分享建议使用官方纸质指南，查看对照完整题目
【OG20-P596-719题】
Proposed new safety rules for Beach City airport would lengthen considerably the minimum time between takeoffs from the airport. In consequence, the airport would be able to accommodate 10 percent fewer flights than currently use the airport daily. The city’s operating budget depends heavily on taxes generated by tourist spending, and most of the tourists come by plane. Therefore, the proposed new safety rules, if adopted, will reduce the revenue available for the operating budget.
The argument depends on assuming which of the following?
-
分析A选项
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
分析B选项
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
分析C选项
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
分析D选项
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -
分析E选项
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- 网友解析
我有更好的解析 
暂无雷哥网文字解析
为BC城机场提出新安全规定将大大延长起飞间的最少时间。结果是，机场每天的航班数比目前要减少10%。城市的预算非常依靠旅行者花销所产生的税，大多数旅行者乘飞机过来。因此，新规定的采用将减少可用于预算的收入。
逻辑链：
新安全规定→延长起飞时间→航班数量减少→旅游收入减少
题型：假设题 （正确选项取非削弱逻辑链）
A 一天中没有这样的时刻，起飞间的间隔时间比目前允许的最短时间长很多 （取非，即使有这样的时刻，即间隔时间比允许最短时间长很多，如果新规增加了其他间隔较短的起飞间的等待时间，仍会减少收入，不能削弱逻辑链，错误）
B 很少有旅行者的目的地不是BC，而是其他城市 （取非，即使有一些旅行者目的地是其他城市，另外的旅行者也会在BC花销，新规仍会减少这部分收入，无法削弱逻辑链，错误）
C 如果安全规定被采纳，乘客人数的减少不会主要来自花费相对少的乘客 （取非，如果乘客数减少主要来自花费少的乘客，新政策的实施也会减少收入，无法削弱逻辑链，错误）
D 增加起飞之间的最小时间是市政府在机场加强唯一的方式，来实现必要的安全改进，同时没有大的支出 （only绝对选项，且减少政府花费与逻辑链无关，错误）
E 对此新规定的回应不包括每个航班的人数增长 （如果每航班人数多了，显然即使航班数少，预算收入不一定减少，相关性+取非削弱逻辑链，正确）
题目讨论 （10条评论）
-
499685skw
这是假设passager的人数在不变的情况下得出的结论。
0
0
回复
2022-09-25 00:50:17
-
willowX
一个顺理成章的解释，不可以遇到它因，所以首先在选项中寻找哪个在解释“没有它因”，八成是正确选项
0
0
回复
2022-07-11 10:47:25
-
Crystal8
This assumes that the actual number of daily flights would fall along with the number that the airport can accommodate; that fewer daily flights would mean fewer people flying into the airport; that fewer people flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists flying into the airport; that fewer tourists flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists visiting the city; that fewer tourists visiting the city would mean less taxable spending by tourists; and that less taxable spending by tourists would mean less revenue overall for the operating budget.
1
0
回复
2021-11-03 00:01:06
-
Crystal8回复Crystal8
逻辑链为The implicit reasoning is that since the rules would reduce the number of flights that can be accommodated, they would thereby reduce the number of tourists arriving by plane, which in turn would reduce the tax revenue that tourist spending generates for the operating budget.
1
0
回复
2021-11-03 00:01:29
-
Crystal8回复Crystal8
这其实是三者之间的关系 flight passenger revenue
1
0
回复
2021-11-03 00:01:58
-
Crystal8回复Crystal8
OG的解答，挺好的 但是我想笑哈哈哈 What must be true in order for the cited facts to support the conclusion that the proposed rules would reduce the revenue fo r the operating budget?The implicit reasoning is that since the rules would reduce the number of flights that can be accommodated, they would thereby reduce the number of tourists arriving by plane, which in turn would reduce the tax revenue that tourist spending generates for the operating budget. This assumes that the actual number of daily flights would fall along with the number that the airport can accommodate; that fewer daily flights would mean fewer people flying into the airport; that fewer people flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists flying into the airport; that fewer tourists flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists visiting the city; that fewer tourists visiting the city would mean less taxable spending by tourists; and that less taxable spending by tourists would mean less revenue overall for the operating budget
3
0
回复
2021-11-03 00:02:39
-
-
Crystal8
逻辑
0
0
回复
2021-11-03 00:00:47
-
Crystal8
What must be true in order for the cited facts to support the conclusion that the proposed rules would reduce the revenue for the operating budget?
0
0
回复
2021-11-02 23:59:56
-
Crystal8
What must be true in order for the cited facts to support the conclusion that the proposed rules would reduce the revenue for the operating budget? 逻辑链：
0
0
回复
2021-11-02 23:59:06
-
Crystal8回复Crystal8
What must be true in order for the cited facts to support the conclusion that the proposed rules would reduce the revenue for the operating budget? The implicit reasoning is that since the rules would reduce the number of flights that can be accommodated, they would thereby reduce the number of tourists arriving by plane, which in turn would reduce the tax revenue that tourist spending generates for the operating budget. This assumes that the actual number of daily flights would fall along with the number that the airport can accommodate; that fewer daily flights would mean fewer people flying into the airport; that fewer people flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists flying into the airport; that fewer tourists flying into the airport would mean fewer tourists visiting the city; that fewer tourists visiting the city would mean less taxable spending by tourists; and that less taxable spending by tourists would mean less revenue overall for the operating budget.
1
0
回复
2021-11-02 23:59:17
-
-
lchGMAT
这其实是三者之间的关系 flight passenger revenue
1
0
回复
2021-01-30 11:39:58
-
Rage
assumption题 取反大法好啊 选项本身加强 取反之后削弱 则该选项就是正确答案 就分析两个选项 其他请网友自己想 A选项本身看似加强 取反 一天中有这样的时间 看似没错 但是仅仅是有 而非所有时间 故不能削弱 排除 E选项本身也看似加强 取反 还有别的选择 完全可以换一种方式避免收入减少 妥妥削弱
0
0
回复
2020-12-07 18:50:39
-
Mariposa爱学习
起飞最低时间限制-->每天都会减少10%的航班-->收入下降 如果每架飞机坐更多人，收入就不会下降了
0
0
回复
2020-11-19 15:06:58
-
布布想去荷兰
航班数量下降&每班飞机的人数没有增加（E），所以revenue会下降
0
0
回复
2020-10-20 16:11:37
