GWD6-Q20

templars

Five years ago, as part of a plan to encourage citizens of Levaska to increase the amount of money they put into savings, Levaska’s government introduced special savings accounts in which up to $3,000 a year can be saved with no tax due on the interest unless money is withdrawn before the account holder reaches the age of sixty-five.Millions of dollars have accumulated in the special accounts, so the government’s plan is obviously working.

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

A.A substantial number of Levaskans have withdrawn at least some of the money they had invested in the special accounts.这样的话储蓄还是增加的

B.Workers in Levaska who already save money in long-term tax-free accounts that are offered through their workplace cannot take advantage of the special savings accounts introduced by the government.

C.The rate at which interest earned on money deposited in regular savings accounts is taxed depends on the income bracket of the account holder.无关

D.Many Levaskans who already had long-term savings have steadily been transferring those savings into the special accounts.长期账户转到这个账户，总和没有变

E.Many of the economists who now claim that the government’s plan has been successful criticized it when it was introduced.

这个题我做对了，这是第二遍做了，忽然不明白B为什么不对了？请NN解答。。。答案是D，这个我是明白的~~

shlshing

就算把B选项中worker改成citizen，也起不到削弱作用，反而是个弱支持选项。这题重点要看，特别帐户所产生的增量和总体saving的增量。

williams

同意楼主，大体看了看，就下了结论，不好，不好。

templars

我又想了一下，我觉得你说的好像不对，应该是worker的问题，而原文是citizens。worker不存钱，别人也会存钱的~~看题还是要仔细啊~~

augest

不是nn，试试看哈。
这个题的中心是－－因为有几百万存到了这个账户，所以计划成功。而B和这个中心无关，因为不能得到福利的别的种类的账户不是在scope之内。就像咱们说的是建行的账户，忽的蹦出说农行的账户怎么怎么样，没关系的两个东西。