纠结了半晚上 早晨看还是云里雾里 大全2-5 谁能帮我看看~~

ljyjulia

大全-2-5.    The city’s public transportation system should be removed from the jurisdiction 权限of the municipal government, which finds it politically impossible either to raise fares or to institute cost-saving reductions in service. If public transportation were handled by a private firm, profits would be vigorously pursued, thereby eliminating the necessity for covering支付 operating costs with government funds.
The statements above best support the conclusion that
(A) the private firms that would handle public transportation would have experience in the transportation industry
(B) political considerations would not prevent private firms from ensuring that revenues cover operating costs
(C) private firms would receive government funding if it were needed to cover operating costs
(D) the public would approve the cost-cutting actions taken by the private firm
(E) the municipal government would not be resigned to accumulating merely enough income to cover costs
答案为什么选B B和C好像意思差不多啊~~
补充：选项E中"resign sb to doing sth" means make sb accept sth bad but can not change.

Bensontuo

Core of the argument:

Conclusion:

City's public transportation should be removed from the jurisdiction of the municipal government, politically impossible either to raise fares or to institute cost saving reduction in service.

PT handled by a private firm ---> profit will pursued ---> Not necessary for covering operating costs with government funds.

A. Could be true, could not be true.

B. so, apparently, based on the information offered, the reason why PT has to be removed from the jurisdiction of the municipal government is because we need to ensure it is politically " possible to raise fares " and " to institute cost - saving reduction in service.

In that sense, the assumption here is that private firm will be political possible to both raise fares and institute cost saving reduction in service.

C. The core of the argument is not about whether private firm could receive the public fund or not but about whether it could raise the profit to cover the operating cost without " compensating the public cost with government funds.

So, we need to ensure what is " sufficient conditions " that ensure private firm to boost up the profit.

AMBER513

我觉得这道题结论的意思是public transportation如果由私人企业接管的话，就不会再需要政府在这方面支出
C是还需要政府支出，所以是削弱

AMBER513

看一下！               

cc621josh

如果按C所说，那它比公共的系统就的优势就减少了，这是削弱。
thereby eliminating the necessity for covering operating costs with government funds.这是私人代替公共的一个好处，如果把funding给了私人，这个好处就不存在了。

-- by 会员 kevin0214 (2010/11/25 11:59:48)

可是请教楼上，那么B选项是什么意思  难道不是说“政治性的考虑不会不让私营企业动用财政来支出运行成本。”?这个意思好像是从原文的进一步推断，但是也没有体现私营企业比公共掌管的优势呀？

-- by 会员 ljyjulia (2010/11/25 14:12:21)

错啦！Revenue在这里是指私营企业的收益，不是财政呐！政府部门和私营企业在这里的常识区别是：前者有政治考虑，后者没有，如果私营企业比政府能更好地运营公共系统，就说明这点上述的区别，即政治考虑，不会影响到私营企业获益cover成本

ljyjulia

如果按C所说，那它比公共的系统就的优势就减少了，这是削弱。
thereby eliminating the necessity for covering operating costs with government funds.这是私人代替公共的一个好处，如果把funding给了私人，这个好处就不存在了。

-- by 会员 kevin0214 (2010/11/25 11:59:48)

可是请教楼上，那么B选项是什么意思  难道不是说“政治性的考虑不会不让私营企业动用财政来支出运行成本。”?这个意思好像是从原文的进一步推断，但是也没有体现私营企业比公共掌管的优势呀？

kevin0214

如果按C所说，那它比公共的系统就的优势就减少了，这是削弱。
thereby eliminating the necessity for covering operating costs with government funds.这是私人代替公共的一个好处，如果把funding给了私人，这个好处就不存在了。