Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2011:00 AM EST
-11:59 PM EST
Don’t miss Target Test Prep’s biggest sale of the year! Grab 25% off any Target Test Prep GMAT plan during our Black Friday sale. Just enter the coupon code BLACKFRIDAY25 at checkout to save up to $625.
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
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.
Nov 2206:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Let’s dive deep into advanced CR to ace GMAT Focus! Join this webinar to unlock the secrets to conquering Boldface and Paradox questions with expert insights and strategies. Elevate your skills and boost your GMAT Verbal Score now!
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
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- Nov 22
12:00 PM PST
-12:30 PM PST
olve GRE practice problems covering Quantitative reasoning, Verbal Reasoning, Text Completion, Sentence Equivalence, and Reading Comprehension Problems. Take this GRE practice quiz live with peers, analyze your GRE study progress, - Nov 23
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions. - Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 3010:00 AM EST
-11:59 PM EST
Get $325 off the TTP OnDemand GMAT masterclass by using the coupon code BLACKFRIDAY25 at checkout. If you prefer learning through engaging video lessons, TTP OnDemand GMAT is exactly what you need.
14 May 2005, 05:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Please explain what we are trying to refute.
Vorland’s government is planning a nationwide ban on smoking in restaurants. The objection that the ban would reduce restaurants’ revenues is ill founded. Several towns in Vorland enacted restaurant smoking restrictions five years ago. Since then, the amount the government collects in restaurant meal taxes in those towns has increased 34 percent, on average, but only 26 percent elsewhere in Vorland. The amount collected in restaurant meal taxes closely reflects restaurants’ revenues.
Which of the following, if true, most undermines the defense of the government’s plan?
A. When the state first imposed a restaurant meal tax, opponents predicted that restaurants’ revenues would decline as a result, a prediction that proved to be correct in the short term.
B. The tax on meals in restaurants is higher than the tax on many other goods and services.
C. Over the last five years, smoking has steadily declined throughout Vorland.
D. In many of the towns that restrict smoking in restaurants, restaurants can maintain separate dining areas where smoking is permitted.
E. Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions.
Vorland’s government is planning a nationwide ban on smoking in restaurants. The objection that the ban would reduce restaurants’ revenues is ill founded. Several towns in Vorland enacted restaurant smoking restrictions five years ago. Since then, the amount the government collects in restaurant meal taxes in those towns has increased 34 percent, on average, but only 26 percent elsewhere in Vorland. The amount collected in restaurant meal taxes closely reflects restaurants’ revenues.
Which of the following, if true, most undermines the defense of the government’s plan?
A. When the state first imposed a restaurant meal tax, opponents predicted that restaurants’ revenues would decline as a result, a prediction that proved to be correct in the short term.
B. The tax on meals in restaurants is higher than the tax on many other goods and services.
C. Over the last five years, smoking has steadily declined throughout Vorland.
D. In many of the towns that restrict smoking in restaurants, restaurants can maintain separate dining areas where smoking is permitted.
E. Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions.
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!
14 May 2005, 06:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
E. Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions.
This proves that restriction/lack of restriction has no impact on revenue, hence it undermines the original defense that tax revenue will go up when restriction is imposed.
This proves that restriction/lack of restriction has no impact on revenue, hence it undermines the original defense that tax revenue will go up when restriction is imposed.
14 May 2005, 11:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
(D) for me. I easily eliminated (E). I may be wrong, but here are my thoughts:
The argument says that the govt gets more money (revenue) in those restaurants in vorland where smoking is banned and this, IMO, is what we should target to undermine/refute.
(E) says that govt rev. from sales tax have been equal, ban or no ban. This does not directly undermine the argument above.
(D) however, seems to do so because it gives us a probable reason why the revenues generated in those areas are higher. maybe more people go to these restaurants since they are allowed to smoke in a separate room.
The argument says that the govt gets more money (revenue) in those restaurants in vorland where smoking is banned and this, IMO, is what we should target to undermine/refute.
(E) says that govt rev. from sales tax have been equal, ban or no ban. This does not directly undermine the argument above.
(D) however, seems to do so because it gives us a probable reason why the revenues generated in those areas are higher. maybe more people go to these restaurants since they are allowed to smoke in a separate room.
