请教各位一道逻辑题（PREP上的）

astronautking

Goronian lawmaker:Goronia's Cheese Importation Board, the agency responsible for inspecting all wholesale shipments of cheese entering Goronia from abroad and rejecting shipments that fail to meet specified standards, rejects about one percent of the cheese that it inspects.Since the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible, whereas the cost of maintaining the agency is not, the agency's cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides.

Knowing the answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the lawmaker's argument?

A. Are any of the types of cheeses that are imported into Goronia also produced in Goronia?

B. Has the Cheese Importation Board, over the last several years, reduced its operating costs by eliminating inefficiencies within the agency itself?

C. Does the possibility of having merchandise rejected by the Cheese Importation Board deter many cheese exporters from shipping substandard cheese to Goronia?

D. Are there any exporters of cheese to Goronia whose merchandise is never rejected by the Cheese Importation Board?

E. How is the cheese rejected by the Cheese Importation Board disposed of?

答案为什么是C啊！

clumsy123

说说俺的观点：
C 的意思就是说 whether the inspection by the CIB would reduce many substandard
cheese to Goronia.

如果回答yes，那么就加强了the CIB's benefits outweigh the costs. 因为由于CIB的存在才能将次品率减少到1%，没有CIB的检查，次品会大大增加（肯定超过1%）那么造成的后果和社会成本就可能不能忽略不计了，由此可见CIB还是很有好处的。→削弱原结论

如果回答NO，CIB的检查对次品的多少无影响，说明次品率一直都是1%，造成的后果和社会成本就如原文说的可以忽略不计。→加强原结论

所以选C~

astronautking

说说俺的观点：
C 的意思就是说 whether the inspection by the CIB would reduce many substandard
cheese to Goronia.

如果回答yes，那么就加强了the CIB's benefits outweigh the costs. 因为由于CIB的存在才能将次品率减少到1%，没有CIB的检查，次品会大大增加（肯定超过1%）那么造成的后果和社会成本就可能不能忽略不计了，由此可见CIB还是很有好处的。→削弱原结论

如果回答NO，CIB的检查对次品的多少无影响，说明次品率一直都是1%，造成的后果和社会成本就如原文说的可以忽略不计。→加强原结论

所以选C~

-- by 会员 clumsy123 (2011/4/21 20:00:58)

有点明白了！多谢了哈！大家一起加油！