The recent decline in the value of the dollar was triggered by a prediction of slower economic growth in the coming year. But that prediction would not have adversely affected the dollar had it not been for the government's huge budget deficit, which must therefore be decreased to prevent future currency declines.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion about how to prevent future currency declines?
The government has made little attempt to reduce the budget deficit.
The budget deficit has not caused a slowdown in economic growth.
The value of the dollar declined several times in the year prior to the recent prediction of slower economic growth.
Before there was a large budget deficit, predictions of slower economic growth frequently caused declines in the dollar's value.
When there is a large budget deficit, other events in addition to predictions of slower economic growth sometimes trigger declines in currency value.
If it weren't/hadn't been for …以及其倒装结构were it not for/had it not been
for表示"如果不是……的话"
如果没有财政赤字,经济放缓的语言就不会对美元有反面影响(即没有赤字,后美元不贬值)
If it weren't/hadn't been for …以及其倒装结构were it not for/had it not been for表示"如果不是……的话" 。
本文的意思是。人们认为growth降低的预期,会使美元贬值。但是,要不是budget deficit,这个预期也不会使得美元贬值。也就是这个budget deficit才是使得美元贬值的真正boss(这句话也是结论)。选D:没有你这个boss,growth降低的预期依旧能使美元贬值。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论