返回列表 发帖

此题怎么也看不明白,请NN们解疑释惑,多谢了!

When limitations were in effect on nuclear-arms testing, people tended to save more of their money, but when nuclear-arms testing increased, people tended to spend more of their money. The perceived threat of nuclear catastrophe, therefore, decreases the willingness of people to postpone consumption for the sake of saving money.

The argument above assumes that

(A) the perceived threat of nuclear catastrophe has increased over the years

(B) most people supported the development of nuclear arms

(C) people’s perception of the threat of nuclear catastrophe depends on the amount of nuclear-arms testing being done

(D) the people who saved the most money when nuclear-arms testing was limited were the ones who supported such limitations

(E) there are more consumer goods available when nuclear-arms testing increases

答案是C,可俺怎么也看不明白啊……痛苦……

收藏 分享

nuclear catastrophe与nuclear-arms testing是两个概念,前文说nuclear-arms testing对people的影响,结论把nuclear-arms testing替换成了nuclear catastrophe,所以假设是people认为nuclear-arms testing与nuclear catastrophe等同

TOP

QUOTE:
以下是引用freecell在2008-2-14 14:56:00的发言:
nuclear catastrophe与nuclear-arms testing是两个概念,前文说nuclear-arms testing对people的影响,结论把nuclear-arms testing替换成了nuclear catastrophe,所以假设是people认为nuclear-arms testing与nuclear catastrophe等同

同意,我也是这么分析的

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看