[求助]TT GWD-3-2

silviaqiu

Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants.  If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews.  However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government’s effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

 

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

 

1. Some of the by-products of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints and plastics.
2. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants.
3. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them.
4. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices.(E)
5. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.

不太明白为什么要选这个答案,还望指教

kallyli

I choose D

silviaqiu

能解释一下吗

kallyli

原来有关税，原料价格高，取消后，原料价格降低，加工成本减少，使加工厂在世界市场有竞争力，销售增加，工人失业减少。所以削弱。
其实我看到Ｅ都觉得没有答案，后来比较了一下选了Ｄ，它有一点问题就是at lower than world market prices这个有点突兀。
Ｅ的话，我无法解释

silviaqiu

我有考虑过选e的理由,就是如果不降低关税,那么农民就不能在种庄稼上获得足够的利润,从而涌入城市,造成更多的就业负担

不知道这样解释通不通

kallyli

题目让削弱结论“取消关税阻止政府减少失业的计划”，增加失业负担是加强这个结论，不是削弱

kallyli

先吃饭去啦哈

silviaqiu

以下是引用kallyli在2006-7-16 19:04:00的发言：
题目让削弱结论“取消关税阻止政府减少失业的计划”，增加失业负担是加强这个结论，不是削弱

题目的意思是说,如果取消关税,政府会对减少失业这件事情做出更少的努力,从而有可能造成更高的失业率,提干得出的结论应该是不取消关税,而如果不取消关税,根据e选项的意思,会有农民涌入城市,造成的失业率将比取消关税更高,从而应该取消关税,削弱了结论

不知道我这样解释清楚了没有

kallyli

同意你

,xiexie:-)

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-7-16 20:14:19编辑过]

silviaqiu

……本来想求助结果自己说了半天，我还是希望有更多的人能参加讨论：p