12 Days of Christmas GMAT Competition - Day 8: City councilperson: Las

Conclusion: The campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Premise: The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town.

We should find additional evidence that would strengthen our conclusion that the campaign would be self-sufficient, given that the funding was provided by the tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities. This strengthens our conclusion because as long as the tobacco and nicotine products are locally bought, then the tax collected wouldn't decrease and funds wouldn't decrease as a result.

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities. Irrelevant

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace. Quite the opposite of what we are looking for. If tobacco consumption has decreased, then the funding would be impacted.

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results. Irrelevant

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens. Irrelevant.

My answer is A.

City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the city councilperson’s argument?

Premises - Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens.
The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town.

Conclusion - The campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Need to strengthen the argument.
Gap - why would the campaign be self-sufficient? Could people buy from other localities and not pay tax?


A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.
Correct. This strengthens the argument that the campaign should be self-sufficient

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.
Incorrect. This is out of scope

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.
Incorrect. This would weaken the argument

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.
Incorrect. This is a weakener.

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.
Incorrect. This is out of scope and doesn't strengthen the argument

City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the city councilperson’s argument?

In order for the campaign to be self-sufficient, the argument assumes that people are going to continue to purchase tobacco and nicotine products in town and nowhere else.


A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities. correct

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities. irrelevant. the argument only talks about teens in town

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace. this if anything weakens the argument

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results. irrelevant

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens. the argument is about the money coming in from purchase.

Strengthen type question

Predicted Answer: The taxes should be sufficient to drive the campaign in the future.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities. If this is false then the taxes collected will be less and it won't serve the purpose of the campaign.

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.Irrelavant

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.Irrelavant

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results. So what??

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.Irrelavant

IMO A

IMO B
Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.
It attacks the weakner and as a result, becomes a strengthener.

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.
What if the teens constitute a smaller portion of the total number of nicotine-consuming people. As it is confined to only teens.

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.
We are looking for a strengthener, not a weakner.

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.
We are concerned about funding not the results of the campaign.

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.
Irrelevant.

City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens{premise}. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town{premise}. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.{conclusion}

the author says the money generated by tax when someone makes a purchase of tobacco in the town is self sufficient to fund the campaign
We need to strengthen the conclusion

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.
yes, if they purchase from other towns then tax cannot be collected and campaign cannot be run lets keep this option

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.
we are not concerned about other towns and number of teens vaping there ( Distortion)

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.
Weakener opposite to what we are looking for

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.
Out of scope we are not concerned with the results of the campaign

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.
out of scope

hence option A IMO

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.
--> Since the products are purchased from within the area, the taxes will be collected proportionately to the number of users, hence the campaign will be self-sufficient. Correct

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.
--> Comparision with other cities will add no value to the discussion on the self-sufficiency of the campaign.

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.
--> Comparision between tobacco and nicotine products is irrelevant as both are taxed.

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.
--> Comparision between campaigns is irrelevant as this campaign might be a success and even if it's a failure we do not know whether the self-sufficiency was an issue.

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.
--> What voters think does not have a bearing on the self-sufficiency of the campaign as the product users are paying the taxes anyways.

City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the city councilperson’s argument?

Since we're looking for a statement that would strengthen the argument we need something that could assure us that the town would gain enough taxes on tobacco and nicotine products to sustain its own campaign.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.-- If the residents purchase tobacco or nicotine products in significant quantity from other residents in the town, then the taxes and money earned from the sales of most of these products would circulate within the town and the town would not run out of funds as long as those products are sold. Seems to be what we are looking for. CORRECT.

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.-- Comparison of vaping habit is not as relevant as the expenditure pattern. Out of scope. WRONG.

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.-- Okay, but as long as tobacco use is still a concern it means tobacco or nicotine products are still being sold, implying sufficient funds. This could strengthen or weaken. WRONG.

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.-- This could weaken the argument. WRONG.

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.-- Voters' opinion on the campaign is not relevant to the argument in question. Out of scope. WRONG.

IMO, Answer= A.

Conclusion: the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town

So, it assumes that he would generate income from vaping and use it for advertising but the income would be effected if the products are purchased from other localities/market places but the teens can increase in vaping of teens.

The key is to identify the conclusion, which in this case is "the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town".

So, in order to strengthen the conclusion, we need an option that assures us that the campaign is self-sufficient, i.e., financially secure as long as teens are vaping. In short, the argument says that since it's financed from the taxes levied on the purchase of tobacco products, it's financially secure as long as people are buying it. And if people stop buying it, then it has met its purpose.

Think about it. The biggest threat to this argument would be a statement that says that people have started buying tobacco products from outside the town as this means a) a fall in tax collection, and b) the number of tobacco users has not fallen.

So, we need an option to safeguard us from the aforementioned threat. Option A does that perfectly. Hence, A is the answer.

IMO A

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.
If the residents are not purchasing tobacco from other localities then more tax can be collected for the campaign to be a success.
B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.
Comparing the teens with the neighboring cities is irrelevant
C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.
Tax is levied on either the tobacco or the nicotine products. It doesn't matter whether one increase and one decrease.
D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.
Irrelevant.
E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.
Doesn't strengthen the argument

Premise:
- Town funded SMC to publicize the dangers
- SMC was funded by a tax levied on T&N purchased in town
Conclusion: the SMC should be self-sufficient. We need to strengthen this conclusion.

Pre-thinking: the CC concludes on the basis of funds gathered from taxes levied on T&N products and he expects the trends to continue. The continuity will generate enough funds for future campaigns. This implies the sales of T&N products will continue to generate funds and people will continue to buy TnC products in town.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities. Correct. If residents of the town buy T&N products from other towns/localities, the town in question will see a decline in sales of T&N products. This in turn will reduce the tax collected to fund the campaign. Thus, this strengthens the belief that the sales of T&N products in the town in question will continue to generate funds for SMC.

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities. Incorrect. Comparison of teens among towns does not impact the conclusion and is irrelevant

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace. Incorrect. This actually weakens the argument

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results. Incorrect. Other SMCs are out of scope

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens. Incorrect. Voters concerns about SMC is out of scope

A is the answer.

City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town.

Conclusion: Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the city councilperson’s argument?


Since residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities, they including teens purchase tobacco or nicotine products mostly from the town itself. Since campaign is funded by tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town, it will get sufficient funding to be self-sufficient.
Correct


The argument is not concerned about teens vaping in neighbouring cities. Therefore, the comparison does not affect the city councilperson’s argument.
Incorrect


The city councilperson's argument is concerned with teen vaping only. The statement has no mention of teen vaping.
Incorrect


The city councilperson's argument is concerned with teen vaping campaign only. The argument is not affected by other social media campaigns.
Incorrect


The city councilperson's argument is not affected by voters doubting the necessity of the campaign.
Incorrect

IMO A

IC ; Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens

Conclusion :The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities. ; the funding of the campaign will not be impacted for this reason ; so its a strengthener.. correct option

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities. if teens are more likely to vape in councilpersons town which is very much given in the argument , but this option does not provide reason to strengthen the argument

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace. ; this is a weakener

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results. irrelevant

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens. irrelevant

OPTION A is correct

Answer A
City councilperson: Last year, our town paid for a robust social media campaign to publicize the dangers of nicotine vaping to teens. The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town. Therefore, the campaign should be self-sufficient for as long as there is a concern regarding the number of teens vaping in our town.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the city councilperson’s argument?

Using tobacco and nicotine products tax money to pay for campaign against nicotine vaping for teens.

A. Residents of the town in question do not purchase tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities.Correct. This means that local tax revenue from tobacco or nicotine product is in good condition. I quote "The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town."

B. Recent surveys have indicated that teens living in the councilperson’s town are more likely to vape than are teens in neighboring cities.Irrelevant

C. Tobacco use in the councilperson’s town has declined greatly since vaping products have become more readily available in the marketplace.Irrelevant

D. Other social media campaigns sponsored by the town in question have had mixed results.out of scope

E. Many voters in the town doubt the necessity of the social media campaign to publicize the dangers of vaping to teens.weaken

Answer seems to be A

As per the premise "The campaign was in large part funded by a tax levied on all tobacco and nicotine products purchased in town"

But if Residents of the town in question purchased tobacco or nicotine products in any significant quantity from other localities then the campaign won't be self-sufficient

A