CR 假定题求助~

sunnyybao · 发表于 2011-1-26 22:06:13

A proposedchangeto federal income tax laws would eliminate deductions from taxable income for donations a taxpayer has made to charitable and educational institutions. If this change were adopted, wealthy individuals would no longer be permitted such deductions. Therefore, many charitable and educational institutions would have to reduce services, and some would have to close their doors.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

(A) Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would not donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have.

(B) Money contributed by individuals who make their donations because of provisions in the federal tax laws provides the only source of funding for many charitable and educational institutions.

(C) The primary reason for not adopting the proposedchange in the federal income tax laws cited above is to protect wealthy individuals from having to pay higher taxes.

(D) Wealthy individuals who donate money to charitable and educational institutions are the only individuals who donate money to such institutions.

(E) Income tax laws should be changed to make donations to charitable and educational institutions the only permissible deductions from taxable income.

The passage argues that charitable and educational institutions, part of whose income comes from donations, would be negatively affected if wealthy individuals could not count such donations as deductions from their income. The question asks you to identify an assumption of the argument-that is, something that has to be true in order for the evidence presented to establish the conclusion.

Choice A is the best answer, since if this statement is false, all wealthy individuals would, even without the incentive provided by federal tax laws, donate as much money as they do now. In that case, the evidence used in the argument provides no support for the conclusion.

其他的知道不对，但是不太懂为什么答案A 的取非是 all wealthy individuals？那如果不是所有人，只是部分人按原数额捐赠，那总数不是还会减少吗？如此不是就不能构成削弱了吗？

helenlife · 发表于 2011-7-26 09:47:43

Negate A (get rid of not), then it will become "Without the incentives offered by federal income tax laws, at least some wealthy individuals would donate as much money to charitable and educational institutions as they otherwise would have"
It means some wealthy individual will remain their donations, therefore, some charity or educational institution wouldn't have to close their doors.

helenlife · 发表于 2011-7-26 09:51:10

Why B is wrong? Is that only because of the difference between "wealthy individuals" in the stimulus and "individual" in Answer B?

kelenrose · 发表于 2011-10-23 11:40:48

A所以对是因为它是原文成立所必须要求存在的逻辑关系，B所以不对是因为它不是原文成立所一定需要的。原文结论只要求慈善和教育机构对富人捐款的依赖性较大即可成立，而不一定需要有慈善和教育机构完全依赖于富人捐款的前提才能成立。

个人觉得哈！

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2012-CR-36 (HNIH)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

CR 假定题求助~

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

本贴相关题目 GMATPrep-2012-CR-36 (HNIH)

相关帖子

更多相关帖子

CR 假定题 求助~

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

CR 假定题求助~