标题: 请教GWD-9-Q28！纠结。。。 [打印本页]
作者: sjmdlycs 时间: 2010-12-12 07:10 标题: 请教GWD-9-Q28！纠结。。。
GWD-9-Q28:
Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:
Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?
A.
Because steel from Krenland is rarely competitive in international markets, only a very small portion of Krenlandian steelmakers’ revenue comes from exports.
B.
The international treaties that some governments are violating by giving subsidies to steelmakers do not specify any penalties for such violations.
C.
For many Krenlandian manufacturers who face severe international competition in both domestic and export markets, steel constitutes a significant part of their raw material costs.
D.
Because of advances in order-taking, shipping, and inventory systems, the cost of shipping steel from foreign producers to Krenland has fallen considerably in recent years.
E.
Wages paid to workers in the steel industry in Krenland differ significantly from wages paid to workers in many of the countries that export steel to Krenland.
为什么选C不选B呢，请教！！！谢谢~
作者: seanceserene 时间: 2010-12-12 19:56
一個小陷阱: manufacturers (只能說 我們對字的敏感度 還不夠高, 尤其在1分鐘之內...>__< )
這個 manufacturers 不是指 steelmakers, 而是利用 steels 為原物料的 manufacturers.
原題推論:
降低 steels 的價格 ---> 造成國內steelmakers 的銷售下滑 + unemployment 上升 + 失去競爭力
要 weaken 這個推論 就是: 降低 steels 的價格 ---> 造成 賴以steels 為原料的 manufacturers 獲利上升 + 可能的 employment 增加 + 增加競爭力
所以 答案C 符合
Hope helps~
作者: michael_wind 时间: 2010-12-13 06:40
注意steel companies 和 industrial employment的关系，如果保护钢铁行业，那么钢铁的价格肯定上升，其他以此为主要原料的行业成本上升，就会没有竞争力了，industrial employment反而会降低
作者: piacia 时间: 2010-12-13 19:53
进口的钢材便宜,国内钢材贵,因此没有竞争力,而国内钢铁成本主要是由于工资的关系.因此为了保护国内钢铁公司以及国内的就业,政府应该减少廉价钢材的进口.
C对于许多K地的制造商而言,钢材是他们主要的原材料à钢材价格便宜,竞争力加强,有效促进就业,Weaken了原文.
作者: 静若水 时间: 2010-12-14 06:30
我选了D
降低 steels 的價格 ---> 造成 賴以steels 為原料的 manufacturers 獲利上升 + 可能
的 employment 增加 + 增加競爭力
上述推理中没有假设这些manufacturers的employment的增加。
如果是D,我觉得可以是他因解释，即进口货价格比domestic低的另外一个原因是shippment
的价格大大降低了，因此weaken通过限制对方政府补贴的行为...
作者: taohuaxian 时间: 2010-12-14 20:41
it would protect
not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our
government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.
可是原题中的确是说，为了保护steel companies, 和 industrial employment ，所以C挺
无关的啊
的确，C的存在证明了不应该 reduce cheap steel imports， 但是不符合原题保护对象的
论述啊
作者: zcooles 时间: 2010-12-15 06:43
我有和ls一样的困惑：C的存在证明了不应该 reduce cheap steel imports， 但是不符合原题保护对象的论述啊
| 欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/) |
Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |