Critical Reasoning

12.According to the Tristate Transportation Authority, making certain improvements to the main commuter rail line would increase ridership dramatically. The authority plans to finance these improvements over the course of five years by raising automobile tolls on the two highway bridges along the route the rail line serves. Although the proposed improvements are indeed needed, the authority's plan for securing the necessary funds should be rejected because it would unfairly force drivers to absorb the entire cost of something from which they receive no benefit.
Which of the following, if true, would cast the most doubt on the effectiveness of the authority's plan to finance the proposed improvements by increasing bridge tolls?
(A) Before the authority increases tolls on any of the area bridges, it is required by law to hold public hearings at which objections to the proposed increase can be raised.
(B) Whenever bridge tolls are increased, the authority must pay a private contractor to adjust the automated toll-collecting machines.
(C) Between the time a proposed toll increase is announced and the time the increase is actually put into effect, many commuters buy more tokens than usual to postpone the effects of the increase.
(D) When tolls were last increased on the two bridges in question, almost 20 percent of the regular commuter traffic switched to a slightly longer alternative route that has since been improved.
(E) The chairman of the authority is a member of the Tristate Automobile Club that has registered strong opposition to the proposed toll increase

IMO D.

IMO D

IMO D

IMO D

Why D? It is not sure that the drivers would again shift to the longer route. There is no evidence that the cost will be lesser than paying the toll and travelling on the same route?

Any second thoughts?

I think the answer should be C. The effectiveness of the toll increase will not be seen immediate. But again not sure how many tickets one can buy. :

This is indeed a good piece of CR.

I am a little confused between "c" and "d". How do we assume that the commuters did not buy enough tokens that could have postponed (for a very long time) the effects of the increase?

Although unlikely, nothing would stop commuters from buying 5 years worth of tokens?

Also with "D", isn't it possible that the toll increase was enough to offset the 20% loss of traffic?

Thoughts anyone?

IMO: D

Yeah, even I am thinking of the answer to be C.

Can anyone clearly validate the reason why D is the correct answer?

raajan_p wrote:Yeah, even I am thinking of the answer to be C.

Can anyone clearly validate the reason why D is the correct answer?

To eliminate C think of this. 1 token = $0.25, the bridge toll before the increase is $0.25. $10 in tokens gets me 40 bridge crossings. After the increase the bridge toll is $0.50, now my $10 in tokens only gets me 20 crossings. I could buy $100 worth of tokens, if the cost to cross the bridge increases I need to use more tokens...

Now if I change me route to work so that I avoid the bridge with the increased toll, the toll plaza is losing money since I'm no longer paying to cross, this is what D says.

Hope that helps.

banker1 wrote:

raajan_p wrote:Yeah, even I am thinking of the answer to be C.

Can anyone clearly validate the reason why D is the correct answer?

To eliminate C think of this. 1 token = $0.25, the bridge toll before the increase is $0.25. $10 in tokens gets me 40 bridge crossings. After the increase the bridge toll is $0.50, now my $10 in tokens only gets me 20 crossings. I could buy $100 worth of tokens, if the cost to cross the bridge increases I need to use more tokens...

Now if I change me route to work so that I avoid the bridge with the increased toll, the toll plaza is losing money since I'm no longer paying to cross, this is what D says.

Hope that helps.

Ok, I eliminated Option D based on two factors.

"(D) When tolls were last increased on the two bridges in question, almost 20 percent of the regular commuter traffic switched to a slightly longer alternative route that has since been improved. "

Option D talks about a scenario that occurred in the past. So, it is not necessary that the same scenario will be repeated again.

Additionally, option D says that 20 percent of the regular traffic switched to slightly longer route. The value of 20 seems to fall under the "few" category.

raajan_p wrote:

banker1 wrote:

raajan_p wrote:Yeah, even I am thinking of the answer to be C.

Can anyone clearly validate the reason why D is the correct answer?

To eliminate C think of this. 1 token = $0.25, the bridge toll before the increase is $0.25. $10 in tokens gets me 40 bridge crossings. After the increase the bridge toll is $0.50, now my $10 in tokens only gets me 20 crossings. I could buy $100 worth of tokens, if the cost to cross the bridge increases I need to use more tokens...

Now if I change me route to work so that I avoid the bridge with the increased toll, the toll plaza is losing money since I'm no longer paying to cross, this is what D says.

Hope that helps.

Ok, I eliminated Option D based on two factors.

"(D) When tolls were last increased on the two bridges in question, almost 20 percent of the regular commuter traffic switched to a slightly longer alternative route that has since been improved. "

Option D talks about a scenario that occurred in the past. So, it is not necessary that the same scenario will be repeated again.

Additionally, option D says that 20 percent of the regular traffic switched to slightly longer route. The value of 20 seems to fall under the "few" category.

Understood, but given the other choices, (D) is the only choice which shows a loss of revenue which would result in the inability of the TA to raise the funding...

Here is another look between C and D:

C: The answer stated "postponed the effect", that means people will pay the new tolls after sometimes. Therefore, the plan works, just take awhile.

D: If 20% of the people switched to a different route, then the revenue is 20% less.


I think D is the best answer out of 5.

C cannot be correct, because time is apparently not a factor in the proposed question... we are looking at profits, but no time factor is specified.