Question

一道题想了很久都想不通，高手来看看

City A 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 urban areas ,removing the tariff would seriously hamper the grovernment’s effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years.

Which of the following ,if ture ,most seriously weakens the atgument?

A some of the by-producets of processing cashews are used foe manfacturing paints and plastics.

B other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants

C more people in city A are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them

D buying unprocessed cashews at a lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in city A to sell processed nuts at competitive prices

E a lack of profitable crop is driving an increasing number of small farmers in city A off their land and into the city
打错个字，应该是argument weaken的意思是削弱
题目出自GMAT

官方答案 E
三楼的理解是错误的

题目说的是加关税会使城镇里的processing factories 的工人有工作做，去掉关税会使他们失业，题目问的是要削弱政府这种去掉关税而使失业率上升的想法，e的答案符合要求就是说如果不去掉关税的话，很多很多farmer会因为没有profitable plants而进入城市而使失业率上升，说不定比工厂的工人还多，相比不去掉关税和去掉关税，不去掉关税造成的失业更多，就是说去掉关税并不违反政府降低失业率的意图。

Answer 1

题目主干的意思是说如果不限制在国内加工，也就是可以在国外加工，那么因为加工工厂都是在城市地区，所以取消这项税收会使城市的加工工人工作减少，使城市的失业率上升。然后E选项说的是，没有profitable crop会驱使农民离开他们的土地而涌进城市，这个就是说城市里面会多出来许多没有工作的农民，使城市的失业率上升。也就是说保持这种情况并不能使城市的失业率有所好转，相反的，如果不把税收取消，这个城市的失业率会上升。
而C选项现在在城市A中种植的比加工的人数多，楼上说的那种是想当然了，你怎么知道种的人多供应就足够呢？也许10个人种的1个人就可以加工了。C只是说种的人比加工的人多，但是从这个选项直接推理的话不能推出什么结果来，做逻辑题一定要从题目中的条件去推，不能加入任何的主观判断或思路。

Answer 2

Which of the following ,if ture ,most seriously weakens the atgument?
。。。weakens什么？ atgument是什么？

Answer 3

Answer is C.
the supply of the raw cashews would not be the problem for urban plants, so the heavy tariff would become unnecessary.