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?
The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.
The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.
硬着头皮看选项吧
A. 留着,好像说了一个什么他因,至于正向反向不清楚
B. 其他国家的肯定和现在讨论的L没关系
C. 反正是说employ和umploy之间有什么区别才导致这个现象
D. 最后有个poverty level,原文根本没说这玩意(原文说的是 gov assit.别潜意识把这两个划等号,当然这也是GMAC的陷阱所在)
E. 人们接受工资少的工作单纯是因为他们喜欢 呃..这种喜不喜欢也没啥太大关系,根本没有提到supplement以及umploy和unemploy
留下A,C 。
能看出C的选C(我当时是没看出来,我是因为C里面有employ 也有umemploy,当然这方法也没啥根据,也可能这个C选项是和问题问的相反的,只是没有方法下的方法,考场时间不允许)
看不出的,随便选一个把。55开-。-
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论