GWD25-Q2 的答案是不是有问题啊？求探讨

Jenny26

GWD25-Q2.

In two months, the legal minimum wage in the country of Kirlandia will increase from five Kirlandic dollars(KD5.00) Per hour to KD5.50 per hour. Opponents对手of this increase have argued that the resulting rise in wages will drive the inflation rate up. In fact its impact on wages will probably be negligible, since only a very small proportion of all Kirfandic workers are currently receiving less than KD5.50 per hour.

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

结论是涨工资对于wage的impact可以忽略不计，因为工资低于5.5的人的比例很小

A.Most people in Kirlandia who are currently earning the minimum wage havebeen employed at their current jobs for less than a year.

B.错Some firms in Kirlandia have paid workers considerably less than KD5.00per hour, in violation of Kirlandic employment regulations. 还是觉得应该选B

C.! Many businesses hire trainees at or near the minimum wage but mustreward trained workers by keeping their paylevels above the pay levelof trainees.

pay levelof trainees= at or near the minimum wage，所以涨工资对于提高worker工资有用，不是negligible

D.The greatest growth in Kirlandia’s economy in recent years has been in those sectors where workers earn wages that tend to be much higherthan the minimum wage.

E.The current minimum wage is insufficient for a worker holding only one job to earn enough to support a family,even when working full time at that job. 这和涨不涨工资没有关系，涨了工资也不一定sufficient

答案选C，我觉得选B，题目问的是对wage的impact是不是negligible，所以削弱的时候应该针对wage啊

xn8510

我也觉得是B。。。。

xn8510

不是说GWD一直没有标准答案么。。。

深圳的游子

B选项是错误的啊，你们仔细阅读以下题干最后一句话since only a very small proportion of all Kirfandic workers are currently receiving less than KD5.50 per hour.这里已经强调了是工人们拿到了那么高的工资的，B选项只是说some，所以只能是这一小部分中的，否则违背题干意思了，而C选项说，很多公司雇佣了很多实习生，你们都知道实习生的工资一般都是很低的，他们只是在最低点哪里的，所以涨工资会对他们有影响，也就最后削弱了原文的结论的

xing727

同意三楼的解释，题目的主要结论并不是对于wage的negligible的效果，而是指很多人得到报酬是5.5，高于5.0，不受到影响。所以答案是C，指出很多人是实习生，所以待遇工资基本在Minimal Level，削弱结论说很多人工资是5.5的说法

Jenny26

恩恩  我同意选C了
因为B中说，some firm违背了KD5每小时的最低工资规定，且大大低于KD5每小时，我选这个选项的时候是觉得尽管题目说低于KD5的比率小，但是只要低的程度高，新规定的实施的影响就不是negligible，但是仔细想一下，这些公司原来可以违背法规，现在就还是可以继续违背法规，所以不能很好的削弱。

charlenelee

如果选b 也可以这样想 既然some firms以前已经 in violation了，那新的涨工资的regulation他们仍然会violate,所以不会cause inflation