CR - Identify conclusion

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:04 pm
Thanked: 165 times
Followed by:70 members

CR - Identify conclusion

by karthikpandian19 » Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:06 pm
Some politicians suggest that reducing governmental infrastructure budgets saves money because governments that are spending less on infrastructure can afford to decrease the business tax rate and to create new business districts, which should provide additional tax revenue. However, failing infrastructure, such as deteriorating bridges and highways, often limits transportation, disallowing consumers from easily accessing current business districts, let alone new business districts, which are often located further from residential areas. Such transportation problems significantly reduce the income of, and the taxes paid by, companies both within and outside of any new business district.

The author is arguing that _________.


(A) deteriorating bridges and highways will discourage businesses from moving into a new business district

(B) cutting infrastructure budgets to save money can result in an overall decrease in revenue

(C) deteriorating infrastructure in business districts will eventually be replaced by new infrastructure

(D) major losses in revenue for both business and government will be offset by the decrease in the business tax rate

(E) politicians are concerned with balancing the competing demands of both business and government
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 7:08 am
Thanked: 322 times
Followed by:143 members

by Kasia@EconomistGMAT » Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:38 am
The correct answer is b. The author is arguing that worse infrastructure will mean fewer clients of the new business districts and thus lower tax revenues.
Answer a - not true, deteriorating bridges and highways will discourage PEOPLE from visiting, not businesses
Answer c - out of scope, it is not included in the question
Answer d - it is a distractor, this answer looks complicated and is irrelevant
Answer e - it is too general, such information is not included
Kasia
Senior Instructor
Master GMAT - the #1 rated GMAT course

"¢ If you found my post helpful, please click the "thank" button and/or follow me.

"¢ Take a 7 day free trial and find out why Economist GMAT is the highest rated GMAT course - https://gmat.economist.com/

"¢ Read GMAT Economist reviews - https://reviews.beatthegmat.com/economis ... mat-course

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 299
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 10:27 am
Thanked: 9 times
Followed by:2 members

by hey_thr67 » Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:52 am
IMO B :

B is the absolute inference which can be drawn from the argument. E could have been a contender, had it not shifted the scope from government to politicians. Rest others are not supported by the stem.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:04 pm
Thanked: 165 times
Followed by:70 members

by karthikpandian19 » Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:28 am
OA is B
karthikpandian19 wrote:Some politicians suggest that reducing governmental infrastructure budgets saves money because governments that are spending less on infrastructure can afford to decrease the business tax rate and to create new business districts, which should provide additional tax revenue. However, failing infrastructure, such as deteriorating bridges and highways, often limits transportation, disallowing consumers from easily accessing current business districts, let alone new business districts, which are often located further from residential areas. Such transportation problems significantly reduce the income of, and the taxes paid by, companies both within and outside of any new business district.

The author is arguing that _________.


(A) deteriorating bridges and highways will discourage businesses from moving into a new business district

(B) cutting infrastructure budgets to save money can result in an overall decrease in revenue

(C) deteriorating infrastructure in business districts will eventually be replaced by new infrastructure

(D) major losses in revenue for both business and government will be offset by the decrease in the business tax rate

(E) politicians are concerned with balancing the competing demands of both business and government
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---