gmatbull wrote:
Area Tenant: Economist Patrick Hutber is most famous for his suggestion that any public expression of improvement
is suspect on the grounds that improvement is only touted when it can serve to conceal some form of deterioration.
Hutber would’ve been grimly satisfied by the recent performance of our neighborhood representative, who responded
to the news that our neighborhood was subject to more vigorous ticketing than any other neighborhood in the county
by celebrating the “improvements” two new bike lanes had contributed to our quality of life.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the tenant’s argument?
A: The ticketing to which the neighborhood was subject over the past twelve months is unprecedented in the
neighborhood’s history.
B: The neighborhood representative has privately remarked that the bike lanes are unimpressive and unlikely to be
frequented by the neighborhood’s residents.
C: Despite the unconscionable and widespread ticketing to which it is subject, the neighborhood is currently one of the
most desirable in the city.
D: The neighborhood’s quality of life, as measured by accurate and respected surveys of local residents, has been
stagnant for well over a decade.
E: The tenant is the most politically informed of the neighborhood’s residents.
Here we have a STRENGTHEN question. What is it we are looking to strengthen? The tenants's argument. What is the tenant's argument?
"Hutber would’ve been grimly satisfied by the recent performance of our neighborhood representative, who responded
to the news that our neighborhood was subject to more vigorous ticketing than any other neighborhood in the county
by celebrating the “improvements” two new bike lanes had contributed to our quality of life."
Rephrased, he's saying that in the current situation, the Neighborhood Representative is trying to cover up some deterioration by touting the improvements of the bike lanes. It is also suggested that the deterioration has to do with the ticketing, since the Neighborhood Representative responded to questions about the ticketing by celebrating the improvements to the bike lanes.
Ok, so what are we looking for in the answer choices? We are looking for something that will strengthen the argument. That is, something that will show that there is some deterioration of the neighborhood's quality of life.
*Note: "Ticketing" refers to police or public security issuing tickets to citizens for violations of bylaws (speeding, illegal parking, j-walking, etc.)
Alright, let's look at the answer choices and see if we find what we're looking for.
A: The ticketing to which the neighborhood was subject over the past twelve months is unprecedented in the
neighborhood’s history.
This suggests that the ticketing has increased in the past 12 months, hence the quality of life has deteriorated. Possible answer!B: The neighborhood representative has privately remarked that the bike lanes are unimpressive and unlikely to be
frequented by the neighborhood’s residents.
Doesn't show any deterioration in the quality of life for the residents. Reject.C: Despite the unconscionable and widespread ticketing to which it is subject, the neighborhood is currently one of the
most desirable in the city.
Doesn't speak to deterioration of the quality of life. Suggests the opposite. Reject.D: The neighborhood’s quality of life, as measured by accurate and respected surveys of local residents, has been
stagnant for well over a decade.
Indicates that there is no improvement or deterioration in the quality of life. Stagnant = no change. Reject.E: The tenant is the most politically informed of the neighborhood’s residents.
No bearing on the deterioration of the quality of life of the residents. Reject.So A is the only possible answer here. It indicates a clear deterioration of the quality of life of the residents (nobody likes more ticketing), and strengthens the tenant's argument that the Neighborhood Representative was trying to conceal the deterioration by celebrating the improvement of the bike lanes.