Q2:
Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to
ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by
growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government’s effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Some of the by-products of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints
and plastics. 不动摇cashew价格,不改变农民收入,对城镇就业未知 - 无关
B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants. 于Kernland无关
C. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them. 想说明什么?想说明即使去掉出口税对城镇就业不会有太大影响嘛?不确认?先放一边,看下面
D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew
processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices. 这就支持了不能取消出口税,不符合提问
E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in
Kernland off their land and into the cities. 农民因为收成问题大量涌入城市,难道不会对城镇就业造成压力?可见不取消cashew出口税,the government’s effort to reduce urban unemployment也不太可能实现;反之,如果取消出口税,由于种植cashew有较高经济受益,农民反而会回去种cashew,倒是能减轻城镇就业,所以,这个选项attack了题干的premise和conclusion,应该是最佳选项;至于C,似乎还欠缺一些. | 
