Doubling the cost of public transportation to compensate for

Question

Doubling the cost of public transportation to compensate for money lost by declining ridership would be disastrous. The greater expense would only further discourage commuters who are already dissatisfied with the poor condition of buses and trains. If the fares are increased, many commuters will choose to drive their cars instead, causing pollution and traffic congestion. As a result, the city will lose money and become even more noisy and smog-filled than it is now.

Which of the following is an assumption made in advancing the argument above?

Commuters who decide to drive instead of using public transportation will not share rides with one another.
 Commuters will not park their cars in garages and thereby spend more money than they would by using buses or trains.
 The condition of public transportation will not improve as a result of the fare increase.
 Commuters who use their own cars currently outnumber those who use buses and trains.
 A significant number of people who now use public transportation have cars or can easily obtain them.

BlueRobin · Answer

Ans C.

The main conclusion is that

If the fare increase is used to improve train conditions then the move would not be disastrous.

Initially, I assumed that the answer is E, but E is already implied in the question . So E is just repeating what is mentioned in the passage.

crick20002002 · Answer

E for me.

E may be implied , but it is still not explicitly stated.

Crick

zuberahmed · Answer

I will go with E. What is the OA?

rohitgoel15 · Answer

Should be E. OA pls

mojorising800 · Answer

IMO answer should be C.
Negating C disproves the main conclusion of teh4 argument. 
Main Conclusion: Doubling the cost of public transportation to compensate for money lost by declining ridership would be disastrous
OA plz

bschool83 · Answer

Here's my explanation.

Conclusion: Doubling the cost of PT would be bad because it will lead to decreased revenues and increased traffic and pollution.
Evidence: Riders are already upset with poor condition of the buses and trains. They will switch to driving their own cars.

Answer choice C is a trap. It is mentioned that the riders are upset with poor condition of the buses. Hence, it can be inferred that improving the condition may make them satisfied, but it is not known if they will remain satisfied after increasing the fare. Therefore wrong choice.

E is the correct choice and OA. If riders do not have access to cars, they will not be able to contribute to increased traffic and pollution.

fluke · Answer

These options are better suited for AssumptionX question type with "D" as the answer.

sudhir18n · Answer

I go with E.

micr0c0sm · Answer

I'll be outside the norm and pick A. We need to advance the argument. Without this assumption, we could potentially have less traffic on the road if commuters creatively carpooled.  And as a result, we'd have lesser pollution and a weaker argument.

As the other person says, C is a trap. Even if conditions improved with the added income of funds, the high fare is still a deterrent to commuters.

LifeChanger · Answer

i'll go with E..the author assumes that people have cars

Chetangupta · Answer

Argument is that dissatisfied commuters will use will choose to drive their cars instead, causing XYZ.

if the commuters dont have cars, this can not take place- E is the answer

anordinaryguy · Answer

Although argument talks about the poor conditions of public transportation, conclusion is about the riders who would start using their personal conveyance instead of public transport if there is any price rise.
This question clearly assumes that people who travel by public transport also posses personals vehicles.

I'll go with 'E'

DYNAMITE · Answer

E. We are clearly implicitly assuming that people HAVE the option of changing over to cars.

nishtil · Answer

The answer should be E as this assumption if negated the conclusion will fail. hence E

bschool83 · Answer

Commuters who decide to drive instead of using public transportation will not share rides with one another. IRRELEVANT
Commuters will not park their cars in garages and thereby spend more money than they would by using buses or trains. OUT OF SCOPE
The condition of public transportation will not improve as a result of the fare increase. DISTORTION
Commuters who use their own cars currently outnumber those who use buses and trains. IRRELEVANT
A significant number of people who now use public transportation have cars or can easily obtain them. CORRECT

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Doubling the cost of public transportation to compensate for

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards