IMO: D

A & E: Eliminated on the ground that it is not impacting the effectiveness of plan.
It raises qs on whether plan will be accepted or rejected.
What will weaken EFFECTIVENESS OF PLAN is what we need to look at. And then when we can further
go ahead and ask what will impact the effectiveness of the plan. The amount of revenue collected of course!

B & C : We can see the impact on revenue on these two choices.We need to ask? What is
the degree of impact?
Compared to D they get eliminated (In c: Ask can the effects of higher tax be postponed for 5 yeras. Less probable.)

D: Entire revenue will be lost here for all 5 years. Impact is much larger than B & C

Bw C & D, it is D as very aptly and correctly explained by lunarpower.

Thnks lunarpower for the excellent insight!!!

Cheers!!
Turbo Jet

lunarpower wrote:it's pretty clear that (d) has a bigger effect than does (c) in this case, for the following TWO reasons:

(1) even if token hoarding does occur, it is extremely unlikely that the effects of token hoarding will amount to 20% OF ALL TOLLS PAID FOR THE NEXT 5 YEARS.
that's a lot of tokens.

(2) perhaps more importantly:
IF TOKENS ARE HOARDED, then all that is lost is the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OLD AND NEW FARES. this is just a % of the fare, perhaps even a small %.
on the other hand,
IF COMMUTERS SWITCH ROUTES, then THE ENTIRE FARE IS LOST.

if you combine these 2 factors, then there's no question that (d) has a bigger effect than does (c).

Thanks for the explanation.

I got thrown by the word 'most' in C and ended up rejecting D because it talks about less than 20% of commuters...tricky question but I guess reading more closely, I should have paid attention to the word 'postpone' in C which implies that it doesnt weaken, it just delays the effect. Need to watch out for these common annoying traps!

Answer D seems to be logical one out of other answer choices