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？

这个是怎么算的，我只能看出要求的人数是总人数的百分之三

这题除了试数还有什么好方法吗？如果试数的话，如何快速找到适合的数呢？

条件二说的是每一项Sn都大于5吗？，但是n/（n+1）不是小于1吗？我不知道该怎么理解和使用该条件

条件2是要把对角线为8时的情况算出来吗？如果不是，应该怎么判断吗？另外五边形的面积应该怎么算呢？

这题怎么思考？还有绝对值不等式的考点有哪些啊

B单独不能成立吗？k=7带入不等式中，不是可以限制m和n的范围吗

题干不是已经能排出+和➗好了吗？因为此时式子没有意义。那两个条件为什么不能单独成立呢？这题的逻辑是什么

条件2为什么单独不成立？B做了超过50%，说明B比A效率高，那么3小时内可以完成

已知由一个符号@表示的加减乘除中的一一个符号。如果a@ (-a) =0,那么a=0.问:以下条件能否判断符号@是加减乘除中的哪一个?条件1).其中a@(a@a)=0, a=0;条件2).其中a@(b@c)=(a@b)@c. 答案：E

老师这道题和后面你讲的6和4的例子没看懂！