Kurtosis wrote:
City Financial Manager: While the city budget for children’s programs continues to rise, children make up a markedly smaller percentage of our population compared to ten and twenty years ago. Given that fact, fewer programs for children are necessary and we can consequently cut expenditures for such programs.
Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Without budget cuts, the city will be unable to maintain its current level of services.
They just want to reduce the budget that doesn't mean they are low on budget that's an oversimplification
(B) The city’s population has not declined sharply over the past two decades.
It might have declined or increased where are more concerned about the composition than total change
(C) Children’s programs are an important factor in the decisions of families that consider moving to the city.
This is thoroughly out of context and doesn't imoact the passage the slightest therefore out
(D) There has not been a significant increase in the number of adults living in the city.
If the adult population increases significantly then the child population will be drastically affected therefore the assumption is valid therefore let us hang on to it
(E) Many of the children’s programs in the city are underutilized by the current population.
This doesn't imoact the passage the slightest therefore out
Therefore IMO D