- UID
- 1199686
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2016-3-22
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
此外,我还有一题想请教楼主:
Economist: The most economically efficient way to reduce emissions of air pollutants is to tax them in proportion to the damage they are likely to cause. But in Country Y, many serious pollutants are untaxed and unregulated, and policy makers strongly oppose new taxes. Therefore, the best way to achieve a reduction in air pollutant emissions in Country Y would be to institute fixed upper limits on them.
Which of the following is an assumption of the economist’s argument?
A Policy makers in Country Y oppose all new taxes equally strongly, regardless of any benefits they may provide.
B Country Y’s air pollutant emissions would not fall significantly if they were taxed in proportion to the damage they are likely to cause.
C Policy makers in Country Y strongly favor reductions in air pollutant emissions.
D Country Y’s policy makers believe that air pollutant emissions should be reduced with maximum economic efficiency.
E Policy makers in Country Y do not oppose setting fixed upper limits on air pollutant emissions as strongly as they oppose new taxes.
这一题正确答案是e,是说措施的可行性。这似乎和楼主说的不要考虑措施的可行性相违背。
不知道楼主能不能帮我解答这个疑惑? |
|