Mayor: Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismokin

Question

Mayor: Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismoking education programs paid for by revenue from heavily increased taxes on cigarettes sold in the city. Although the effectiveness of such education programs is debatable, there is strong evidence that the taxes themselves would produce the sought-after reduction in smoking. Surveys show that cigarette sales drop substantially in cities that impose stiff tax increases on cigarettes.

Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the reasoning in the argument above?

(A) A city-imposed tax on cigarettes will substantially reduce the amount of smoking in the city if the tax is burdensome to the average cigarette consumer.

(B) Consumers are more likely to continue buying a product if its price increases due to higher taxes than if its price increases for some other reason.

(C) Usually, cigarette sales will increase substantially in the areas surrounding a city after that city imposes stiff taxes on cigarettes.

(D) People who are well informed about the effects of long-term tobacco use are significantly less likely to smoke than are people who are not informed.

(E) Antismoking education programs that are funded by taxes on cigarettes will tend to lose their funding if they are successful.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

The mayor’s argument sounds reasonable to me. The mayor is saying the expanded antismoking education bill has two chances to reduce smoking. First, there’s the education itself. Second, there’s the huge tax on cigarettes. Even if the education doesn’t work, the Mayor reasons, huge taxes might curtail cigarette purchases, which would presumably reduce smoking. As much as I’d prefer to argue, I don’t hate this thinking.

We’re asked to “undermine” the reasoning. I don’t have a prediction here, so we’ll just have to venture into the answer choices.

A) This could only weaken the argument if we were provided with an additional premise that said, “The tax is not burdensome to the average smoker.” Lacking that premise, this answer choice isn’t a weakener. Actually, if given the additional information that the tax  is  burdensome to the average smoker, this answer would become a strengthener. We need to pick an answer choice that’s a clear weakener, and this isn’t it.

B) This isn’t relevant, because studies show that “cigarette sales drop substantially in cities that impose stiff tax increases on cigarettes.” It doesn’t matter whether they would have been more sensitive to a regular price increase than to a tax hike. What matters is that they do, in fact, curtail their purchases in response to the hike.

C) This could be it. If this is true, then smoking in the mayor’s city might not decrease even if cigarette sales decrease within city limits. The city’s residents will just drive five minutes out of town and avoid the tax. Hell, they’ll probably smoke on the way there and on the way back!

D) This is certainly true in real life, but real life isn’t the point. The point is: Will smoking decrease even if the education doesn’t work? The mayor says it will, because the tax will drive down cigarette sales. This answer doesn’t attack the mayor’s logic.

E) This might be true, but it doesn’t attack the mayor’s logic. The mayor would just say, “This would mean my plan worked! The point isn’t to pay for education, it’s to stop smoking. If nobody is buying cigarettes, then the plan has already won, via the tax. I told you I didn’t care whether the education actually worked or not.”

Our answer is C, because it illustrates how the tax might drive down sales but still not reduce smoking.

Nidzo · Answer

A) Strengthens the argument. Incorrect.

B) Compares the likely hood of purchasing cigarettes when the price increases due to tax increase and any other increase. Not what the argument is about. Incorrect.

C) While cigarette sales may drop in the city, if this statement is true then the consumption in the city will stay the same. Correct.

D) Not relevant to the argument. Incorrect.

E) Not relevant to the argument. Incorrect.

Answer C

winterschool · Answer

Mayor: Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismoking education programs paid for by revenue from heavily increased taxes on cigarettes sold in the city. Although the effectiveness of such education programs is debatable, there is strong evidence that the taxes themselves would produce the sought-after reduction in smoking. Surveys show that cigarette sales drop substantially in cities that impose stiff tax increases on cigarettes.

Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the reasoning in the argument above?

(A) A city-imposed tax on cigarettes will substantially reduce the amount of smoking in the city if the tax is burdensome to the average cigarette consumer.  Incorrect

support argument reasoning

(B) Consumers are more likely to continue buying a product if its price increases due to higher taxes than if its price increases for some other reason.  Incorrect

it contradicts with argument, cant explain why sales decreased but smoking cigarettes were not

(C)  Usually, cigarette sales will increase substantially in the areas surrounding a city after that city imposes stiff taxes on cigarettes .  Correct

so, sales decreased because of increased tax but consumption of cigarettes was not

(D) People who are well informed about the effects of long-term tobacco use are significantly less likely to smoke than are people who are not informed.  Incorrect

talks about another fact

(E) Antismoking education programs that are funded by taxes on cigarettes will tend to lose their funding if they are successful.  Incorrect

irrelevant

sivatx2 · Answer

Since the taxes are local, the most undermining result would be 
1. Educational program, though debatable, if proven that it is completely ineffective in control smoking. 
2. Survey( that shows the sales is low with higher taxes) is some how incorrect. That is, people choose alternate options, by ordering online, drive out-of-city to buy the cigarette, choosing duty-free places like airport etc. Also, sales lower in the city does not mean that people of the city don't have other options.

(A) A city-imposed tax on cigarettes will substantially reduce the amount of smoking in the city if the tax is burdensome to the average cigarette consumer. 
 This is already known and does not weaken the argument. Eliminate

(B) Consumers are more likely to continue buying a product if its price increases due to higher taxes than if its price increases for some other reason. 
 This may or may not be true. If someone don't have enough money, they cannot buy the product, period. So this case is extreme and hence it does not qualify to undermine the argument. Eliminate.

(C) Usually, cigarette sales will increase substantially in the areas surrounding a city after that city imposes stiff taxes on cigarettes. 
 C, is the correct choice as per our analysis.

(D) People who are well informed about the effects of long-term tobacco use are significantly less likely to smoke than are people who are not informed. 
 well-informed people & effects of long-term tobacco use is irrelevant to the argument. Eliminate.

(E) Antismoking education programs that are funded by taxes on cigarettes will tend to lose their funding if they are successful .
 It about eliminating smoking which is the true goal. If it is achieved then there is no need for antismoking programs at all. Eliminate.

100mitra · Answer

Correct Option C

Mayor:  
Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismoking education programs 
paid for by revenue from heavily increased taxes on cigarettes sold in the city. 
Although the effectiveness of such education programs is debatable,
 Evidence:  taxes themselves would produce the sought-after reduction in smoking. 
 Surveys:  cigarette sales drop substantially in cities that impose stiff tax increases on cigarettes.

Conclusion:  Impose tax will drop tobacco sale
 Assumption:  considered only one option, that tobacco can be made available
 Argument:  People on tax impose on tobacco, will not purchase

Which one of the following, if true, most  undermines the reasoning in the argument above ?

(A) A city-imposed tax on cigarettes will substantially reduce the amount of smoking in the city 
if the tax is burdensome to the average cigarette consumer.
 Wrong:  Strengthen the argument

(B) Consumers are  more likely to continue buying  a product 
if its price increases  due to higher taxes than  
if its price increases  for some other reason .
 Weaken:   to close to correct but, here condition can be implemented, what if price is high than expected

(C) Usually, cigarette  sales will increase  substantially in 
 the areas surrounding a city  after that 
 city imposes stiff taxes on cigarettes .
 Weaken : City impose tax sales decrease to nearby city where tax is not imposed sales increase, person might end up purchasing bulk amount at less price and consume as per need.

(D)  People who are well informed  
about the effects of long-term tobacco use are significantly less likely to smoke than are 
 people who are not informed .
 Wrong:  Informed vs non-Informed comparison between the people

(E)  Antismoking education programs  that are 
funded by taxes on cigarettes will tend to lose them 
funding if they are successful.
 Wrong:  irrelevant - gives detail about agency/ programs profit and loss

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.

Mayor: Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismokin

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

Mayor: Local antitobacco activists are calling for expanded antismokin

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