Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.
_________________

math-polygons-87336.html
competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

The answer is C. I had already read this on another forum and seeing your post reminded me of it. Here is the link http://www.beatthegmat.com/1000-cr-t3249.html

No doubt, E is the best choice.

Hi mates,

I really find difficult to choose between C and E, however I'd go with C

If taxes are removed, real taxpayers will find that their incomes increase. If public employees find that their incomes decrease, that means that public employees are not real taxpayers.

I've not picked C because it doesn't say anything about real taxpayers, which are an important element of the structure.

However, it's true that C sounds very well... If I find a question like this... well, I'll flip a coin

OA and Source?

Cheers
_________________

mates, please visit my profile and leave comments
johnlewis1980-s-profile-feedback-is-more-than-welcome-80538.html

I'm not linked to GMAT questions anymore, so, if you need something, please PM me

I'm already focused on my application package

My experience in my second attempt
http://gmatclub.com/forum/p544312#p544312
My experience in my third attempt
630-q-47-v-28-engineer-non-native-speaker-my-experience-78215.html#p588275

But argument mentions "abolish taxez and the income disappears". If there were other sources other than taxes, then how cum income disappears?

Its from LSAT series
OA-C
++++++++
request to you all Posters
pls post the OA within 8-10 discussions/24 hrs
do we have spoiler here?
++++++++++++++++
Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.
Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?
(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.



_________________

math-polygons-87336.html
competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise. irrelevant
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes. illogical
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers. chances are there waitlisted
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.irrelevant
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.comes close

I think C and E are more relevant to the question but between C and E I chose E because from the statement it is obvious that if taxes are abolished public employees wouldn't have any income

and also the above statement doesn't clearly states that pubilc employee are not real tax payers

It's gotta be C as E doesn't use the information from both statements. It only uses the information from the second statement. The stimulus says which conclusion comes from using both statements and only C does this.

Finally... a CR question that I asked correctly. I chose C over B. I don't why I re-read B a few times more than necessary. I guess I wanted to be sure about my choice.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Reward wisdom with kudos.

E is very close but the question is very tricky, so take into account this:

It is true that E can be logically derived from the second statement. The issue here is that the question is asking for a logical conclusion that depends on both statements. E only depends on the second statement and the first does not provide any informations relevant to conclude E

C on the other hand is a conclusion that depends on both statements:

(Please excuse my english, these are not formal logic procedures but they provide a general idea)
Lets suppose real tax payers are public employees
Supposition: x is a real tax payer <-> x is a public employee
Taxes are abolished -> y is a real tax payer ^ y has its disposable income increased
Taxes are abolished -> z is a public employee ^ z has its income dessapear
Lets take the person A, A is a real tax payer
Taxes are abolished then:
A is a real tax payer ^ A has its disposable income increased
A is a public employee ^ A has its disposable income increased
But also
A is a public employee ^ A has its income dessapear
So A has its disposable income increased ^ A has its income dessapear

Since we reached a contradiction we conclude that real tax payers cannot be public employees since disposable income cannot increase if the income dissapears.

We reach a contradiction that depend on both statements to proof. Answer E is also right, but it is not what the question is asking, be careful with tricky questions.

RegardsRegards