zhenti

kevin_ws

Political Advertisement:

Mayor Delmont’s critics complain about the jobs that were lost in the city under Delmont’s leadership.  Yet the fact is that not only were more jobs created than were eliminated, but the average pay for these new jobs has been higher than the average pay for jobs citywide every year since Delmont took office.  So there can be no question that throughout Delmont’s tenure the average paycheck in this city has been getting steadily bigger.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the advertisement?

The average pay for jobs created in the city during the past three years was higher than the average pay for jobs created in the city earlier in Mayor Delmont’s tenure.

Average pay in the city was at a ten-year low when Mayor Delmont took office.

Some of the jobs created in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure have in the meantime been eliminated again.

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.

The average pay for jobs in the city is currently higher than it is for jobs in the suburbs surrounding the city   这题怎么选C啊，C的感觉象是在削弱啊，不是在加强啊？

cranberry

i do not think c is the right answer,cos it fails to elminate the possibility that average pay for citywide is declining when some high pay jobs are eliminated.

i think d is the answer

2love2live

D

rainstar666

c

notice the getting steadily bigger

the average pay for jobs is increasing, to keep steadily , the number of jobs should be equal!

mariezhu

D似乎不对吧.

每年减少的就业机会的平均工资与该市的平均工资基本相等,这怎么加强啊?

mariezhu

I'm a little bit confused about this question: Choice D doesn't convey the sense that not only more jobs are created, but also the average paychecks are becoming bigger. In fact, choice D  admits that some jobs are eliminated during the mayor's tenure. Furthermore, if contrary to what Choice D states, the paycheck of job eliminated DOES NOT equal to the average payroll, there are two possibilities for the paycheck's orientation: it may become either bigger or smaller. So what choice D can prove at most is that the paycheck level has been constant (it neither increases nor falls), it doesn't indicate that the paycheck in the city has been getting steadily higher.

Meanwhile, in my opinion, choice A demonstrates that jobs are created, what's more, it indicates that the paycheck level of newly created jobs is actually higher than that of jobs created earlier during the mayor's tenure and thus perfectly convey what the conclusion says :the paycheck in the city has been getting steadily higher.

What's wrong with my reasoning? please kindly help find the problem. Thanks

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-6-8 20:01:24编辑过]

renprince

I prefer C as the ans. My reason for choosing c is to find the quatity relationship between numbers of jobs and the average wage.C is the only one relative to such relationship, and meanwile stengthen the argument. Choices A/D are a little bit confusing ,though concerning about the average wage, however, the deductions from them is not.

To marie, the time period in A is  a little bit obscure.

Personal opinion....

Hope NN  to correct my logic reasoning procedure

mindfree

D is the answer, I think.

The argument does not account for the average paycheck of the jobs lost every year. It is one of the key factors in calculating the average pay. If I assume that the lost jobs average $10 million in pay, while the citywide average is $50,000 and jobs created average $60,000. It is possible that the lost jobs set back the average paycheck even though the number of the lost jobs is smaller than jobs created.

D simply eliminates the possibility by giving the factor. I do not see how C relates to the argument.

As to A, I think the average paycheck will be bigger if the average pay of jobs created is higher than jobs lost, whether A is true or not. For example, the city might be losing the most low pay jobs in the past three years, say $15,000/year. And the jobs created average $20,000 in pay during the same time period. Even thought the $20,000 might not be higher than the pay of earlier period, the overall effect is that the average paycheck is higher.

weiyu

以下是引用mariezhu在2004-6-8 18:59:00的发言：

I'm a little bit confused about this question: Choice D doesn't convey the sense that not only more jobs are created, but also the average paychecks are becoming bigger. In fact, choice D  admits that some jobs are eliminated during the mayor's tenure. Furthermore, if contrary to what Choice D states, the paycheck of job eliminated DOES NOT equal to the average payroll, there are two possibilities for the paycheck's orientation: it may become either bigger or smaller (The question requests for a support choice, not an assumption; For seeking support choice, the conside of such choice does not necessarily to undermine the argument??). So what choice D can prove at most is that the paycheck level has been constant (it neither increases nor falls), it doesn't indicate that the paycheck in the city has been getting steadily higher.

Meanwhile, in my opinion, choice A demonstrates that jobs are created, what's more, it indicates that the paycheck level of newly created jobs is actually higher than that of jobs created earlier during the mayor's tenure and thus perfectly convey what the conclusion says :the paycheck in the city has been getting steadily higher.

(It sounds reasonable, anyway I am confused by the timestamp mentioned in choice A)

What's wrong with my reasoning? please kindly help find the problem. Thanks

Your comments will be welcomed...

dashasha

同意选D，不是逻辑题，是数学题。