The cost of manufacturing automobiles is considerably greater in Esteria than in Burdistan. In order to stimulate Esterian consumers` purchases of domestically manufactured automobiles, the Esterian government has historically charged taxes on automobiles manufactured in Burdistan. Five years ago, however, the Esterian government dropped those taxes; in those five years, the number of workers employed in Esterian automobile factories has decreased by 30%. Therefore, the number of vehicles manufactured and sold in Esteria must have decreased in the last five years.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
You need to find another reason for the decrease by 30% of the country's workers.
A) Many Esterian automobile manufacturers operate factories outside Esteria. = it is not time related. The companies could have started to produced outside the country 50 years ago.
B) The number of automobile workers in Burdistan has not increased during the same period. = This is the answer to the question "on what the argument depends?"
C) Because vehicles manufactured in Esteria have a reputation for high quality, many Esterian consumers have continued to purchase domestically manufactured vehicles since the tax was abolished. = And therefore is this a reason why the number of workers decreased by 30%? And "many" is not clear: could be 60%, 70%...;
D) Esterian automobile manufacturers have lowered the price of their automobiles so as to remain competitive with the manufacturers in Burdistan. = Close, but not good; the decrease in price might not have led to a decrease in the number of workers
E) Recent innovations in automated automobile-manufacturing technology have approximately halved the number of worker-hours required to produce most automobiles. = Correct, this weaken the argument, stating that the decrease in the number of workers is due to a new innovations not to a decrease in sales. It also justify the decrease of 30% and is time related with the word "recent".
Answer E for me!
加入收藏
在线答疑
