NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 15:55 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 15:55
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing

User avatar
imaru
Manager
Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 88
Own Kudos [?]: 1200 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 08:42
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (04:11) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 5 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing government debt. The government's stockpile of helium is worth 25 percent more, at current market prices, than the debt accumulated in acquiring and storing it. Therefore, by selling helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argement depends?

a. The government has no current need for helium.

b. 25 percent of the debt the government has accumulated in stockpiling helium is not an insignificant portion of the government's total debt.

c. It is not in the lawmaker's interest to advocate raising taxes as a means of reducing government debt.

d. Attempts to sell the government's helium will not depress the market price of helium by more than 25 percent.

e. The government will not incur any costs in closing its facilities for stockpiling helium.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
User avatar
dwivedys
Director
Director
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 603
Own Kudos [?]: 673 [0]
Given Kudos: 17
Concentration: Strategy
Schools:Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
 Q48  V33 GMAT 2: 670  Q46  V36 GMAT 3: 720  Q49  V40
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 09:06
Is it B? I think by negation we can see that if the money earned by selling Helium is not a significant portion of the overall debt then the claim that the overall debt will be reduced falls apart.
User avatar
mailtheguru
Manager
Manager
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 187
Own Kudos [?]: 82 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Phoenix AZ
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 09:46
imaru wrote:
Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing government debt. The government's stockpile of helium is worth 25 percent more, at current market prices, than the debt accumulated in acquiring and storing it. Therefore, by selling helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argement depends?

a. The government has no current need for helium.

b. 25 percent of the debt the government has accumulated in stockpiling helium is not an insignificant portion of the government's total debt.

c. It is not in the lawmaker's interest to advocate raising taxes as a means of reducing government debt.

d. Attempts to sell the government's helium will not depress the market price of helium by more than 25 percent.

e. The government will not incur any costs in closing its facilities for stockpiling helium.


I am going with C. If C were not true, then the passage is meaningless.
User avatar
imaru
Manager
Manager
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 88
Own Kudos [?]: 1200 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 09:47
OA is D, but i dunno why... can anyone explain?
User avatar
dwivedys
Director
Director
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 603
Own Kudos [?]: 673 [0]
Given Kudos: 17
Concentration: Strategy
Schools:Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
 Q48  V33 GMAT 2: 670  Q46  V36 GMAT 3: 720  Q49  V40
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 10:08
imaru wrote:
OA is D, but i dunno why... can anyone explain?


I have to recant my earlier stmt about B. B is actually stated in the argument.

D is correct because if due to bulk selling the price of helium is depressed the govt can't make that much money and the argument falls..it HAS to rely on the assumption that the sale will bring in the money AT THE CURRENT MARKET PRICE.

Guru I see your predicament. I did get confused with this choice as well, but the point is that raising taxes is stated in the very first line and is then not mentioned; hence actually we don't have enough information to conclude this from the passage though it's a very cleverly crafted choice. The thrust of the passage changes course from raising taxes to the helium stockpile.
User avatar
aryanb
Intern
Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 10:12
imaru wrote:
Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing government debt. The government's stockpile of helium is worth 25 percent more, at current market prices, than the debt accumulated in acquiring and storing it. Therefore, by selling helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argement depends?

a. The government has no current need for helium.

b. 25 percent of the debt the government has accumulated in stockpiling helium is not an insignificant portion of the government's total debt.

c. It is not in the lawmaker's interest to advocate raising taxes as a means of reducing government debt.

d. Attempts to sell the government's helium will not depress the market price of helium by more than 25 percent.

e. The government will not incur any costs in closing its facilities for stockpiling helium.


The conclusion of the lawmakers statement is that the overall debt of the nation can be reduced by selling of the helium.

The fact that present market value of the stored helium is 25% higher is the evidence presented.

The first part of the stimuli - Raising taxes .... its a consideration raised and is not the conlclusion. If one treats this as the conclusion, then subsequent evidence is int he opposite direction of the argument since reduction in the national debt by selling of helium will not necessitate the increase in tax as well. Hence C is wrong.

a and e are totally irrelevant to the conclusion.

d is right because, applying negaton it would prove that the national debt will not be reduced.

b is a possible inference, but is not the underlying assumption. There will be a reduction in national debt, irrespective of significance of the portion that will be reduced.

Hence d.
User avatar
B
pelihu
SVP
SVP
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 2209
Own Kudos [?]: 520 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Schools:Darden
 Q50  V51
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 10:28
I do not have a guess for this question. My response is that the question does not make sense. Consider this:

1. Raising taxes is the only means of reducing the governmet's debt.
2. By selling helium, the government can...reduce its overall debt.

Those two sentences cannot both be true, yet the passage makes no commentary on the conflict between the two statements. The answer choices are ambiguous as well.

This question didn't come from the OG did it?
User avatar
old_dream_1976
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 134
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 12:17
logic for D is not completely true.

what if the 25% becomes 18% because of increase in supply in the open market.

Still the debt may reduce. there is nothing that says 25%is the threshold limit below which the arguement falls apart.


what is the source please?
User avatar
ghantark
Manager
Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 53
Own Kudos [?]: 67 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 22:45
old_dream_1976 wrote:
logic for D is not completely true.

what if the 25% becomes 18% because of increase in supply in the open market.

Still the debt may reduce. there is nothing that says 25%is the threshold limit below which the arguement falls apart.


what is the source please?


IMO D
If 25% becomes 18% the statment holds good, because "price of helium by more than 25 percent" That means the price of helium is not going fall by more than 25%. In which case it will be better-off storing than selling.
User avatar
Futuristic
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
Own Kudos [?]: 48 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
 Q49  V41
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2006, 23:34
I think this is a straight D.

Let debt = 100 x
Then sale price of helium = 125x

If we are to make some profit selling it, then we have to sell it at 100x or more. Now lets assume that D is incorrect. Then :

attempts to sell the government's helium will depress the market price of helium by more than 25%. which means that the sale price will be 3/4 of 125x or less than 100x, implying a loss.
User avatar
ps_dahiya
VP
VP
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 1490
Own Kudos [?]: 1133 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
Schools:Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
 Q50  V34
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   06 Aug 2006, 00:13
I can't digest D.

I think this should be B.

Argument says:
Govt should sell helium to reduce debt but even after selling the helium govt has to raise the taxes to reduce overall debt.

Negate B: If debt accumulated in stockpiling helium is a big portion of total debt then their is no need to raise taxes. Argument falls apart.

Negate D: If selling helium in bulk will depress the market then it means this will not be an effective mean of reducing the overall debt. Hence we have to raise taxes. Supporting the argument.
User avatar
Futuristic
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 418
Own Kudos [?]: 48 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
 Q49  V41
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   06 Aug 2006, 14:46
ps_dahiya wrote:
I can't digest D.

I think this should be B.

Argument says:
Govt should sell helium to reduce debt but even after selling the helium govt has to raise the taxes to reduce overall debt.

Negate B: If debt accumulated in stockpiling helium is a big portion of total debt then their is no need to raise taxes. Argument falls apart.

Negate D: If selling helium in bulk will depress the market then it means this will not be an effective mean of reducing the overall debt. Hence we have to raise taxes. Supporting the argument.


By supporting the argument, we must support the conclusion:
"by selling helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well"

Assume B is false. Then 25% of the debt is an insignificant portion of the overall debt. Even if it is insignificant, it will still help reduce the overall debt, even if marginally. So the conclusion still holds.

Assume D is false. The sale of helium brings no profits. The debt is not reduced at all. Conclusion is broken.
User avatar
jaynayak
Director
Director
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 896
Own Kudos [?]: 593 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink] New post   07 Aug 2006, 00:08
I think this is one of the GMAT question types where they test one thing only. I have seen so many questions like these that ....... if I go with intution, the answer will be D everytime.

But logically we can argue on many options.

The premise is the stockpile of helium is worth a lot to reduce the debt considering the market prices.

Now if the sale of the helium brings it price down, then the argument presented by the lawmaker doesnot stand. The prices will not be at the same level that it could reduce the debt.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Lawmaker: Raising taxes is the the only means of reducing [#permalink]
07 Aug 2006, 00:08
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions