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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
35%
(02:05)
correct 65%
(02:15)
wrong
based on 248
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The city council has decided to increase the sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent to generate additional revenue. The mayor argues that this increase is necessary because the revenue will be used to fund public education and healthcare, which are currently underfunded. Critics argue that the increase in the sales tax will disproportionately affect lower-income families, who spend a larger percentage of their income on taxable goods. However, supporters of the tax increase contend that the enhanced services in education and healthcare will ultimately benefit all residents, including lower-income families.
In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A) The first is a consideration that has been used to argue against a plan that the argument advocates; the second is a claim that the argument puts forward in support of the plan.
B) The first is evidence that the argument presents as a counterpoint to its own position; the second is the argument's conclusion.
C) The first is an objection that has been raised in response to a conclusion that the argument defends; the second is a rebuttal that further supports the conclusion.
D) The first is an assumption on which the argument depends; the second is a conclusion drawn from this assumption.
E) The first is a fact presented as support for an opposing position; the second is a hypothetical situation used to undermine the opposition.
This Question is Locked Due to Poor Quality
Hi there,
The question you've reached has been archived due to not meeting our community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Looking for better-quality questions? Check out the 'Similar Questions' block below
for a list of similar but high-quality questions.
Want to join other relevant Problem Solving discussions? Visit our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
for the most recent and top-quality discussions.
The conclusion is "The city council has decided to increase the sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent to generate additional revenue." Why? Because there is an argument that says, "the revenue will be used to fund public education and healthcare, which are currently underfunded." Therefore, the argument justifies the conclusion.
Now the critics are opposing this conclusion as it will affect lower-income families. So the first boldface is an objection to the conclusion, the conclusion that is being defended by the argument.
However, the second boldface is saying that, no, this will help all residents, including the lower-income families. So, sales tax shall be increased i.e. support the conclusion. Option (C) makes sense.
The conclusion is "The city council has decided to increase the sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent to generate additional revenue." Why? Because there is an argument that says, "the revenue will be used to fund public education and healthcare, which are currently underfunded." Therefore, the argument justifies the conclusion.
Now the critics are opposing this conclusion as it will affect lower-income families. So the first boldface is an objection to the conclusion, the conclusion that is being defended by the argument.
However, the second boldface is saying that, no, this will help all residents, including the lower-income families. So, sales tax shall be increased i.e. support the conclusion. Option (C) makes sense.
Hope this helps.
Show more
Nice explanation but : Can you help me get my head around it how the argument advocates for the increase in tax hikes. It seem to me that the author is neutral in the argument. The author neither agrees nor disagrees with any position.
The conclusion is "The city council has decided to increase the sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent to generate additional revenue." Why? Because there is an argument that says, "the revenue will be used to fund public education and healthcare, which are currently underfunded." Therefore, the argument justifies the conclusion.
Now the critics are opposing this conclusion as it will affect lower-income families. So the first boldface is an objection to the conclusion, the conclusion that is being defended by the argument.
However, the second boldface is saying that, no, this will help all residents, including the lower-income families. So, sales tax shall be increased i.e. support the conclusion. Option (C) makes sense.
Hope this helps.
Nice explanation but : Can you help me get my head around it how the argument advocates for the increase in tax hikes. It seem to me that the author is neutral in the argument. The author neither agrees nor disagrees with any position.
Posted from my mobile device
Show more
Sure Sazimordecai, see, the Mayor is arguing that "this increase is necessary because the revenue will be used to fund public education and healthcare, which are currently underfunded" so the mayor is advocating the tax increase. It is the mayor who bolsters the conclusion. The author's just narrates, right. Does it help?
Can you be more specific? Other have already gone over the answer, so let us know what aspect of the right answer is throwing you off, or what makes another answer look correct to you.
varunkeeja
i dont agree with the answer. please help me understand.
The conclusion of the argument is that the tax increase should happen, which is the mayor's stance in favor of it. So, the argument ultimately supports the tax increase as necessary for funding education and healthcare, even though critics oppose it due to concerns about its impact on lower-income families.
The argument presents the following key perspectives: Critics argue that the tax increase will disproportionately affect lower-income families. → This is an objection to the tax increase, as critics believe it will have negative effects. Supporters argue that the enhanced services in education and healthcare will ultimately benefit all residents, including lower-income families. → This is a rebuttal to the critics' objection. It counters the argument by suggesting that, despite the short-term burden, the long-term benefits will outweigh the drawbacks.
Option A says: "The first is a consideration that has been used to argue against a plan that the argument advocates; the second is a claim that the argument puts forward in support of the plan." The first part of A is correct: The first boldface portion is indeed a consideration that critics raise against the plan (the increase in tax). It's an objection to the tax increase. The second part of A is not fully correct: The second boldface portion is a claim used by the supporters to defend the tax increase (that better public services will benefit everyone, including lower-income families). The critical part where A doesn't fully align with the passage is in the context of "the argument" itself. A makes it seem like the argument (the passage) is directly advocating the tax increase and presenting these points as its own. However, the passage presents both sides neutrally, without outright advocating for the tax increase. The second boldface portion is supporting the increase, but it comes from supporters, not the argument itself.
Now, let's analyze option C: "The first is an objection that has been raised in response to a conclusion that the argument defends." ✅ Correct! The first boldface portion (critics’ argument) is an objection against the tax increase, which the argument ultimately supports. "The second is a rebuttal that further supports the conclusion." ✅ Correct! The second boldface portion (supporters’ argument) directly refutes the critics' claim and reinforces the argument that the tax increase is justified. Thus, C is the correct answer because it accurately describes the roles of the boldface statements as an objection and a rebuttal.
If you're saying that the argument presents both side neutrally and one of your reasons for eliminating A, then C is definitely incorrect because It clearly mentions that the argument defends a conclusion and the first boldface is raised to question that defence.
If the argument is defending one side, then it's definitely not neutral
Aashimabhatia
The conclusion of the argument is that the tax increase should happen, which is the mayor's stance in favor of it. So, the argument ultimately supports the tax increase as necessary for funding education and healthcare, even though critics oppose it due to concerns about its impact on lower-income families.
The argument presents the following key perspectives: Critics argue that the tax increase will disproportionately affect lower-income families. → This is an objection to the tax increase, as critics believe it will have negative effects. Supporters argue that the enhanced services in education and healthcare will ultimately benefit all residents, including lower-income families. → This is a rebuttal to the critics' objection. It counters the argument by suggesting that, despite the short-term burden, the long-term benefits will outweigh the drawbacks.
Option A says: "The first is a consideration that has been used to argue against a plan that the argument advocates; the second is a claim that the argument puts forward in support of the plan." The first part of A is correct: The first boldface portion is indeed a consideration that critics raise against the plan (the increase in tax). It's an objection to the tax increase. The second part of A is not fully correct: The second boldface portion is a claim used by the supporters to defend the tax increase (that better public services will benefit everyone, including lower-income families). The critical part where A doesn't fully align with the passage is in the context of "the argument" itself. A makes it seem like the argument (the passage) is directly advocating the tax increase and presenting these points as its own. However, the passage presents both sides neutrally, without outright advocating for the tax increase. The second boldface portion is supporting the increase, but it comes from supporters, not the argument itself.
Now, let's analyze option C: "The first is an objection that has been raised in response to a conclusion that the argument defends." ✅ Correct! The first boldface portion (critics’ argument) is an objection against the tax increase, which the argument ultimately supports. "The second is a rebuttal that further supports the conclusion." ✅ Correct! The second boldface portion (supporters’ argument) directly refutes the critics' claim and reinforces the argument that the tax increase is justified. Thus, C is the correct answer because it accurately describes the roles of the boldface statements as an objection and a rebuttal.
How is the argument defending something ? That was the reason why I eliminated C in the first place but not able to understand how C is correct answer
DmitryFarber
Can you be more specific? Other have already gone over the answer, so let us know what aspect of the right answer is throwing you off, or what makes another answer look correct to you.
varunkeeja
i dont agree with the answer. please help me understand.
Sorry, folks, I didn't look closely enough at this one before. This is definitely a flawed question. Each part of the paragraph describes a different perspective (city council, mayor, critics, supporters), and the author never actually supports a position of their own. That's common enough, but then the question stem would have to direct us toward whose perspective we are analyzing/strengthening/weakening. That doesn't really work on a role question, though, since the author never comes to a conclusion of their own for us to connect these positions to. Toss the whole thing out!
This Question is Locked Due to Poor Quality
Hi there,
The question you've reached has been archived due to not meeting our community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Looking for better-quality questions? Check out the 'Similar Questions' block below
for a list of similar but high-quality questions.
Want to join other relevant Problem Solving discussions? Visit our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
for the most recent and top-quality discussions.