Which of the following most logically completes the passage? Concerned about the financial well-being of its elderly citizens, the government of Runagia decided two years ago to increase by 20 percent the government-provided pension paid to all Runagians over 65. Inflation in the intervening period has been negligible, and the increase has been duly received by all eligible Runagians. Nevertheless, many of them are no better off financially than they were before the increase, in large part because __________.
A. they rely entirely on the government pension for their income
B. Runagian banks are so inefficient that it can take up to three weeks to cash a pension check
C. they buy goods whose prices tend to rise especially fast in times of inflation
D. the pension was increased when the number of elderly Runagians below the poverty level reached an all-time high
E. in Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living
题目翻译：考虑到当地老人的福利，政府在2年前决定将其为超过65岁的老年人所提供的养老金增加20%。其间通胀率可以忽略，养老金全部及时送达符合条件的老年人手中，但老年人并未从政策中获益，经济条件未见改善，很大一部分原因是：
题型：填空题。However之前是根本原因，之后是直接原因。即：
因：增加养老金的政策 果：老人收入没有增加
但看上去相互矛盾，填空的部分实现了架桥。
A 老年人收入全部依靠养老金。哇靠，那养老金增加还能不改善经济状况？？
B 当地银行不给力，花3周时间才给的钱。花多久这钱也是给了，你还惦记怎么地！
C 老年人买的都是在通胀期间涨价很快的东西。老年人怎么这么缺心眼……
D 在超级多的老人收入低于贫困线时，增加了养老金。雪中送炭啊，有木有！！！
E 子女给老年人钱，但只能刚好够他们舒服地活着。
看似与养老金无关，但是如果政府都给老人钱了，子女们自然也就不给钱了，而政府给的钱可能还不够让老人活得舒服，所以老年人生活没变好。所以是养老金政策导致子女撤资导致老年人收入没有增加作者: supercury 时间: 2012-3-19 19:05
E为什么相关，我觉得是题目没有看懂 In Runagia children typically supplement the income of elderly parents, but only by enough to provide them with a comfortable living 。说的是孩子会提供income but by enough to provide them with a confortable living.意思是这种提供会在舒适的生活处截止。意思是孩子不会提供更多的supplement.所以当政府提供的时候，老人生活达到了comfortable level的时候孩子会自动撤走。所以E是相关的，即政府提供的资助后老人生活没有变得更better off,因为孩子撤资了。
欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/forum/)
