[問題]GWD 31-19

[csc]

19:
Sonya: The government of Copeland is raising the cigarette tax. Copeland’s cigarette prices will still be reasonably low, so cigarette consumption will probably not be affected much. Consequently, government revenue from the tax will increase.

Raoul: True, smoking is unlikely to decrease, because Copeland’s cigarette prices will still not be high. They will, however, no longer be the lowest in the region, so we might begin to see substantial illegal sales of smuggled cigarettes in Copeland.

Raoul responds to Sonya’s argument by doing which of the following?

A: Questioning the support for Sonya’s conclusion by distinguishing carefully between No change and no decrease
B: calling Sonya’s conclusion into question by pointing to a possible effect of a certain change.
C: Arguing that Sonya’s conclusion would be better supported if Sonya could cite a precedent for what she predicts will happen.
D: showing that a cause that Sonya claims will be producing a certain effect is not the only cause that could produce that effect
E: pointing out that a certain initiative is not bold enough to have the predicts it will have

答案有B跟E，不知道大家選哪一個，我個人選B，請大家指教

[維尼]

我會選 B

[bonus]

香煙價格的上升導致非法香煙的流入因此政府稅收不一定會增加

[willyyang]

不知道有定論了嗎？

我個人也比較支持B

CD上面好像也是這樣

E真的亂不像答案的 ，R先生的意思是這個方案會有其他問題(smuggled ciggarettes)，而不是在講incentive不夠明顯(bold)。

有NN可以提供其他想法嗎？

[dibert8]

香煙價格的上升導致非法香煙的流入因此政府稅收不一定會增加

這麼一說,就將 S 的論調 call into question 了,所以覺得 (B) 是較佳選項.