One way for reducing commuting time for those who work in the cities

Question

One way for reducing commuting time for those who work in the cities is to increase the speed at which traffic moves in the heart of the city. This can be accomplished by raising the tolls on the tunnels and bridges connecting the city with other communities. This will discourage auto traffic into the city and will encourage people to use public transportation instead.

Which of the following, if true, would LEAST weaken the argument above?

(A) Nearly all of the traffic in the center of the city is commerical traffic which will continue despite the toll increases
(B) Some people now driving alone into the city would choose to car pool with each other rather than use public transportation
(C) Any temporary improvement in traffic flow would be lost because the improvement itself would attract more cars
(D) The numbers of commuters who would be deterred by the toll increases would be insignificant
(E) The public transportation system is not able to handle any significant increase in the number of commuters using the system

devavrat · Answer

Please explain
Eventually by carpooling the traffic will reduce. So the final objective which is to reduce the traffic will be achieved

churuand · Answer

this question is poor-writing since every answers does weaken the argument.

ababab5 · Answer

Conclusion has 2 parts : - 1. discourage auto traffic into the city and 2. encourage people to use public transportation 
Every answer weakens both the parts of conclusion, But option B ,which says that though traffic will decrease but usage of public transportation won't increase. Hence, option B least weakens the conclusion.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

The question is one that tests the validity or strength of a causal inference. Often such arguments can be attacked by finding intervening causal linkages, that is, variables that might interfere with the predicted result.  (A)  cites such a variable. If the traffic problem is created by commercial traffic that will not be reduced by toll increases, then the proposed increases will not solve the problem.

(C) , too, is such a variable. It suggests that the proposal is essentially self defeating.

(D)  undermines the claim by arguing that the deterrent effect of a price increase is simply not significant, so the proposal will have little, if any, effect.

(E)  attacks the argument on a different ground. The ultimate objective of the plan is to reduce commuting time. Even assuming a drop in auto traffic because some commuters use public transportation, no advantage is gained if the public transportation system cannot handle the increase in traffic.

(B) , however, does very little to the argument. In fact, it could be argued that  (B)  is one of the predicted results of the plan: a drop in the number of autos because commuters begin to car-pool.

The correct answer is (B).

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

One way for reducing commuting time for those who work in the cities

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

One way for reducing commuting time for those who work in the cities

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