The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites. B是正确选项，但是A不也是从赚钱的角度来说的吗，因为工厂赚钱能盈利，所以不会关闭，这不是也驳斥这个选项了吗，困惑好久了，希望高手来解惑呀，谢谢啦！
shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits. 题干的结论说：OLEX社会责任感超过了对高利润的渴求。 削弱：不关不是因为社会责任感，而是另有其因 B 关的话成本太高。另有其因 但是给不出A不啥不对。。。。只是感觉B比A好。。。。请高手来说一下
it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. A项说现在还有MODERATE的利润,但是,如果因此保留就不是完全为了追求利润,因为很明显,关了它可以得到的利润更高,所以不关,并不代表是追求利润,反而是为了社会责任
shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
看来这题只能比着选了。 不过觉得还可以结合全题来看，前题是cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery。意味着关了G，可以节省成本，所以A说：一直有moderate profits(利润中庸水平，不能构成对整体高利润的贡献），不至于削弱，因为题里说的是更高利润，关了G还能减少成本呢，意味着可以compensate 不关G让它营利取得的moderate profits所以A不构强。。。这个选项感觉不温不火。 B说了，如果关，意味着要花很多钱事后处理这个mess。那意味着成本加大，对利润构成明显损伤。所以还不如留着G。。。。
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2010-4-28 12:56:37
收藏
收藏
