souvik101990 wrote:
A gas tax of one cent per gallon would raise one billion dollars per year at current consumption rates. Since a tax of fifty cents per gallon would therefore raise fifty billion dollars per year, it seems a perfect way to deal with the federal budget deficit. This tax would have the additional advantage that the resulting drop in the demand for gasoline would be ecologically sound and would keep our country from being too dependent on foreign oil producers.
the conclusion here:
GT of 50c - perfect way to deal with FBD.
this will lead to lower demand and thus, preserve the nature and reduce the dependence on foreign oil.
the flaw here is that the author makes 2 incompatible assumptions. it is mentioned "current consumption rates", thus, if the demand decreases, there is NO WAY to make 50B $ from the tax.
Which one of the following most clearly identifies an error in the author‟s reasoning?
(A) The author cites irrelevant data.
we cannot say that.
(B) The author relies on incorrect current consumption figures.
current consumption is not at issue here.
(C) The author makes incompatible assumptions.
exactly! gvt wants to make 50B $ (at current consumption), while wanting to decrease the demand.
(D) The author mistakes an effect for a cause.
what is the effect? dropped demand? what is the cause? 50b $? can't figure out which is which, and C is way better than this one.
(E) The author appeals to conscience rather than reason.
no, he does reason, stating facts!!! but the way of thinking is flawed.