文章：According to many analysts, labor-management relations in the United States are undergoing a fundamental change: traditional adversarialism is giving way to a new cooperative relationship between the two sides and even to concessions from labor. These analysts say the twin shocks of nonunion competition in this country and low-cost, high-quality imports from abroad are forcing unions to look more favorably at a variety of management demands: the need for wage restraint and reduced benefits as well as the abolition of "rigid" work rules, seniority rights, and job classifications. Sophisticated proponents of these new developments cast their observations in a prolabor light. n return for their concessions, they point out, some unions have bargained for profit sharing, retraining rights, and job--security guarantees. Unions can also trade concessions for more say on the shop floor, where techniques such as quality circles and quality-of-work­ life programs promise workers greater control over their own jobs. Unions may even win a voice in investment and pricing strategy, plant location, and other major corporate policy decisions previously reserved to management. Opponents of these concessions from labor argue that such concessions do not save jobs, but either prolong the agony of dying plants or finance the plant relocations that employers had intended anyway. Companies make investment decisions to fit their strategic plans and their profit objectives, opponents point out, and labor costs are usually just a small factor in the equation. Moreover, unrestrained by either loyalty to their work force or political or legislative constraints on their mobility, the companies eventually cut and run, concessions or no concessions. Wage-related concessions have come under particular attack, since opponents believe that high union wages underlay much of the success of United States industry in this century. They point out that a long-standing principle, shared by both management and labor, has been that workers should earn wages that give them the income they need to buy what they make. Moreover, high wages have given workers the buying power to propel the economy forward. f proposals for pay cuts, two-tier wage systems, and subminimum wages for young workers continue to gain credence, opponents believe the U.S. social structure will move toward that of a less-developed nation: a small group of wealthy investors, a sizable but still minority bloc of elite professionals and highly skilled employees, and a huge mass of marginal workers and unskilled laborers. Further, they argue that if unions willingly engage in concession bargaining on the false grounds that labor costs are the source of a company's problems, unions will find themselves competing with Third World pay levels-a competition they cannot win. 想请问郭老师，这题opponents观点是在第三段，但是原文和选项要怎么对照呢...怎么从观点看出态度？

老师好…这道CR题错选A能求解释一下么？谢谢！

请教唐瑭老师：og上的题，答案是D，选了A。不明白D为什么对，是因为最后一句的Although强调的是前半句吗？although一般强调后半句还是前半句？

老师这道题不知道该怎么解！我是这么算的 6!/3!*3!得出来的结果再乘以2，等于40，但答案是30，不知道是哪里算错了，还是我理解错了，希望老师解答！

老师图片里是作文的标题和我在规定时间内写的东西，您看看我错误找全了吗？找错的思维有没有跳跃？第一段和第二段的论证可以这样写吗？以及我每次都是三十分钟压线写完，字数也不多，请老师给我提一些思维和写作上的建议，谢谢！

老师这道题题目有点看不懂，算不到B选项，不知道是题目理解错了还是公式用错了，求讲解

老师能讲解一下这道题吗？

老师您好，这道题的题目有一点看不懂，请问是什么意思以及为什么选d？

老师您好，我想问一下这道题E为什么有利于支持文中观点？

@英吉老师，我最近在看您的录播逻辑网课，您不推荐我们回读。但是我在日常练习的时候做不到读一遍就能弄懂句间关系，或者读第一遍有时候连句子一起都不太清楚。那我们想要练就读一遍就可以了解句间关系的能力，并且用在考场的话，平时可以怎样练习呢？

老师请问这个“or”应该怎么算？