated, but each year since Delmont took office the average pay for the new jobs created has been higher than that year’s average pay for jobs citywide.  So it stands to reason that throughout Delmont’s tenure the average paycheck in this city has been getting steadily bigger.

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

A.    The unemployment rate in the city is higher today than it was when Mayor Delmont took office.

B.    The average pay for jobs in the city was at a ten-year low when Mayor Delmont took office.

C.    Each year during Mayor Delmont’s tenure, the average pay for jobs that were eliminated has been higher than the average pay for jobs citywide.

D.    Most of the jobs eliminated during Mayor Delmont’s tenure were in declining industries.

      E.  The average pay for jobs in the city is currently lower than it is for jobs in the suburbs surrounding the city.C

答案是C，但是题目说新工作的平均工资比城市平均工资高，C说消失的工作工资比城市平均工资高，怎么可以就此推断说paycheck没有增长呢？？我们并不能确定消失的工作的工资和新工作的工资谁高谁低啊。

相比起来觉得A还不错。尽管有工资较高的新工作产生，可是由于失业率高，所以很大比例的工人无法工作，那么paycheck自然就低了啊

削弱不一定充分， 只是增加了原结论错误的可能，  高薪的那些人都没了， 那么在整体中，往上拉平均工资的人就少了， 省下的都是中等，低工资的人， 当然平均工资就降了

原文中有说，执政期间，失业率是减少了， 那么A选项是不是就反对前提了呢， 即使是不反对前提，AVERAGE PAY CHECK 是针对于有工作的人来算的，这样才有意义， 因为这个指标代表着平均人们工作的回报率。 

不知道这样说清不清楚

A support,

B 无关

C 公式 X为TOTAL，X+NEW JOB*THE PAYCHECK OF NEW JOB-ELIMINATED JOB*THE PAYCHECK OF ELMINIATED JOB

我们知道NEW JOB大于ELIMINIATED JOB的数量，但是只是说NEW JOB比AVERAGE PAYCHECK高，但是没说和ELIMINATED JOB PAYCHECK比，如果这个乘数很高，那么就无法使这个公式如结论那样得出比以前更好的PAYCHECK水平。而是下降。所以削弱。

D SUPPORT

E 无关

为什么拒绝a是明白了。

不过选c多少还是会觉得有点牵强。。。

我认为是b.

c有争议.正如4楼分析,文中说new job package > average package,并且 new job no.> eliminated job no.  光凭C说 eliminated job package > average package,无法得出 new job total paycheck > eliminated job paycheck.结果可能削弱也可能加强.

NN的意见?

这题肯定是C

作者的理由是因为这个人在位期间 1.创造的工作岗位比失去的多 2。the average pay for the new jobs created has been higher than that year’s average pay for jobs citywide（新创造的就业收入高于CITYWIDE）  所以说明这个人很有价值！

  其实第一个理由他忽略了这么一点：万一失去的就业岗位都是收入很高的那种 而增加的工作岗位收入很低的可能性 C就提到了这点.说  
                        Each year during Mayor Delmont’s tenure, the average pay for jobs that were eliminated has been higher than the average pay for jobs citywide. 所以推翻以第2点来证明结论！！！！！