ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 26722|回复: 62
打印 上一主题 下一主题

天山-9-2

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2004-12-16 23:48:00 | 只看该作者

天山-9-2

Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to
ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and
unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by
growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing
the tariff would seriously hamper the government’s effort to reduce urban unemployment
over the next five years.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Some of the by-products of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints
and plastics.
B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants.
C. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them.
D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew
processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices.
E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in
Kernland off their land and into the cities.


MINE C


ANS E


请指教

沙发
发表于 2004-12-17 01:33:00 | 只看该作者
政府目的是降低urban unemploymen城市失业率,要让它这个目的破产只有E可以,因为许多种腰果赚不到钱的农民将涌入城市从而抬高城市失业率。C说种腰锅的人多于加工腰果的人,那结果是农民失业农村失业率提高,与论题无关。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2004-12-17 02:08:00 | 只看该作者

More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them

城市的人也去种不就降低失业率了吗?

地板
发表于 2004-12-17 16:01:00 | 只看该作者

在看到E之前,我也是选B。

注意题目的逻辑推导:增加关税以扶持腰果加工业,腰果加工业多在城市=》增加关税能减轻城市失业压力

E直接反对结论——增加失业压力;

B;嘻嘻,好像很容易选的迷惑选项。

不过,有一句话,是OG上说地, because a sharply defined focus is not a flaw in an argument

不知道这里能不能用。

反正就是管他人多人少,能直接反对结论的,才是正确的选项。

5#
发表于 2004-12-23 14:08:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用neverback在2004-12-17 2:08:00的发言:

More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them


城市的人也去种不就降低失业率了吗?



你这不是支持结论了吗?
6#
发表于 2005-1-16 16:26:00 | 只看该作者
但是题目说的是“阻碍政府的这种目的”,要weaken这个argument,必须是说没有阻碍政府这种行为,也就是政府关于降低城市失业的effort可以实现。E表明城市失业要多起来了。跟政府目的相反,也就是支持“阻碍政府的这种目的”,那怎么能说是weaken 呢?怀疑E。
7#
发表于 2005-1-29 11:09:00 | 只看该作者
题目说的是REMOVE TARIFF 就会使农民进城,从而加剧城市失业,选项要WEAKEN这个结论就应说不会加剧失业,而E正是加强结论呀.
8#
发表于 2005-1-29 21:37:00 | 只看该作者

E的确感觉是加强,不是削弱。

9#
发表于 2005-2-10 03:30:00 | 只看该作者

why not C,E is relevant to the question

10#
发表于 2005-2-17 03:13:00 | 只看该作者

E的意思是如果农民种腰果没钱-->他们就会进城--->失业率就增加

现在政府要取消关税,那农民就有钱赚了,他们就安安心心在家种腰果,就不进城了,城里的失业率就不增加了.(至少农民不会跑到城里去增加城市的失业率了)--->weaken

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-9-1 22:04
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部