Q21: The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
以前这里有过讨论
但是越看越迷糊了~~
我认为A比E对结论"at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits" 更有攻击力。
题目说厂要cut cost，所以打算关G厂。
大家都知道，cut cost 是为了钱嘛~ 企业说到底最根本目的也是为了钱呀~钱从哪里来？profit呀！
A说“G厂虽然cost多，但是还是有利润。”
1. 都提到利润了，怎么和原文无关呢？
2. 既然有利润了，还管它cost多干什么？cost再多，只要有利润，都不应该关厂啊！
3. 直接反对了结论，说明该厂就是desire for higher profits
E说“关厂要付一大笔清理费，所以不关厂”
然后有朋友说A的利润不能代表将来，而且moderate不能说明到底是多还是少，
那我就纳闷了，既然要这么想的话，那E不是更不能代表将来吗？
大家想想看，如果G厂是在亏本而不盈利的，即使是要付一大笔清理费，如果你是厂商也许你还是会关门的吧，这叫长痛不如短痛啊！
LZ你看第一句，The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery 。所以本来他的目的只想是要减少cost。和利润不利润无关。
现象：关掉工厂
结论：关掉原因是社会顾虑，而非追求HIGHER PROFIT
削弱：关掉成本太大。E提出一个他因
A错在：即使G地区的厂有MODERATE PROFIT，正象原文说的，closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery有更高PROFIT。所以关掉它PROFIT上是合理的。所以A无法削弱结论：关掉是社会顾虑。作者: supermanlee 时间: 2011-3-22 20:32
原文只说了it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. 我并没有把cut cost和“会有更高profit”联系起来。
不过我想起了新东方老师讲过的“GMAT中默认的几种有关”：
1）cost与profit有关，与价格无关
2）sales与revenue有关
3）供需决定价格
如果是按以上“默认”的话，那“cut cost”和“会有更高profit”就不缺桥梁了，那么就可以理解你所说的A错了，是这样吗？
此外，以上三种默认正确吗？
再补充问一句：是不是higher profit和more profit意思不一样？一个是单位成本的profit 一个是总量概念（单位profit*数量）？作者: huangsiyan 时间: 2011-3-23 06:50
