|
|
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.
29 Aug 2018, 00:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
“This city should be able to improve existing services and provide new ones without periodically raising the taxes of
the residents. Instead, the city should require that the costs of services be paid for by developers who seek approval
for their large new building projects. After all, these projects can be highly profitable to the developers, but they can
also raise a city’s expenses and increase the demand for its services.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here the editor of the local newspaper states that the money for the operation of the services should be collected from the developers rather than collecting it from residents i.e by increasing taxes. The assumptions made by the local newspaper editor are vulnerable for weak reasoning to draw a conclusion. The claims made by the editor can be weaken when the assumptions are interpreted in different ways. There are total three flaws which would be discussed elaborately in the following paragraphs.
Firstly, the autor imply that the taxes for the residents shouldn’t be increase periodically to improve existing servicies. Here the assumption that the residents are becoming victim of the tax rises. There could be an alternate scenario where the residents appealed to their mayor that they want their city to have latest services with any cost. This would lead to improving of existing services even though the services were capable of serving more people for longer period of time. This claim could be made stronger if the reason of increasing taxes and resident views on that is examined, data of the percentage taxes paid by residents from their income would also be helpful.
Second, the author says that the developers of the projects should be charged enough because they are responsible for attracting people to their projects and the developers make large amount of profit from these kind of projects. The assumption made by the author here can be weaken if it is altered by the another assumption that the city is currently under the need to attract more employers and companies to their area hence want to create more employment and better standard of life, but if the city would start charging the developers for the development of infrastructure less developers would be intrested in making new projects.
Third, The author also implies that developers are getting large amount of profit and they all should be charged for the services provided by the city. This claim is proposterous as not all developers are attaining large amount of profits. The initial investment in their business is very high and the project doesn’t start paying without its actual completing which is large amount of time. The profitiblity is varied according to the size, nature and need of project. And it is the residents whose choice is wheather to use those project.
Contratary to the first claim made by the author that the residents are burdend with taxes, the development of projects by the developers should attract less residents to the city where the taxation is high. But event than people are willing to reside in this city. Finally concluding the argument the author need to provide more data on the econmy of the city, the people willingness to pay more taxes, the population using the services, percentage of total income given as taxes etc. to make this claim more stronger.
“This city should be able to improve existing services and provide new ones without periodically raising the taxes of
the residents. Instead, the city should require that the costs of services be paid for by developers who seek approval
for their large new building projects. After all, these projects can be highly profitable to the developers, but they can
also raise a city’s expenses and increase the demand for its services.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here the editor of the local newspaper states that the money for the operation of the services should be collected from the developers rather than collecting it from residents i.e by increasing taxes. The assumptions made by the local newspaper editor are vulnerable for weak reasoning to draw a conclusion. The claims made by the editor can be weaken when the assumptions are interpreted in different ways. There are total three flaws which would be discussed elaborately in the following paragraphs.
Firstly, the autor imply that the taxes for the residents shouldn’t be increase periodically to improve existing servicies. Here the assumption that the residents are becoming victim of the tax rises. There could be an alternate scenario where the residents appealed to their mayor that they want their city to have latest services with any cost. This would lead to improving of existing services even though the services were capable of serving more people for longer period of time. This claim could be made stronger if the reason of increasing taxes and resident views on that is examined, data of the percentage taxes paid by residents from their income would also be helpful.
Second, the author says that the developers of the projects should be charged enough because they are responsible for attracting people to their projects and the developers make large amount of profit from these kind of projects. The assumption made by the author here can be weaken if it is altered by the another assumption that the city is currently under the need to attract more employers and companies to their area hence want to create more employment and better standard of life, but if the city would start charging the developers for the development of infrastructure less developers would be intrested in making new projects.
Third, The author also implies that developers are getting large amount of profit and they all should be charged for the services provided by the city. This claim is proposterous as not all developers are attaining large amount of profits. The initial investment in their business is very high and the project doesn’t start paying without its actual completing which is large amount of time. The profitiblity is varied according to the size, nature and need of project. And it is the residents whose choice is wheather to use those project.
Contratary to the first claim made by the author that the residents are burdend with taxes, the development of projects by the developers should attract less residents to the city where the taxation is high. But event than people are willing to reside in this city. Finally concluding the argument the author need to provide more data on the econmy of the city, the people willingness to pay more taxes, the population using the services, percentage of total income given as taxes etc. to make this claim more stronger.
Moderators:
188 posts
