Critical Reasoning

Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased. Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.
Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?
(A) Public offices should be abolished so that disposable incomes will rise.
(B) The only real taxpayers are those who would have more to spend if they did not pay taxes.
(C) Public employees are not real taxpayers.
(D) Public employees’ incomes should not be taxed since they come from taxes.
(E) If there were no taxes, then public employees could not be paid.

I would go with C

The Q says that

Which one of the following is a logical conclusion that depends on information in both of the statements above?

so any conclusion that we drae must be supported by both the premises provided in the stimulus

now I only see C is supported by both

i.e Public employees are not real taxpayers.

P1: Abolish taxes, and real taxpayers would find that their disposable incomes have increased.

i.e If taxes are not there real tax payers income would increase

P2: Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared.

i.e If taxes are not there then public emplyoees would have no income

if we combine both then we can

"Since the income of public employees decreases (or gets nullified) if there are no taxes (p2) hence public employees are not real taxepayers (as their income should increase instead p1)

If my memory serves right the OA is C... I will recheck and post it here..

I chose E too..

samir, can you please explain why E is wrong..

This is what I am thinking.. Public Employees are paid from the amount gathered from taxes paid by tax payers. So if taxes are abolished, the fund to pay public employees is vanished...

E can be seen as a mere restatement of the premise

"Abolish taxes, and public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared. "

i.e If there were no taxes ----> same as Aboslish taxes

public employees would find that their incomes have disappeared-----> which is same as saying "public employees could not be paid"

In Inference questions there will almost certainly be a statement which is nothing but a differnt way of presenting a premise.

Q says the statement would be supported by both the premises.

Hmm... makes sense now... thanks

Option C looks good, i will go with C