问3道逻辑题。。。大虾们帮下忙

miguel29 · 发表于 2010-11-14 11:53:25

1,A: We must make a strong moral statement against Country X's policies. Only total divestment-the sale of all stock in companies that have factories or business offices in X- can do this.Therefore, the university should divest totally.

Which of following if true, would be evidence that the university would not be harmed economicaly if it followed
A's recommendation?

答案：The expected financial return to the university from stocks that the university could own under a policy of total divestment is approximately the same as the expected financial return from the same as the expected financial.

为什么选这个啊？

2，The lobbyists argueed that because there is no statstical evidence that breathing other people's tobacco smoke increases the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers, legislation banning smoking smoking in workplaces cannot be justified on health grounds?

Which the following best criticism of the argument reported above?

答案： It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.

这里为什么要选这个选项啊，best criticism 是当weaken做吗？

3，State X's income-averageing law allows a portions of one's income to be taxed at a lower rate than the rate based on one's total taxable income. To use income averaging, the taxpayer must have earned taxable income for a particular year that exceeds 140 percent of his or her average taxable income for the previous three years. People using income averaging owe less tax for that year than they would without income averaging.

Which of following individuals would be most seriously affected if income averaging were not permitted in computing the taxes owed for the current year?

答案是： Individuals whose income has doubled this year after remaining about the same for five years.

这个题我完全没想法了，一有数学概念，就死。。。解释下。。。谢谢啦

zhangjy · 发表于 2010-11-19 22:37:16

第二道不会，同求，
第三道是介样滴， To use income averaging, the taxpayer must have earned taxable income for a particular year that exceeds 140 percent of his or her average taxable income for the previous three years。。。这句话是关键，了解了这句话，就能解体了，我认为的翻译如下：
想要用income averaging这种方法用少交税，纳税人必须在某年可上税的工资超过前三年可纳税工资的140%
选择的答案是：Individuals whose income has doubled this year after remaining about the same for five years.
个人在五年都没有涨工资的之后，工资翻倍了，翻倍就是200%的增加，明显比140%要大，而且前三年的工资又没有变，this year的比前三年可纳税工资高了不止140%，所以为选项。
不知道这么解释清晰不。。。

miguel29 · 发表于 2010-11-20 07:00:39

恩，了解，谢谢

白羽撒旦boy · 发表于 2010-11-20 09:55:23

第一题，问要想通过持股不交易来对x 公司进行道义上的反对，在怎样的条件下，采取此措施的大学不会有经济损失。所以答案就要找这一条件。就是持股的收益与转让股票带来的收益是相同的。

白羽撒旦boy · 发表于 2010-11-20 10:01:53

第二题，一部分不能代表整体，缺少二手烟伤害健康的非烟民的证据，并不能证明法律不合理，因为我们并不知道二手烟是否对本身身体不健康的人的影响。即一部分不能成为结论的充分条件。

miguel29 · 发表于 2010-11-21 04:17:26

清楚了。。。谢谢

zyzrafa · 发表于 2011-5-17 12:11:50

第二道不会，同求，
第三道是介样滴， To use income averaging, the taxpayer must have earned taxable income for a particular year that exceeds 140 percent of his or her average taxable income for the previous three years。。。这句话是关键，了解了这句话，就能解体了，我认为的翻译如下：
想要用income averaging这种方法用少交税，纳税人必须在某年可上税的工资超过前三年可纳税工资的140%
选择的答案是：Individuals whose income has doubled this year after remaining about the same for five years.
个人在五年都没有涨工资的之后，工资翻倍了，翻倍就是200%的增加，明显比140%要大，而且前三年的工资又没有变，this year的比前三年可纳税工资高了不止140%，所以为选项。
不知道这么解释清晰不。。。

-- by 会员 zhangjy (2010/11/19 22:37:16)

我觉得翻倍是100%的增加吧。。所以不到140% 不能用income averaging 这样就要交比较多的税了

zyzrafa · 发表于 2011-5-17 12:14:41

啊自己也糊涂了、、

清绿地 · 发表于 2011-7-27 15:38:57

第三题选C我理解的是
某一年的可上税收入大于 140%*之前三年可上税收入的平均值，这个情况下，可以根据income averaging政策，按更低的比例交税。
问题问的是以下哪个人，如果今年income averaging 政策没有通过，受到的影响最大。（对于不能享受政策的人，这个政策是否通过都不受影响，所以问的是以下哪个人可以享受到政策）
A。过去三年年收入每况愈下
B。此人近几年可上税收入情况： x, 1.5 x, 1.5x, 1.5X, 1.5X ——>不可以享受政策
C。此人近几年可上税收入情况：X, X ,X, X, X, 2X ——>可以享受政策
D。此人近几年可上税收入情况：X, X, X, 0 ——>不可以享受政策
E。此人近几年可上税收入情况：X, X,X , X, X, X,X , X,X,X,X ——>不可以享受政策

问3道逻辑题。。。大虾们帮下忙

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块