Because the government of Laconia provided considerable tax

Question

Because  the government of Laconia provided considerable tax incentives to farmers , many newspapers, expecting that these tax incentives would allow farmers to invest more into their businesses and improve the profitability of Laconia’s agricultural sector, published articles stating that Laconian agriculture would soon become profitable. However, these newspapers did not consider that the  Laconian government provides tax incentives only to support the weakest segments of economy, which are not likely to become profitable any time soon.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the conclusion of the argument; the second gives a reason for questioning the conclusion.
(B) The first provides evidence supporting the conclusion; the second is the conclusion of the argument.
(C) The first is a statement explained by the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that statement.
(D) The first is a statement opposed by the argument as a whole; the second is evidence opposing that statement.
(E) The first is a statement explained by the argument as a whole; the second provides evidence opposing that statement.

vaodeanhem · Accepted Answer

Hi guerrero25, for these bold face questions, i suggest that you crack the stimulus of ur question before going to the answer choice. Once, u identify premise, conclusion n counter premise, u will find it easier to choose a correct answer. In this particular question:
Premise: the government provided tax incentives to farmers, many newspapers, expecting that these tax incentives would allow farmers to invest more and improve the profitability of Laconia’s agricultural sector.
Conclusion: Laconian agriculture would soon become profitable
Counter premise: HOWEVER, these newspapers did not consider that the Laconian government only supports the weakest segments of economy, not likely to become profitable any time soon.

After cracking the stimulus, u will clearly see that 1st Bold face lies on Premise which supports the conclusion and 2nd Bold face lies on the counter premises that opposes the conclusion. Saying in other way, they are on the opposite positions. what we need is to find an answer that correctly describes these positions.

(A)The first provides evidence supporting the conclusion of the argument; the second gives a reason for questioning the conclusion.
=> Good. They are in the opposite sites. A good Contender.
(B)The first provides evidence supporting the conclusion; the second is the conclusion of the argument.
=> 1st bold face's role is correct but 2nd isnt the conclusion so we can eliminate this choice safely.
(C)The first is a statement explained by the argument; the second provides evidence in support of that statement.
=> They are on the same side again. Eliminate.
(D)The first is a statement opposed by the argument as a whole; the second is evidence opposing that statement.
=> 1st correct, 2nd fails to describe its role. 
(E)The first is a statement explained by the argument as a whole; the second provides evidence opposing that statement.
=> This is an Shell Game answer. However, the argument doesnt explain any statement. Instead, it claims that 
"Laconian agriculture would soon become profitable". The 2nd is opposing the conclusion not the statement.

Hence, A is correct.

Hope it helps.

Marcab · Answer

Hi Guerrero,
In this question, try to figure out what is premise, counter premise and conclusion.
Premise: First boldface
Conclusion: Many newspaper articles published that Lanconian agriculture will become profitable.
Counter Premise: This is what author of this CR states. He mentions that the newspapers did not consider another aspect, and what these newspapers concluded may not be true.

P.S.: Do mention the source please

raghaw · Answer

A is closest contender and rest are not even remotely connected to correct answer. Answer A supports a conclusion, but it is not the conclusion of argument rather it is conclusion of many news papers. conclusion of argument is opposite to the conclusion of news papers, as evidenced by the keyword "However" in the last sentence. So correct answer must be something like:

The first provides evidence supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that conclusion.

In the 5 options given, A is least wrong.

first is not a statement that is explained or opposed by argument rather it is a fact. So C,D and E are out.
Second is not a conclusion of argument, rather it supports the conclusion. So B is out.
Only A remains.

Rakeshtewatia · Answer

i have read somewhere that conclusion is always given by the author. So " however" part is the conclusion as per me and first one is counter premise. Please correct me.

kumarankit01 · Answer

This is not awlays true. Argument may have a conclusion which author may not agree and may have some other position .

Here However part is counterpremise and conclusion is that the agriculture willl be proditable.

author did not agree to this and has a different position.

hope this helps

Posted from my mobile device

druparel · Answer

I thought that 'Laconian agriculture would soon become profitable' was the immediate conclusion and '  are not likely to become profitable any time soon' was the main conclusion. Do you have any tips on how to avoid falling into this trap?

Chauhan1508 · Answer

The conclusion of the argument is that the newspapers' prediction that Laconian agriculture would soon become profitable is likely incorrect. This conclusion is based on the premise that the Laconian government provides tax incentives only to support the weakest segments of the economy, which are not likely to become profitable in the near future. Please correct me if i am wrong?

Posted from my mobile device

Posted from my mobile device

OokandGluk · Answer

KarishmaB   Bunuel  
I thought the conclusion to the argument was "Therefore, the Laconian Government's tax incentives to farmers won't make agricultural business profitable like how the newspapers claimed".

What exactly is a conclusion in a CR argument?
Is it what the author is trying to convey in the argument or can it be even something which is expressed by another person or entity in an argument apart from the author (in this case newspaper)? How to know which conclusion to consider for a question.

Can you please elaborate?

OokandGluk · Answer

kumarankit01   GMATNinja 
I thought the conclusion to the argument was "Therefore, the Laconian Government's tax incentives to farmers won't make agricultural business profitable like how the newspapers claimed" and the intermediate conclusion was "Newspapers published articles that Laconian Agriculture will be profitable".

What exactly is a conclusion in a CR argument?
Is it what the author is trying to convey in the argument or can it be even something which is expressed by another person or entity in an argument apart from the author (in this case newspaper)? How to know which conclusion to consider for a question.

Posted from my mobile device

Because the government of Laconia provided considerable tax

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Because the government of Laconia provided considerable tax

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards