Last visit was: 12 Jul 2024, 15:56 It is currently 12 Jul 2024, 15:56
Toolkit
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2017
Posts: 269
Own Kudos [?]: 1523 [14]
Given Kudos: 236
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94302
Own Kudos [?]: 640176 [0]
Given Kudos: 84576
General Discussion
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2014
Posts: 43
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q45 V35
GPA: 3.66
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Director
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 542
Own Kudos [?]: 439 [1]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: India
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereby a negative incentive for technological innovation, and all nations in which technological innovation is hampered inevitably fall behind in the international arms race. Those nations that, through historical accident or the foolishness of their political leadership, wind up in a strategically disadvantageous position are destined to lose their voice in the world affairs. So if a nation wants to maintain its value system and way of life, it must not allow its highest tax bracket to exceed 30 percent of income.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the politician’s argument EXCEPT:

(A) The top level of taxation must reach 45 percent before taxation begins to deter inventors and industrialists from introducing new technologies and industries.
This point weakens the argument as if the statement is true then the argument is weakend on its 30% claim.

(B) Making a great deal of money is an insignificant factor in driving technological innovation.
weakens teh argument which suggest that tax is direclty relative to the technological advancement,

(C) Falling behind in the international arms race does not necessarily lead to a strategically less advantageous position.
Although this is a blunt statement but we considera ll the choices to betrue as they are,it weakens the argument,as the arument suggest that the arms race leads to strategicall advancement.

(D) Those nations that lose influence in the world community do not necessarily suffer from a threat to their value system or way of life.
weakens one the way of life point of the argument.

(E) Allowing one’s country to lose its technological edge, especially as concerns weaponry, would be foolish rather than merely a historical accident.

Does not weaken or have any impact on the argument. Thus is the correct choice.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Oct 2019
Posts: 121
Own Kudos [?]: 37 [0]
Given Kudos: 896
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36 (Online)
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V38
GMAT 3: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
I do understand that E is the best answer. Here but I need help in proving C does weaken here.
My thought process is that, falling behind in arms race IS a strategically disadvantageous position and as in the option C it does not lead to that the position. So how does that weaken the conclusion ? I know I am messing up the reasoning here, but I can't figure a way out.
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15105
Own Kudos [?]: 66591 [2]
Given Kudos: 436
Location: Pune, India
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
2
Kudos
vikasp99 wrote:
Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereby a negative incentive for technological innovation, and all nations in which technological innovation is hampered inevitably fall behind in the international arms race. Those nations that, through historical accident or the foolishness of their political leadership, wind up in a strategically disadvantageous position are destined to lose their voice in the world affairs. So if a nation wants to maintain its value system and way of life, it must not allow its highest tax bracket to exceed 30 percent of income.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the politician’s argument EXCEPT:

(A) The top level of taxation must reach 45 percent before taxation begins to deter inventors and industrialists from introducing new technologies and industries.

(B) Making a great deal of money is an insignificant factor in driving technological innovation.

(C) Falling behind in the international arms race does not necessarily lead to a strategically less advantageous position.

(D) Those nations that lose influence in the world community do not necessarily suffer from a threat to their value system or way of life.

(E) Allowing one’s country to lose its technological edge, especially as concerns weaponry, would be foolish rather than merely a historical accident.

Look at how we have arrived at the conclusion - look at the link between 'high tax' and 'value system and way of life'.

High tax hampers tech innovation.
Hampered tech innovation means falling behind in arms race.
Those in strategically disadvantageous position (presumably those behind in arms race) lose their voice in the world affairs.

Conclusion: If a nation wants to maintain its value system and way of life (presumably by retaining value in world affairs), it must not allow its highest tax bracket to exceed 30 percent of income.

(A) The top level of taxation must reach 45 percent before taxation begins to deter inventors and industrialists from introducing new technologies and industries.

It brings the figure of 30% into question.

(B) Making a great deal of money is an insignificant factor in driving technological innovation.

This weakens "High tax hampers tech innovation".

(C) Falling behind in the international arms race does not necessarily lead to a strategically less advantageous position.

This weakens the relation between "Falling behind in the international arms race" and "strategically less advantageous position"

(D) Those nations that lose influence in the world community do not necessarily suffer from a threat to their value system or way of life.

This weakens the relation between "lose voice in the world community" and "suffer from a threat to their value system or way of life"

(E) Allowing one’s country to lose its technological edge, especially as concerns weaponry, would be foolish rather than merely a historical accident.

Losing tech edge would be foolish. This is irrelevant to the argument.

Intern
Joined: 22 Apr 2020
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
Thank you, VeritasKarishma, for making it clear.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4918
Own Kudos [?]: 7796 [0]
Given Kudos: 220
Location: India
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
Gokul20 wrote:
I do understand that E is the best answer. Here but I need help in proving C does weaken here.
My thought process is that, falling behind in arms race IS a strategically disadvantageous position and as in the option C it does not lead to that the position. So how does that weaken the conclusion ? I know I am messing up the reasoning here, but I can't figure a way out.

Hi Gokul

Let me attempt to answer your question here. As per the stimulus:

i) High tax on income (X) --> negative incentive for technological innovation (Y) --> fall behind in the international arms race (Z).

Separately

ii) Strategically disadvantageous position (P) --> lose voice in the world affairs (Q).

Based on the above two causal relations, the conclusion drawn is that "if a nation wants to maintain its value system and way of life, it must not allow its highest tax bracket to exceed 30 percent of income".

Option (C) says: Falling behind in the international arms race -X-> strategically less advantageous position. This breaks the connection between (i) and (ii) above (since it disconnects Z and P), and thus breaks the connection between X and Q (which can only be connected through Z and P). This can now be interpreted as:

High tax on income -X-> lose voice in the world affairs. This clearly weakens the conclusion.

Hope this helps.
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17492
Own Kudos [?]: 867 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
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.
Re: Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereb [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6979 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts
CR Forum Moderator
821 posts