carcass wrote:
Politician：Each year, small businesses create more jobs than do large established businesses. Therefore, in order to reduce unemployment in the long term, we should provide incentives for starting small businesses rather than for expanding established large businesses.
Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the politician's argument ?
(A) In general, people employed by small businesses report higher job satisfaction than do people employed by large businesses.
(B) Among the currently unemployed are many people with sufficient job skills to perform the jobs that small businesses would create.
(C) Providing an effective incentive for starting a business generally costs significantly less than providing an effective incentive for expanding a large business.
(D) A high proportion of small businesses fail within three years of starting because of their owners' inexperience.
(E) The average large business contributes more money to politicians’ campaign funds than the average small business does.
Weaken politicians argument
Each yr small create more jobs than large >> So, to reduce unemployment in the LONG RUN, we should provide incentives for STARTING smalls rather than existing large in expansion..
a) how does this weaken the plan to provide incentives for small vs large to reduce unemployment?
b) maybe this would strengthen the plan bc small with incentives wouldn’t have a hiring problem.
c) providing incentive for beginners costs less than providing for large: this wouldn’t weaken.
d) ok, so if we incentive starting small business, unemployment would decrease for a while, but on the long run it would come back because these business owners have no experience and their businesses fail.
e) this is out of scope.
(D) is the answer.
close
92% (01:03) correct 
