PREP的一道逻辑~~看了好几遍也没看懂~~~求大N

sunshengkun666

Bankdepositors in the United States are all financially protected against bankfailure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance ispartly responsible for the high rate of bank failures, since it removes fromdepositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds theirmoney is secure against failure. Ifdepositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order tocompete for depositors' money.

Whichof the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist's argument?

(A)Before the government started to insure depositors against bank failure, therewas a lower rate of bank failure than there is now.

(B)When the government did not insure deposits, frequent bank failures occurred are result of depositors' fears of losing money in bank failures.

(C)Surveys show that a significant proportion of depositors are aware that theirdeposits are insured by the government.

(D)There is an upper limit on the amount of an individual's deposit that thegovernment will insure, but very few individuals' deposits exceed this limit.

(E)The security of a bank against failure depends on the percentage of its assetsthat are loaned out and also on how much risk its loans involve.

这道题的选B，但我怎么看B怎么像加强。我是这样想的：既然B说如果政府不提供担保的话，存款者的损失恐惧就会让银行XX掉，说明depositors还是有选择性的啊~~~混乱了，求拍@@

cy907512

这道题就是条件型结论嘛，条件是“If depositors were more selective”，而B选项正是肯定了这个条件，说depositors are fear of losing money because of bank failures , 但是事实上这个前提并没有保证银行成功，反而导致了frequent bank failures ，正好就否定了题目中的结论，起到了weaken的作用~不知道这样分析对不对~

15151816806

文章主线的结论是政府担保是无效的应该取消担保，后面的只是解释说明为什么政府担保是无效的，原因就是它remove那一小段话，这里要削弱的应该是结论，就是要说取消政府担保也没用，就是b了。

sunshengkun666

这道题就是条件型结论嘛，条件是“If depositors were more selective”，而B选项正是肯定了这个条件，说depositors are fear of losing money because of bank failures , 但是事实上这个前提并没有保证银行成功，反而导致了frequent bank failures ，正好就否定了题目中的结论，起到了weaken的作用~不知道这样分析对不对~

-- by 会员 cy907512 (2011/7/11 10:58:20)

明白明白，谢谢喽~~嘿嘿~~