真得很需要帮助，要考了，谢谢

ekinok

Q9:

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.

5. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.

答案选E,题目结论说移除关税就会使政府不能降低失业率，但是E选项只是说更多的农民会进入城市，但是这并不能表明就业率会增高呀，谁能帮忙解决一下，谢谢~~~

nuj_am

正因为政府去保全了城市的就业率， 牺牲了农民的利益，生活状况不好的农民自然会进城务工，那么这些进城的农民也自然会增加失业率，这就反过来weaken了政府的初衷，既保全城市的就业率

ekinok

但是我觉得，农民进城减少就业率的结论只能加强文章中的结论，即移除关税减少就业率。

你应该同意文章的结论是减少就业率吧~~~

在把我的逻辑强调一遍：文章中结论中：移除关税————就业率减少

                                      正确选项中：移除关税————农民进城————就业率减少

jczephyr

我觉得结论是失业率上升。（政府试图降低失业率的努力失败）

本来占失业率比例的农民，因为进城找工作而导致 urban unemployment ，也就是当地的失业率相应降低。

jczephyr

回二楼，我觉得城市的就业率不应该在考虑范围之内。