扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / GMATLA-CR-45
Vorland's government is planning a nationwide ban on smoking in restaurants. The objection that the ban would reduce restaurants' revenues is ill founded. Several towns in Vorland enacted restaurant smoking restrictions five years ago. Since then, the amount the government collects in restaurant meal taxes in those towns has increased 34 percent, on average, but only 26 percent elsewhere in Vorland. The amount collected in restaurant meal taxes closely reflects restaurants' revenues.
Which of the following, if true, most undermines the defense of the government's plan?
When the state first imposed a restaurant meal tax, opponents predicted that restaurants' revenues would decline as a result, a prediction that proved to be correct in the short term.
The tax on meals in restaurants is higher than the tax on many other goods and services.
Over the last five years, smoking has steadily declined throughout Vorland.
In many of the towns that restrict smoking in restaurants, restaurants can maintain separate dining areas where smoking is permitted.
Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions.
Show that although the effect occurs, the cause did not occur
DE?
类比推理，找不同
直接漏看题 了...undermine...
D选项的意思是，tax,即revenue增加是因为饭店自己想到了对策，而不是因为吸烟的禁令本身不会影响到sales。
原文结论是实施吸烟限制的地方的tax比其他地方多，意味着其收入比其他地方多，这说明禁烟不会影响收入。
注意：限制不同于禁止，如果只是表面的限制，并没有完全禁止的话，不能说明禁烟不影响。C项，如果没有完全禁烟，并不能说禁烟不会影响。
E项，总收入增长速度和收入大小无关。
枚举推理
前提：V的几个城镇在限制在餐厅吸烟后仍然税收增加
结论：全国禁止在餐厅吸烟也不会影响税收收入
枚举了v的几个城镇作为样本，推出全国的结论，属于枚举推理
枚举的推理的方向：样本的代表性，是否有另外一个反样本
D，在那些限制吸烟的城镇的餐厅里是有吸烟区的，没有完全禁止吸烟，所以样本不能代表禁止吸烟后的全国的情况，削弱了推论
赞！
thumbs up!
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
C.有restriction的restaurant利润增加因为他们可以弄separate dining areas。但是政府的plan是要ban，全面禁止吸烟，所以renevue可能会下降。
restriction 不等于ban
忽略了这点
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论