The country of Maravia has severe air pollution, 80 percent : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 28 Feb 2017, 03:43

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The country of Maravia has severe air pollution, 80 percent

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 586
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

The country of Maravia has severe air pollution, 80 percent [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2006, 21:10
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:04) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 4 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The country of Maravia has severe air pollution, 80 percent of which is caused by the exhaust fumes of cars. In order to reduce the number of cars on the road, the government is raising taxes on the cost of buying and running a car by 20 percent. This tax increase, therefore, will significantly reduce air pollution in Maravia.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
(A) The government of Maravia is in the process of building a significant number of roadways.
(B) Maravia is an oil-producing country and is able to refine an amount of gasoline sufficient for the needs of its population.
(C) Maravia has had an excellent public transportation system for many years.
(D) Ninety percent of the population of Maravia is very prosperous and has a substantial amount of disposable income.
(E) In Maravia, cars that emit relatively low levels of pollutants cost 10 percent less to operate, on average, than do cars that emit high levels of pollutants.
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 09 Oct 2005
Posts: 720
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2006, 21:22
C for me
excellent public transportation system for many years----->air pollution
_________________

IE IMBA 2010

Director
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 993
Location: South Korea
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2006, 21:33
Let me vote for D.

Rich people will not care much about tax increase.
_________________

Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn !

VP
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 1065
Location: USA
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2006, 23:55
I would vote for D here.

The argument assmes that "people will be discouraged to buy and run cars due to the tax increase". If people had large disposable incomes, the assumption doesn't stand true. Hence D!
_________________

"To dream anything that you want to dream, that is the beauty of the human mind. To do anything that you want to do, that is the strength of the human will. To trust yourself, to test your limits, that is the courage to succeed."

- Bernard Edmonds

CEO
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 2911
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 277 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 01:12
D

"This tax increase, therefore, will significantly reduce air pollution in Maravia." means

Tax Increase ---> People discouraged from buying and running cars ---> Less Pollution

D is weakening the effect "People discouraged from buying and running cars". Due to weakening of this effect, conclusion can not stand true.
_________________

SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008

Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 528
Location: US
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 05:00
Government wants to discourage people from buying cars by increasing taxes on cars.

This measure will be ineffective if people are still able to cars at the existing rate. So people should be rich and prosperous enough.
Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5238
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 382 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 06:25
What do us plutocratic billionaires care about a measly 20% increase in auto taxes? Clearly (D)
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1810
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 09:36
Yes D should be it.
Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 98
Location: New York
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 09:46
D it is....
Director
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 586
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2006, 11:33
Gud WOrk Guys..OA is D
Director
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 576
Location: Munich,Germany
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2006, 00:53
D.
20 Jan 2006, 00:53
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Anthony: It has been established that over 80 percent of those who use 1 20 Feb 2016, 07:23
Neighboring landholders: Air pollution from the giant 2 07 Dec 2009, 13:06
9 CR: air pollutants 27 26 Jun 2008, 01:56
Although air pollution was previously thought to exist 4 11 Jan 2008, 11:17
CR 1000: Air pollution in Los Diablos 5 31 Oct 2007, 22:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by