请教：og-30 没看懂解释

30. The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from military contractors
                

is determined by a pricing method called “historical costing.” Historical costing allows

contractors to protect their profits by adding a percentage increase, based on the current rate

of inflation, to the previous year’s contractual price.

Which of the following statements, if true, is the best basis for a criticism of historical costing as an economically sound pricing method for military contracts?

A. The government might continue to pay for past inefficient use of funds.

B. The rate of inflation has varied considerably over the past twenty years.

C. The contractual price will be greatly affected by the cost of materials used for the products.

D. Many taxpayers question the amount of money the government spends on military

contracts.

E. The pricing method based on historical costing might not encourage the development of

innovative weapons.

解答为：

If the original contractual price for the weapons purchased incorporated an inefficient use of

funds, then, since historical costing merely adds to the original price, it preserves these

inefficiencies. An economically sound pricing method should at least allow the possibility of

reductions in price as such inefficiencies are removed. Hence, A is the best answer. Because

historical costing responds to inflation, B and C are consistent with the economic soundness of

historical costing-the rate of inflation and costs that are reflected in inflation. D offers no

grounds for questioning the economic soundness of historical costing in particular. Historical

costing applies to standard weapons only, not to the innovative weapons that are mentioned in E.

请问答案中说的inefficient use 是什么，能否用中文解释一下背后的逻辑关系？谢谢！

第一次回答问题 哈 搂住给点鼓励啊

inefficient use of funds: 没有效率的使用资金，也就是说花钱花多了

A的逻辑是：以前也许花钱花多了，现在再按照以前的价格定价等于继续多花钱,当冤大头。也就是说historic pricing 十不准确的

削弱historic pricing