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:
While Governor Verdant has been in office, the state s [#permalink]
14 Dec 2010, 14:16
This post received KUDOS
21% (01:50) correct
79% (01:46) wrong based on 20 sessions
HideShow timer Statictics
While Governor Verdant has been in office, the state’s budget has increased by an average of 6 percent each year. While the previous governor was in office, the state’s budget increased by an average of 11.5 percent each year. Obviously, the austere budgets during Governor Verdant’s term have caused the slowdown in the growth in state spending. Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn above? (A) The rate of inflation in the state averaged 10 percent each year during the previous governor’s term in office and 3 percent each year during Verdant’s term. (B) Both federal and state income tax rates have been lowered considerably during Verdant’s term in office. (C) In each year of Verdant’s term in office, the state’s budget has shown some increase in spending over the previous year. (D) During Verdant’s term in office, the state has either discontinued or begun to charge private citizens for numerous services that the state offered free to citizens during the previous governor’s term. (E) During the previous governor’s term in office, the state introduced several so-called “austerity” budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending. SOURCE:MisterEko's collection of LSAT GMAT CR
this is quite straightforward A . the fall in inflation explains reduced spending by the latter governer,implying the budgets were not necessarily austere.
E states ' During the previous governor’s term in office, the state introduced several so-called “austerity” budgets intended to reduce the growth in state spending'
we are only interested in weakening the conclusion that the austere budgets by the new governor verdant are not the reason for slowdown of growth in state spending.
A provides a clear alternative cause for the slowdown of growth in state spending i.e. fall in inflation rate. less inflation-> cheaper commodities->less spending ->slowdown in spending.
austerity budgets were ineffective during previous governors term do not mean they will always be ineffective , there could be an alternate cause for their ineffectiveness during that time, which may not be present currently. so you can not state that austere budgets were ineffective once as an experiment , so they will always be ineffective hence E. _________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
No reasoning gap in the argument hence a requirement of defender answer choice here.
A and C basically mans the same however, A brings a third party element the inflation.As inflation is 10% for previous term the net increase in spending is just 1.5% However, the net increase in V's term is 3% each year. Thus opposing the trend mentioned in the argument.