Teenagers are often priced out of the labor market by the government-mandated minimum-wage level because employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help. Therefore, if Congress institutes a subminimum wage, a new lower legal wage for teenagers, the teenage unemployment rate, which has been rising since 1960, will no longer increase.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?
(A) Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen when the minimum wage has risen.(没说)
(B) Since 1960 the teenage unemployment rate has risen even when the minimum wage remained constant.(=government-mandated minimum-wage level。以前工资保持不变不雇佣数量就一直上升,异因同果)
(C) Employers often hire extra help during holiday and warm weather seasons.(违反前提cannot afford to pay that much for extra help.)
(D) The teenage unemployment rate rose more quickly in the 1970’s than it did in the 1960’s.(无关比较) (B)
(E) The teenage unemployment rate has occasionally declined in the years since 1960.(无关)
这是我以前做的时候标记的,今天再做的时候发现怎么也觉得B想不通了。
以前维持最低工资时评的时候失业率也上升,和现在再降低工资失业率不上升有什么关系啊?
原文说最低工资的时候employers cannot afford to pay that much for extra help,那现在降低工资不就can afford了吗?我怎么也绕不出来B了,大家帮忙啊~~~头痛~~ data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/95a0d/95a0d78514f9a60feae2acaaedbca335bda19104" alt="" |