以下是小编为大家分享的GMAT备考资料之新
The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper.
“A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”
一份西Cambria报纸的社论片断：
最近的对西Cambria的志愿救护服务的回顾显示出其对事故的平均应对时间比设在东Cambria的一个商业救护班要长。为了给事故受害者提供更好的医护服务并通过收取急救服务费来提高我们镇的税收，我们应当解散志愿救护并雇佣商业救护服务。
1. 对事故的反映时间诚然是评价服务质量的一个因素但并不是唯一的因素.所以仅仅因为东区的商业救护班的反映时间短就认定商业救护办的服务更好是gratuitous的.
2. 就算东区的商业班的服务质量更好也并不意味着,西区用商业班就会有一样的成效.因为东西区的情况是不同的.很可能西区的志愿者更有服务,献身意识.
3. 此外除非商业班收十分昂贵的服务费用或者有十分多的事故事实这些都是不可能的, 改成商业是不见得就可以给该镇增加很多税收的.所以把这一点作为理由是不正确的.
considerable revenue significant significance consequently consequence ... is insufficient evidence for the claim that this will be the case for ... ambulance-crew proficiency training emergency
1， 错误类比 两个城市不一样，很可能因为西和东的不一样，比如，路的情况traffic condition。可能东的车辆更好。服务的态度更好。
而且没有说东的志愿情况如何，很可能东的志愿比商业的快。
2， 草率的判断：就算是商业的更快，也不一定更好。反映时间不是唯一的因素，有其他——比如服务的质量，态度，器材等等。
3， 另外，除非商业可以charge considerable fees 或者 accident rate非常高，否则未必带来可观的revenue。
In this argument the author concludes that West Cambria can increase revenues and provide better care to accident victims by disbanding the volunteer ambulance service and hiring a commercial one. The author reasons that this change would yield additional revenues because service fees could be imposed for ambulance use. The author also reasons that the city would provide better service to accident victims because a commercial service would respond more quickly to accidents than a volunteer service would. The author’s argument is flawed in two respects.
To begin with, the author’s plan for raising revenue for West Cambria is questionable. Unless the service fees are considerable or the accident rate is extremely high, it is unlikely that significant revenues will be raised by charging a fee for ambulance use. Consequently, revenue generation is not a good reason to disband the volunteer service and hire a commercial service.
Next, the author’s belief that better patient care would be provided by a commercial ambulance service than by a volunteer service is based on insufficient evidence. The fact that the commercial service in East Cambria has a lower average response time than the volunteer service in West Cambria is insufficient evidence for the claim that this will be the case for all commercial services. Moreover, the author’s recommendation depends upon the assumption that response time to an accident is the only factor that influences patient care. Other pertinent factors—such as ambulance-crew proficiency and training, and emergency equipment—are not considered.
In conclusion, this argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that substantial revenue for the town could be raised by charging service fees for ambulance use. Additionally, the author would have to provide more evidence to support the claim that commercial ambulance services provide better patient care than volunteer services.
34. The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president.
“The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available.”
Easy信贷公司的一个经营主管向董事长提交的一份计划：
如果我们将信用卡所得的利润中的一部分捐给一个知名的环保组织换取在我们的信用卡上使用他们的标识的权利，Easy信贷公司将在信用卡服务的竞争中得到很大好处。由于最近的民调显示，很多人都关心环境问题，这一计划将吸引新顾客，提高现有顾客的使用量，并使我们得到比最低利润率要高的利润率。
1环保组织所提供的标识所关心的方面和民众所关心的方面可能不一致
2关心环保问题不意味着他们就一定会采取一些具体的措施象是在这个例子里面购买这个公司的产品
The author assumes that the public's concern about environmental issues will result in its taking steps to do something about the problem-in this case, to use the Easy Credit Company credit card.
3权衡了额外付出的成本和收益之后并不一定值得这么做.
1，首先，关心环境的人，不一定是使用信用卡的。第二，关心环境问题的人，关心的issues不一定与该组织的相同。
2，因果关系不明确：不一定人们关心环保就一定用使用信用卡的方式来表达。因为More often，人们可能采取更加直接的方式，比如直接donate money to the environmental organization.
3， 另外，利润率关系到收入和支出，很可能两个比较收入小于支出。
In this argument the author concludes that the Easy Credit Company would gain several advantages over its competitors by donating a portion of its profits to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of the organization’s logo on their credit card. The author reaches this conclusion on the basis of a recent poll that shows widespread public concern about environmental issues. Among the advantages of this policy, the author foresees an increase in credit card use by existing customers, the ability to charge higher interest rates, and the ability to attract new customers. While the author’s argument has some merit, it suffers from two critical problems.
To begin with, the author assumes that the environmental organization whose logo is sought is concerned with the same environmental issues about which the poll shows widespread concern. However, the author provides no evidence that this is the case. It is possible that very few credit-card users are concerned about the issues that are the organization’s areas of concern; if so, then it is unlikely that the organization’s logo would attract much business for the Easy Credit Company.
Next, the author assumes that the public’s concern about environmental issues will result in its taking steps to do something about the problem—in this case, to use the Easy Credit Company credit card. This assumption is unsupported and runs contrary to experience. Also, it is more reasonable to assume that people who are concerned about a particular cause will choose a more direct means of expressing their concern.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author must show a positive link between the environmental issues about which the public has expressed concern and the issues with which this particular environmental organization is concerned. In addition, the author must provide evidence to support the assumption that concern about a problem will cause people to do something about the problem.