Nations

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 2:02 pm
Location: San Jose, CA
Thanked: 43 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

Nations

by dumb.doofus » Wed May 27, 2009 10:00 pm
Politician: All nations that place a high tax on income produce thereby a negative incentive for technological innovation, and all nations in which technological innovation is hampered inevitably fall behind in the international arms race. Those nations that, through historical accident or the foolishness of their political leadership, wind up in a strategically disadvantageous position are destined to lose their voice in the world affairs. So if a nation wants to maintain its value system and way of life, it must not allow its highest tax bracket to exceed 30 percent of income.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the politician’s argument EXCEPT:

(A) The top level of taxation must reach 45 percent before taxation begins to deter inventors and industrialists from introducing new technologies and industries.
(B) Making a great deal of money is an insignificant factor in driving technological innovation.
(C) Falling behind in the international arms race does not necessarily lead to a strategically less advantageous position.
(D) Those nations that lose influence in the world community do not necessarily suffer from a threat to their value system or way of life.
(E) Allowing one’s country to lose its technological edge, especially as concerns weaponry, would be foolish rather than merely a historical accident.
One love, one blood, one life. You got to do what you should.
https://dreambigdreamhigh.blocked/
https://gmattoughies.blocked/

Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehravikas » Wed May 27, 2009 11:21 pm
Is the answer 'E'

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 3:55 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:740

by Domnu » Thu May 28, 2009 5:51 am
IMO, the answer is E. Here's why:

[spoiler]A) The statistic changes from 30% to 45%
B) Clearly against a premise stated.
C) Clearly against a premise stated.
D) Clearly against a premise stated.
E) Foolish rather than a historical accident? This is just amplifying what an earlier premise stated. So this doesn't weaken anything the politician stated.[/spoiler]
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:13 am
Thanked: 2 times

by subha_sri8 » Thu May 28, 2009 10:34 pm
How could the answer be B?
It states money is a insignificant factor in technological innovation which is just the opposite to the statement mentioned in premises.

Therefore the answer would be E
OA please?

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: India

by shalinisingh » Thu May 28, 2009 11:02 pm
dear Subha_sri8
yes u r right. B is exactly opposite to statement mentioned, so it weakens the argument. What we have to see is what weakens the argument EXCEPT, that means we r looking for argument which strengthen the statement so
E, should be the correct answer

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:56 am

by Musicolo » Fri May 29, 2009 1:45 am
E is the only one that supports the statement, its obvious, unless this is a trick question :)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:03 am

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 3:01 pm
I think E is the best option