|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 272
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are [#permalink]
02 Feb 2007, 08:56
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are subsidized by city tax revenues, but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the service.
Each of the following, if true, would weaken the argument advanced by the city councilors EXCEPT:
(A) Many businesses whose presence in the city is beneficial to the city’s taxpayers would relocate outside the city if public-transit fare were more expensive.
(B) By providing commuters with economic incentives to drive to work, higher transit fares would worsen air pollution in Greenville and increase the cost of maintaining the city’s streets.
(C) Increasing transit fares would disadvantage those residents of the city whose low incomes make them exempt from city taxes, and all city councilors agree that these residents should be able to take advantage of city-run services.
(D) Voters in the city, many of whom benefit from the low transit fares, are strongly opposed to increasing local taxes.
(E) People who work in Greenville and earn wages above the nationally mandated minimum all pay the city wage tax of 5 percent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1560
Location: Ann Arbor
Schools: Ross '10
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
155
[0], given: 1
|
Clear D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 66
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
D..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Location: Boston, MA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
AK47 wrote: fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are subsidized by city tax revenues, but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the service. Each of the following, if true, would weaken the argument advanced by the city councilors EXCEPT: (A) Many businesses whose presence in the city is beneficial to the city’s taxpayers would relocate outside the city if public-transit fare were more expensive. (B) By providing commuters with economic incentives to drive to work, higher transit fares would worsen air pollution in Greenville and increase the cost of maintaining the city’s streets. (C) Increasing transit fares would disadvantage those residents of the city whose low incomes make them exempt from city taxes, and all city councilors agree that these residents should be able to take advantage of city-run services. (D) Voters in the city, many of whom benefit from the low transit fares, are strongly opposed to increasing local taxes. (E) People who work in Greenville and earn wages above the nationally mandated minimum all pay the city wage tax of 5 percent.
A. Weakens the argument by saying that the taxpayers actually DO benefit from subsidizing the fares, because if they didnt, local businesses would leave the town.
B-not necessarily a disadvantage to taxpayers
C-non tax payers are Out of scope
D-so what? this doesnt affect whether increased fares will actually benefit tax payers.
E-Irrelevant
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1560
Location: Ann Arbor
Schools: Ross '10
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
155
[0], given: 1
|
buckkitty wrote: AK47 wrote: fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are subsidized by city tax revenues, but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the service. Each of the following, if true, would weaken the argument advanced by the city councilors EXCEPT: (A) Many businesses whose presence in the city is beneficial to the city’s taxpayers would relocate outside the city if public-transit fare were more expensive. (B) By providing commuters with economic incentives to drive to work, higher transit fares would worsen air pollution in Greenville and increase the cost of maintaining the city’s streets. (C) Increasing transit fares would disadvantage those residents of the city whose low incomes make them exempt from city taxes, and all city councilors agree that these residents should be able to take advantage of city-run services. (D) Voters in the city, many of whom benefit from the low transit fares, are strongly opposed to increasing local taxes. (E) People who work in Greenville and earn wages above the nationally mandated minimum all pay the city wage tax of 5 percent. A. Weakens the argument by saying that the taxpayers actually DO benefit from subsidizing the fares, because if they didnt, local businesses would leave the town. B-not necessarily a disadvantage to taxpayers C-non tax payers are Out of scope D-so what? this doesnt affect whether increased fares will actually benefit tax payers. E-Irrelevant
Careful:This is an EXCEPT question.
A, B, C and E all weaken the conclusion.
B - Weakens the argument by showing that the increased fare will result in increased maintenance costs.
C - Weakens the argument by showing that a section of the public is adversely affected.
E - Weakens the argument by showing that even people who commute from outside the city contribute to taxes. This directly attacks the justification for the fare increase by nullifying the following portion of the argument.
but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the
As you said, D doesn't weaken the argument. Thats why D is the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Affiliations: FRM Charter holder
Joined: 02 Dec 2006
Posts: 737
Schools: Stanford, Chicago Booth, Babson College
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 4
|
good question. One more D. The word "all" in E is hidden very intelligently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 367
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
one more D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Post MBA, working in the area of Development Finance
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 169
Location: Africa
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 1
|
ncprasad wrote: buckkitty wrote: AK47 wrote: fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are subsidized by city tax revenues, but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the service. Each of the following, if true, would weaken the argument advanced by the city councilors EXCEPT: (A) Many businesses whose presence in the city is beneficial to the city’s taxpayers would relocate outside the city if public-transit fare were more expensive. (B) By providing commuters with economic incentives to drive to work, higher transit fares would worsen air pollution in Greenville and increase the cost of maintaining the city’s streets. (C) Increasing transit fares would disadvantage those residents of the city whose low incomes make them exempt from city taxes, and all city councilors agree that these residents should be able to take advantage of city-run services. (D) Voters in the city, many of whom benefit from the low transit fares, are strongly opposed to increasing local taxes. (E) People who work in Greenville and earn wages above the nationally mandated minimum all pay the city wage tax of 5 percent. A. Weakens the argument by saying that the taxpayers actually DO benefit from subsidizing the fares, because if they didnt, local businesses would leave the town. B-not necessarily a disadvantage to taxpayers C-non tax payers are Out of scope D-so what? this doesnt affect whether increased fares will actually benefit tax payers. E-Irrelevant Careful:This is an EXCEPT question. A, B, C and E all weaken the conclusion. B - Weakens the argument by showing that the increased fare will result in increased maintenance costs. C - Weakens the argument by showing that a section of the public is adversely affected. E - Weakens the argument by showing that even people who commute from outside the city contribute to taxes. This directly attacks the justification for the fare increase by nullifying the following portion of the argument. but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the As you said, D doesn't weaken the argument. Thats why D is the answer.
Will 'weakens except' imply 'strengthens'. If so, statement D does not strengthen, does it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1560
Location: Ann Arbor
Schools: Ross '10
Followers: 12
Kudos [?]:
155
[0], given: 1
|
No. The correct answer in a weakens except question does not need to strengthen. In EXCEPT questions, we want to find a logically opposite answer.
The logical opposite of Weaken is not necessarily 'Strengthen'
The logical opposite is 'Not Weaken'.
Similarly, in 'Strengthen Except' questions, the correct answer does not need to Weaken the argument. A neutral answer that neither strenghtens nor weakens the argument is also a valid candidate.
Last edited by ncp on 03 Feb 2007, 09:14, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 272
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
oa is D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 395
Location: Boston, MA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
ncprasad wrote: buckkitty wrote: AK47 wrote: fares on the city-run public buses in Greenville are subsidized by city tax revenues, but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the service. Each of the following, if true, would weaken the argument advanced by the city councilors EXCEPT: (A) Many businesses whose presence in the city is beneficial to the city’s taxpayers would relocate outside the city if public-transit fare were more expensive. (B) By providing commuters with economic incentives to drive to work, higher transit fares would worsen air pollution in Greenville and increase the cost of maintaining the city’s streets. (C) Increasing transit fares would disadvantage those residents of the city whose low incomes make them exempt from city taxes, and all city councilors agree that these residents should be able to take advantage of city-run services. (D) Voters in the city, many of whom benefit from the low transit fares, are strongly opposed to increasing local taxes. (E) People who work in Greenville and earn wages above the nationally mandated minimum all pay the city wage tax of 5 percent. A. Weakens the argument by saying that the taxpayers actually DO benefit from subsidizing the fares, because if they didnt, local businesses would leave the town. B-not necessarily a disadvantage to taxpayers C-non tax payers are Out of scope D-so what? this doesnt affect whether increased fares will actually benefit tax payers. E-Irrelevant Careful:This is an EXCEPT question. A, B, C and E all weaken the conclusion. B - Weakens the argument by showing that the increased fare will result in increased maintenance costs. C - Weakens the argument by showing that a section of the public is adversely affected. E - Weakens the argument by showing that even people who commute from outside the city contribute to taxes. This directly attacks the justification for the fare increase by nullifying the following portion of the argument. but among the beneficiaries of the low fares are many people who commute from outside the city to jobs in Greenville. Some city councilors argue that city taxes should be used primarily to benefit the people who pay them, and therefore that bus fares should be raised enough to cover the cost of the As you said, D doesn't weaken the argument. Thats why D is the answer.
Doh! I need to read more carefully. Definitely D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Aug 2005
Posts: 418
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
Late but D...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 245
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
'D'
Voters of the city are willing to pay higher bus fare but against increasing city taxes, which is aligned with the proposal of council members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 37
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Late D.
I want to add to the discussion that the answer could be E too.
The passage doesn’t say that commuters’ salaries are above nationally mandated minimum. It’s possible that they all work on the same factory and earn minimum salary.
On contrary, the passage doesn’t say that taxes need to be increased in order to continue to support low bus fares. So D is not that obvious choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 328
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
Another D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|