Vorland’s government is planning a nationwide ban on smoking in restaurants. The objection that the ban would reduce restaurants’ revenues is ill founded. Several towns in Vorland enacted restaurant smoking restrictions five years ago. Since then, the amount the government collects in restaurant meal taxes in those towns has increased 34 percent, on average, but only 26 percent elsewhere in Vorlan. The amount collected in restaurant meal taxes closely reflects restaurants' revenues. Which of the following, if true, most undermines the defense of the government ’s plan? A. When the state first imposed a restaurant meal tax, opponents predicted that restaurants’ revenues would decline as a result, a prediction that proved to be correct in the short term. B. The tax on meals in restaurants is higher than the tax on many other goods and services. C. Over the last five years, smoking has steadily declined throughout Vorland. D. In many of the towns that restrict smoking in restaurants, restaurants can maintain separate dining areas where smoking is permitted. E. Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions. 答案D 想請問高手，題目是問弱化政府的政策嗎? undermines the defense of the government's plan? 但D我的解讀是支持政府 因為只有說很多禁煙的地方餐廳經營的方式把吸菸區獨立出來 沒有說到跟營收有相關阿，如果可以延伸說：就算有禁菸罰則， 餐廳照樣可以經營不影響營收哩， 這樣解釋：有禁菸不會導致收入變少←變支持政府， 就不對啦，請求協助 卡在這題很久暸@@ 謝謝 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 59.112.36.13