lsat-21-3-18

kentfly

Questions 17-18

The widespread staff reductions in a certain region’s economy are said to be causing people who still have their jobs to cut back on new purchases as though they, too, had become economically distressed. Clearly, however, actual spending by such people is undiminished, because there has been no unusual increase in the amount of money held by those people in savings accounts.

18.   Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) If people in the region who continue to be employed have debts, they are not now paying them off at an accelerated rate.

(B) People in the region who continue to be employed and who have relatives who have lost their jobs commonly assist those relatives financially.

(C) If people in the region who have lost jobs get new jobs, the new jobs generally pay less well than the ones they lost.

(D) People in the region who continue to be employed are pessimistic about their prospects for increasing their incomes.（A）

(E) There exist no statistics about sales of goods in the region as a whole.

实在是不明白为什么选A? 请NN帮忙，thx：）

icewarm

(A) If people in the region who continue to be employed have debts, they are not now paying them off at an accelerated rate.

Negation: If people in the region who continue to be employed have debts, they are now paying them off at an accelerated rate.

People who are still eployed did not put more money in their saving accounts (no unusual increase in the amount of money held by those people in savings accounts). Where did the money go? Spending + paying debts. If they increased monthly payment for their debts, then they would have less money to spend (spending diminished). The conclusion does not stand anymore (Clearly, however, actual spending by such people is undiminished).

So this is the right answer.

kentfly

太感谢了。。。。

不过Where did the money go? Spending + paying debts这个关键点我觉得很难想到啊。。。。

我当时看见debt就当无关选项直接排除了。。。。寒。。。。

ssssss

use negation technique to test the answer