GWD6-Q20

nysen

GWD6-Q20
Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska’s government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five.Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government’s plan is obviously working.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?



A.A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.

B.Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.

C.The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.

D.Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.

E.Many of the economists who now claim that the government’s plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.

答案D, 求解释啊~

mudiduange

D:  这些人只是把钱从一个账户移动到另外一个账户，钱并没有增加。因此驳斥

camelo777

LS解释的很到位，我再补充一下
首先题目的意思是Levaska’s government 希望increase the amount of money they put into savings，重点是这个increase，是希望增加。然后在结论中通过Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts得出结论说ZF的plan确实有用。

那我们怎么来思考呢？怎么能削弱呢，很明显如果事实上总的saving没有增加的话，那自然ZF的plan就没什么意义，所以就起到了削弱的作用。

D选项说存进这个special accounts里的钱不过是那些本来就有long-term savings 的人，把那个lone-term saving里的一部分转移了过去，所以总的saving是没有变化的，因此启到了削弱作用

nysen

多谢LS两位解释~