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.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
25 Sep 2024, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
5%
(low)
Question Stats:
87% (01:33) correct
13%
(01:41)
wrong
based on 273
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Many states seek to reduce their budget deficits by cutting state funding for colleges and universities. However, many students who cannot afford the tuition increases resulting from the decreased state funding will not be able to earn a college education and, as a result, will not be able to move into higher paying careers. Consequently, the state will lose future income tax revenues.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?
A. Many states that have already reduced their funding for colleges and universities have seen declines in income tax revenues in the following years.
B. Many states that have not cut education funding have seen budget deficits grow larger.
C. States that do not cut their education funding sometimes also experience declines in tax revenues.
D. Cuts to colleges and universities affect two-year colleges and well as four-year colleges.
E. The size of the budget deficit is usually too great to be eliminated by reductions in higher education funding alone.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?
A. Many states that have already reduced their funding for colleges and universities have seen declines in income tax revenues in the following years.
B. Many states that have not cut education funding have seen budget deficits grow larger.
C. States that do not cut their education funding sometimes also experience declines in tax revenues.
D. Cuts to colleges and universities affect two-year colleges and well as four-year colleges.
E. The size of the budget deficit is usually too great to be eliminated by reductions in higher education funding alone.
This is a CR Butler Question
Check the links to other Butler Projects:
Check the links to other Butler Projects:
- Data Sufficiency Butler
- Problem Solving Butler
- Sentence Correction Butler
- Reading Comprehension Butler
- Integrated Reasoning Butler
25 Sep 2024, 04:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A) This directly supports the argument by providing evidence that states that reduced education funding experienced the predicted outcome: a decline in future income tax revenues. This confirms the negative economic consequences of cutting funding for higher education. CORRECT
(B) This weakens the argument by suggesting that maintaining education funding might not solve the budget deficit problem, but it doesn’t address the main concern about future tax revenues. INCORRECT
(C) This is irrelevant to the argument, as it discusses situations where funding is not cut but tax revenues still decline. It doesn’t address the impact of cutting education funding on tax revenues. INCORRECT
(D) This is a neutral statement. While it expands the scope of the problem, it does not strengthen the argument about the long-term economic impact of cutting education funding. INCORRECT
(E) This doesn’t strengthen the argument, as it focuses on the magnitude of the budget deficit, not on the specific consequences of cutting education funding. INCORRECT
Answer A.
(B) This weakens the argument by suggesting that maintaining education funding might not solve the budget deficit problem, but it doesn’t address the main concern about future tax revenues. INCORRECT
(C) This is irrelevant to the argument, as it discusses situations where funding is not cut but tax revenues still decline. It doesn’t address the impact of cutting education funding on tax revenues. INCORRECT
(D) This is a neutral statement. While it expands the scope of the problem, it does not strengthen the argument about the long-term economic impact of cutting education funding. INCORRECT
(E) This doesn’t strengthen the argument, as it focuses on the magnitude of the budget deficit, not on the specific consequences of cutting education funding. INCORRECT
Answer A.
25 Sep 2024, 09:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. We are given the argument that if "states seek to reduce their budget deficits by cutting state funding for colleges and universities", then as a consequence, "the state will lose future income tax revenues". Now we need a statement to strengthen this argument.
2. Many states that have already reduced their funding for colleges and universities have seen declines in income tax revenues in the following years. This is perfect since it mentions the action and that the consequence will happen. So, this statement does strengthen the argument.
3. Many states that have not cut education funding have seen budget deficits grow larger. Our argument talks about losing future income tax revenues, which isn't mentioned here. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
4. States that do not cut their education funding sometimes also experience declines in tax revenues. We are interested in rather the change that will happen if the states were to cut their education funding. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
5. Cuts to colleges and universities affect two-year colleges and well as four-year colleges. This is irrelevant since it doesn't discuss the impact in the future. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
6. The size of the budget deficit is usually too great to be eliminated by reductions in higher education funding alone. This statement is also irrelevant since it discusses how large the problem is and not about the consequence. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
2. Many states that have already reduced their funding for colleges and universities have seen declines in income tax revenues in the following years. This is perfect since it mentions the action and that the consequence will happen. So, this statement does strengthen the argument.
3. Many states that have not cut education funding have seen budget deficits grow larger. Our argument talks about losing future income tax revenues, which isn't mentioned here. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
4. States that do not cut their education funding sometimes also experience declines in tax revenues. We are interested in rather the change that will happen if the states were to cut their education funding. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
5. Cuts to colleges and universities affect two-year colleges and well as four-year colleges. This is irrelevant since it doesn't discuss the impact in the future. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
6. The size of the budget deficit is usually too great to be eliminated by reductions in higher education funding alone. This statement is also irrelevant since it discusses how large the problem is and not about the consequence. So, this statement doesn't strengthen the argument.
