逻辑 Critical Reasoning-6324

标记
Editorial:In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker's income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.

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

【选项】The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

选项是否正确?

  • 正确
  • 错误

正确的用户笔记

0个赞

Cindygmat 2014-12-23 11:21:53

每年没工作的人收到的援助少于贫穷水平,无关,杀

0个赞

blanche001 2014-09-30 08:49:15

不管是不是比贫困线的收入少,这些失业的人得到的补助总是比收入低的人得到的补助多,这一点在文中已经说明了

0个赞

稳定的玉米投手 2016-09-25 20:53:44

失业的人有政府补助 plan: 给那些收补助的人一些工资低于补助的工作 ---使得老板Hire 更便宜 目的:减少失业 然而 这不会提高收入超过政府的补助(因为) 推测 因此 失业的人没有动机去接受这样的工作(结果) 削弱 要么 攻击传导机制 要么 负面因素 每年 收到的补助是低于贫困线的定义的 无关。。 你自己主观推测 这样好 但实际上原文没有定义。。 这是典型的off-goal

GMAT

考满分GMAT备考平台-公开课天天看,免费提供强大的学习做题
系统,专业优质的在线课程助你迅速提分。

GMAT考满分App

把网站装进口袋
随时随地练习

联系我们