ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:Krenland's steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland's steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial's argument?

正确答案: C

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 2764|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

GWD17-Q13~HELP~

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-7-31 21:16:42 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:

Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties.But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry.Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?



A.Because steel from Krenland is rarely competitive in international markets, only a very small portion of Krenlandian steelmakers’ revenue comes from exports.

B.The international treaties that some governments are violating by giving subsidies to steelmakers do not specify any penalties for such violations.

C.For many Krenlandian manufacturers who face severe international competition in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their raw material costs.

D.Because of advances in order-taking, shipping, and inventory systems, the cost of shipping steel from foreign producers to Krenland has fallen considerably in recent years.

E.Wages paid to workers in the steel industry in Krenland differ significantly from wages paid to workers in many of the countries that export steel to Krenland.

此题答案是C。I can't see how C undermines the argument. How can it weaken the argument by ruling out the possibility that the situation now in the steel industry is threatening jobs in USA.
I am totally confused.  Hope NN here can help solve the question.
Many thanks!

收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
 楼主| 发表于 2011-7-31 22:21:24 | 只看该作者
顶顶顶~
板凳
发表于 2011-7-31 22:47:26 | 只看该作者
c中说钢铁是很多工厂的原材料, 那么如果政府禁止进口便宜的外国钢铁, 那么那些以钢铁为原材料的工厂的成本就增加, 这样也会损害那些工厂还有他们员工的利益...
也就是说, 即便钢铁业能够因禁止进口而获利,但别的行业的损失会抵消钢铁业获得的利益
地板
 楼主| 发表于 2011-8-1 11:00:59 | 只看该作者
c中说钢铁是很多工厂的原材料, 那么如果政府禁止进口便宜的外国钢铁, 那么那些以钢铁为原材料的工厂的成本就增加, 这样也会损害那些工厂还有他们员工的利益...
也就是说, 即便钢铁业能够因禁止进口而获利,但别的行业的损失会抵消钢铁业获得的利益
-- by 会员 weijiejing (2011/7/31 22:47:26)



Thanks a lot!
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-12-26 13:00
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部