Sonya: The government of Copeland is raising the cigarette tax. Copeland’scigarette prices will still be reasonably low, so cigarette consumption willprobably not be affected much. Consequently, government revenue from the taxwill increase.
Raoul: True, smoking is unlikely to decrease, because Copeland’scigarette prices will still not be high. They will, however, no longer be thelowest in the region, so we might begin to see substantial illegal sales ofsmuggled cigarettes in Copeland.
Raoul responds to Sonya’s argument by doing which of the following?
A. Questioning the support for Sonya’s conclusion bydistinguishing carefully between no change and no decrease
B. calling Sonya’s conclusion into question by pointing to apossible effect of a certain change.
C. Arguing that Sonya’s conclusion would be better supportedif Sonya could cite a precedent for what she predicts will happen.
D. showing that a cause that Sonya claims will be producing acertain effect is not the only cause that could produce that effect
E. pointing out that a certain initiative is not boldenough to have the predicts it will have
给的答案是B，但是搜索了帖子逻辑还是理不清。认同前辈说的B中possible effect 是see substantial illegal sales of smuggled cigarettes in Copeland，
certain change是 raising the cigarette tax，但是说calling Sonya's conclusion也就是(government revenue from the tax will increase) into question，我 就理不清了，说反驳了S的观点，那么就说政府的收入不会增加。所以整个逻辑是：因为走私的烟变多，而总体吸烟人数不会减少，所以合法渠道的烟销量会减少，所以政府的收入不会增加？
是这样吗？求NN解答。。。LZ眼浊觉得都不对就选了个看起来像对的A。。。 | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-7-19 14:48:06
收藏
收藏
楼主
