大全section1,13

[freshmanduke]

13. While Governor Verdant has been in office, the state’s budget has increased by an average of 6 percent each year. While the previous governor was in office, the state’s budget increased by an average of 11.5 percent each year. Obviously, the austere budgets during Governor Verdant’s term have caused the slowdown in the growth in state spending.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above?
(A) The rate of inflation in the state averaged 10 percent each year during the previous governor’s term in office and 3 percent each year during Verdant’s term.
(B) Both federal and state income tax rates have been lowered considerably during Verdant’s term in office.
(C) In each year of Verdant’s term in office, the state’s budget has shown some increase in spending over the previous year.
(D) During Verdant’s term in office, the state has either discontinued or begun to charge private citizens for numerous services that the state offered free to citizens during the previous governor’s term.
(E) During the previous governor’s term in office, the state introduced several so-called “austerity” budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending.
答案是A
想請問B 為何不可
謝謝

[JS]

Because ususlly if the goverment lower the income tax, the goverment will has less money to spend on budgets.

[freshmanduke]

so the answer B directly support the idea,right?

[JS]

ya, it supports the argument but the question ask you to weaken it.

[auguding]

可否請問那A為何對咧???

[aerobert]

文章結論應是說：Verdant政府的預算是比較吃緊的
而A的答案應是說前政府時期的通貨膨脹率平均都在10%，而Verdant政府時期的通貨膨脹率則在3%
以通貨膨脹率跟預算增加率看起來，Verdant政府並不會感覺到預算有吃緊的現象

[dibert8]

(A) 考慮通膨,前任預算實質增加率為 1.5%, GV 任內預算實質增加率為 3%, 所以 GV 實際上比前任增加更多預算.