大全-2-11

Statement of a United States copper mining company: Import quotas should be imposed on the less expensive copper mined outside the country to maintain the price of copper in this country; otherwise, our companies will not be able to stay in business.

Response of a United States copper wire manufacturer: United States wire and cable manufacturers purchase about 70 percent of the copper mined in the United States. If the copper prices we pay are not at the international level, our sales will drop, and then the demand for United States copper will go down.

If the factual information presented by both companies is accurate, the best assessment of the logical relationship between the two arguments is that the wire manufacturer’s argument

(A) is self-serving and irrelevant to the proposal of the mining company

(B) is circular, presupposing what it seeks to prove about the proposal of the mining company

(C) shows that the proposal of the mining company would have a negative effect on the mining company’s own business

(D) fails to give a reason why the proposal of the mining company should not be put into effect to alleviate the concern of the mining company for staying in business
            

(E) establishes that even the mining company’s business will prosper if the mining company’s proposal is rejected

Key:C

who can help me analyze this question?

thanks.

铜矿公司的人说要对外国的低价铜的进口进行配额控制，否则他们企业就快生存不下去了。

铜线公司的人说他们从美国市场进口70% 的铜，如果铜价不在国际水平上,他们的销售会降低，同事对铜的需求也减少了。

C说铜矿公司的proposal对他们自身是不利的。

这题纯考阅读:

逻辑关系:

铜矿公司:进口铜价格更低,国产铜价格才能维持(不升),我们才有生意.

铜线生产商:因为国产铜便宜,我们采购的70%的铜是国产铜.

这二者实际上是矛盾的.

补充楼上：个人觉得，不是对进口低价铜进行配额限制，而是通过限制让进口铜价格更低。

一己之见，实不准确，请后来者点评