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?
前提1:V政府计划全国参观戒烟
2:已经戒烟5年的参观税收反而比没有戒烟的餐馆税高,税的总量直接反映了餐馆的效益
结论:反对者提出的戒严令会降低餐馆效益的说法是错的,也就是说戒烟令不会降低餐馆效益
削弱 有因无果,
A:支持者预测餐馆效益会短期下降 无关
B:餐饮税比其他税高 无关
C: 过去5年,吸烟情况逐渐下降 无关
D:直接说餐厅将抽烟和不抽烟的分开,那样的话有没有戒严令不都一回事,所以尽管前提2存在,但是由于抽烟和不抽烟的是分开的。
E:过去5年政府在禁烟区的销售税和非禁烟区的差不多 那不就支持了结论 戒烟令不会降低餐馆效益