Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on

(E) appears to have a typo ("rewarding" instead of "rewording"). If someone sees this question in the software, please check to see if there are any other mistakes!


"The first is a claim that the argument accepts with certain reservations" - This would mean that the author accepts the claim but has some doubts about it. This is not the case. The author does not express any doubt about this claim, saying, "the critics are correct on this point." So the first part of (E) is off.

"the second presents that claim in a rewording that is not subject to those reservations" - This would mean that the second BF is essentially the same claim as the first BF but reworded so that it is not subject to the same doubts. But the first pertains to current sales, and the second is a prediction about future sales. So the two BF portions do not present the same claim at all.

The first half of (E) is definitely not right, so the second half of (E) makes no sense.

"the second is a prediction that, if accurate, undermines the force of that objection."

is equivalent to

"the second is a prediction that, if accurate, weakens the objection."

I would go for A

the reason I think D isn;t correct because its not the main point used by arguement.. main point used by an arguement to prove itself is something that supports it.. the second BF is itself a conclusion..

wats the OA

The bold face arguments are tricky. First need to know the conclusion of the argument and how the bold face arguments relates to the conclusion.

Conclusion: (2 nd bold face argument: In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially.
First bold face argument is an objection that points out new plan won’t generate same amount as old plan.

In the argument given, the two potions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first is an objection that has been raised against a certain plan; the second is a prediction that, if accurate, undermines the force of that objection. [First: is Criticism, Second: Actual Conclusion – Hold it]

B. The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is a point the argument makes in favor of adopting an alternative plan. [First: is Criticism, Second: Actual Conclusion – Eliminate it]

C. The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is the main reason cited by the argument for its endorsement of the criticism. [First: is Criticism, Second: Actual Conclusion – Eliminate it]


D. The first is a claim that the argument seeks to refute; the second is the main point used by the argument to show that the claim is false. [First: is Criticism, Second: Actual Conclusion – Eliminate it]

E. The first is a claim that the argument accepts with certain reservations; the second presents that claim in a rewarding that is not subject to those reservations. [First: is Criticism, Second: Actual Conclusion – Eliminate it]

Answer: A

Very nice work, aragonn! I'll throw in my two cents, just in case it's useful at all.


Let's be very clear about what the author is saying:

• BF1 is a claim made by critics.
• Immediately after BF1, the author writes, "The critics are correct on this point." The author accepts this particular claim without denial or hesitation.

Now lets' be clear about what (D) is saying:

• Is the author refuting BF1? Absolutely not. The author says outright that BF1 is correct.
• Since the first half of this answer choice is wrong, we can eliminate this choice and move on.

I hope this explanation is more than three percent helpful! (Yeah... I'm practicing my dad jokes.)

Hi deepverma,

The conclusion of the author's argument is that implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools. The author accepts BF1 outright, then predicts that because retail sales will increase substantially, the proportional shortfall described in BF1 will not result in an absolute reduction in school funds. The author's argument doesn't depend on refuting BF1; it depends on whether this prediction of increased retail sales will come true.

In other words, we can infer that the critics believe that implementing the plan will probably reduce the money going to Aroca's schools. The author is certainly trying to refute that implied conclusion. However, the author does NOT refute the claim made in the first BF.

I hope this helps clarifies why we should eliminate (D)!

I would say no.

Endorse means express approval. A single line The critics are correct on this point does not mean that the argument endorses this point.

At best, the argument accepts this fact as true but immediately proposes a counter-argument (retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially) that offsets the point made by the critics.

adkikani, I think you and VeritasPrepKarishma are saying nearly the same thing.

• You claim that Rob stole money from a bank.
• I raise an objection to that claim.
• If you then undermine the force of my objection, then you are weakening the force of my objection.

As the always-sharp VeritasPrepKarishma wisely suggested, this means that you are weakening my objection. You might not have any evidence that Rob actually stole money from the bank, but you've at least succeeded in defending your point of view against my criticism.

Let us know if it's still unclear!

Hi Experts / GMATNinja / VeritasPrepKarishma,

Can you please explain why D is wrong here? I read the entire thread but can't find a convincing answer. I have doubts on both parts of D. For BF1 - seems okay since the argument is refuting that the three percent falls short of the amount raised. I am not sure what's wrong with the second boldface. Please advise. Thanks!

Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property. ---- Fact
In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city.--- proposal
1. Critics protest that 3 percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes. --- opinion
The critics are correct on this point. --- Someone saying above opinion is correct.
Nevertheless --- something contradictory coming.
implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca’s schools. --- contradiction to someone, as rest evidence given for this choice, this is the main conclusion
Several large retailers have selected Aroca City as the site for huge new stores, ---- Fact
and these are certain to draw large numbers of shoppers from neighboring municipalities, --- prediction
where sales are taxed at rates of six percent and more. --- fact
2.In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially. ---- prediction/ a conclusion

Final verdict:(A) The first presents a plan that the argument concludes is unlikely to achieve its goal; the second expresses that conclusion.

Straight, I have eliminated C, D, E. Well 2nd part is a conclusion and not presenting an evidence.

Check out this example:

"It's probably not going to rain today. Nevertheless, I will pack an umbrella just to be safe." - The word "nevertheless" doesn't "refute" the previous statement. I still believe that it's probably not going to rain. In spite of that belief, I'm still going to pack an umbrella.

Back to the passage: the author does NOT refute that the critics are correct. But in spite of the fact that the critic are correct, the author still believes that implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's school.

Bottom line: the author does not refute anything by using the word "nevertheless". I hope that helps!

It depends on exactly what is asked -
'main point of the argument' - is the conclusion of the argument
'main point to show the claim is false' - The conclusion will likely be 'the claim is false'. The 'main point' here would be the premise given to support that the claim is false.

In a passage of this type, we need to be clear about what are facts and what are opinions. From the same facts, different people may come to different conclusions. Conclusions, inferences, criticisms, predictions, and assumptions are all opinions.


Fact 1:
"Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property."

City's Plan:
"In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city."
This system = public schools are funded by property taxes (from Fact 1, the previous sentence)
Planned system: public schools will be funded by a new 3% sales tax

Fact 2:
"three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes."

Critics Opinion:
- "Critics protest" (because of Fact 2: 3% of current sales is less than what schools receive from property taxes)
- Unstated Inference from critics: the city's plan won't work

Author's Opinions:
"The critics are correct on this point"
Here THIS POINT is only Fact 2 as stated in the previous sentence: current sales are not high enough. The author accepts that Fact 2 is true. He may not share the critics' opinion about the plan.

"Nevertheless, implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools."
So the author does not agree with the objection from the critics. He thinks that school funding will probably not reduce. (But how?? Read on... Hint, future sales may not be the same as current sales)

Fact 3:
"Several large retailers have selected Aroca City as the site for huge new stores"

Author's Opinions (continued)
"and these are certain to draw large numbers of shoppers from neighboring municipalities, ..."
This is a prediction from the author. Here THESE are the huge new stores that are expected (from Fact 3).

"In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially".
This is another prediction from the author. Now we understand why the author does not agree with the critics.


Once we have done this careful reading, the role of each boldface is clear, and we will not take much time to choose the right answer.

BF-1 is a fact (Fact 2), and everyone accepts the fact. The critics presented BF-1 to support their objection to the plan. The author accepts the fact but he does not agree with their objection.
BF-2 is part of the author's explanation of why he does not agree with the objection.

Posted from my mobile device

VeritasPrepKarishma



Does not - to undermine - means to weaken?

The force of objection means simply the strength by which a claim is countered to be true

Eg: I undermine the force of objection that Rob stole money from bank.

Is not this is a classic case of double negation?

Eg: I support the fact that Rob stole money from bank.

It is not a double negative - it is just a weakener

The first is an objection. The second undermines (weakens) that objection (another word for the first bold statement).

Hi!
Can someone explain what option E is trying to state?
I was stuck between A and E, E i couldnt understand the second part hence i eliminated E and went with A

Answer choice (A) includes the words "if accurate" because it identifies the second boldface portion of the passage as a prediction, or something that is expected to happen in the future.

Let's look at the wording from the passage: "retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially." Even though the sentence is written in the present tense, the author is arguing that the actual increase of retail sales will occur in the future. Therefore, the statement is a prediction -- which introduces more doubt than would a statement of current fact. This prediction would only undermine the objection to the plan if it turns out to be accurate, which is why that language is included in the answer choice.

I hope that helps!