GWD1-Q13

herr_chenhy

In the United States, of the people who moved from one state to another when they retired, the percentage who retired to Florida has decreased by three percentage points over the past ten years.  Since many local businesses in Florida cater to retirees, this decline is likely to have a noticeably negative economic effect on these businesses.

 

 

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

 

 

1. Florida attracts more people who move from one state to another when they retire than does any other state.

2. The number of people who move out of Florida to accept employment in other states has increased over the past ten years.

3. There are far more local businesses in Florida that cater to tourists than there are local businesses that cater to retirees.

4. The total number of people who retired and moved to another state for their retirement has increased significantly over the past ten years.

5. The number of people who left Florida when they retired to live in another state was greater last year than it was ten years ago.

虽然通过排除法，答案肯定是A，但是我还是觉得A并没有和文中结论想冲突啊！即使Florida比其他州吸引的人要多，但是他本身在过去一个decade里吸引retirees的数量是减少了，这当然会对以来retirees的local businesses受影响，这个结论没有错啊……

另外，我想问一下关于GWD题的搜索格式，也许这些题目之前有过讨论，但是可能搜索格式不对找不到，请达人指点！

谢谢！

xiangxiang4

答案A 中有一个比较，佛州和其它州的比较，与原题所给条件无联系，与推理和结论也没直接关系。不论比其它州如何，到佛州的退休人数总量多少才是问题关键。显然，只有答案D解决了这个问题。

beautywawa

举个例子，以前有30万人退休喜欢去其他州，其中50％去florida，那么人数是15万，现在有100万退休喜欢去其他州，只有30％去florida，虽然比例下降了，但是人数却是30万，增加了

beautywawa

这道题目考的是比例跟绝对数的关系，虽然比例下降了，但是d说总量增加了。那么有可能去florida过退休生活的总人数还是增加的，削弱了结论

herr_chenhy

这道题XDF的答案是D，而不是A。

刚才又和我同学讨论了一下。

katherine8110

FLORIDA在过去的时间里吸引的RETIREEES比较多,那么也就是说 decreased by three

percentage points 这样一种状况在总体的绝对数量上并没有让LOCAL BUSINESS形成很

大的影响,有可能绝对数量上并没有让LOBAL BUSINESS遭到NEGATIVE的影响.

我个人理解这个题目应该是表示影响比较小,而不是说削弱这个结论就要削弱到DECREASE

对LOBAL BUSINESS没有影响的程度.所以相对来说A是最准确的.

关于搜索格式,本人也不是特别会,所以也不能解答,另请高明了!