[求助]请帮助解答GWD6-Q14

sunzhaoyang

同意楼上，没有论证工资因为这个原因进一步增加而是排除了工资不增加的可能

这道题我觉得问的不好，与其说是加强不如说是假设~个人意见仅供参考

ParkShanghai

同意9楼，D选项保证了原题的结论的正确性

Jimmyzhang2012

Suggest to use "What - If" to  evaluate Option D

The average pay for jobs eliminated in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure has been roughly equal every year to the average pay for jobs citywide.

What if the average pay for eliminated jobs is not equal to mean of the payment citywide?  
If the eliminated job is low end job, to put it to extreme, far lower than average, new average pay will raise up.  This supports the conclusion.
If the eliminated job is high paid one, to put it to extreme, the highest paid job got cut, new average pay will go down,  This weakens the conclusion.

If the statement in D is not true, the conclusion may be undermined. In another word, to make the advertisement more persuasive, constraint like D is in favor.

gigi68788

D

Line of reasoning:
       工作多了+新工作的工资比市里每年的工作的工资平均水平高 => 总的工资平均水平在上升。

Gap: 总的平均工资水平=(不变的+新生的-eliminated)的工资/job总量

=>那么被eliminated的工作的平均工资水平呢？

要证明这部分不比之前每年的平均工资水平高

A：部分和部分比，不能说明问题，我们要求的总的平均工资水平

B：weaken了

C: out of scope => merely mention the number of jobs, not even mention anything about the pay

E: This argument does not compare the average pay in the city with that of the suburb

D: Correct.

-- by 会员 Ingridcoco (2009/6/12 20:42:00)

既然题目已经这样说了：
Line of reasoning:
       工作多了+新工作的工资比市里每年的工作的工资平均水平高 => 总的工资平均水平在上升。

其实d是有没有都ok的吧？说不上什么加强阿～