Critical Reasoning

A gas tax of one cent per gallon would raise one billion dollars per year at current consumption rates. Since a tax of fifty cents per gallon would therefore raise fifty billion dollars per year, it seems a perfect way to deal with the federal budget deficit. This tax would have the additional advantage that the resulting drop in the demand for gasoline would be ecologically sound and would keep our country from being too dependent on foreign oil producers.
Which one of the following most clearly identifies an error in the author"Ÿs reasoning?
(A) The author cites irrelevant data.
(B) The author relies on incorrect current consumption figures.
(C) The author makes incompatible assumptions.
(D) The author mistakes an effect for a cause.
(E) The author appeals to conscience rather than reason.

Kindly offer explanation if you think u found the correct answer

mundasingh123 wrote:A gas tax of one cent per gallon would raise one billion dollars per year at current consumption rates. Since a tax of fifty cents per gallon would therefore raise fifty billion dollars per year, it seems a perfect way to deal with the federal budget deficit. This tax would have the additional advantage that the resulting drop in the demand for gasoline would be ecologically sound and would keep our country from being too dependent on foreign oil producers.
Which one of the following most clearly identifies an error in the author"Ÿs reasoning?
(A) The author cites irrelevant data.
(B) The author relies on incorrect current consumption figures.
(C) The author makes incompatible assumptions.
(D) The author mistakes an effect for a cause.
(E) The author appeals to conscience rather than reason.

Kindly offer explanation if you think u found the correct answer

The answer is C. Think about what's wrong with the argument: One the one hand, by saying that 1 cent per gallon = one billion dollars means that 50 cents per gallon will result in 50 billion dollars, the author must assume that the consumption (the number of gallons) will remain the same for one cent or for 50. Yet in the very next sentence, On the other hand, he says that the increased tax on gas will result in lower demand - he assumes that people will consume less gas because it costs more. So which is it? will the increased tax to fifty cent affect or not affect the number of gallons consumed by the public? those are the incompatible assumptions which contradict each other.

Thanks a Lot Geva .I dont why my brain just switches off while i am reading a CR stimulus .

Make the conscious effort to switch it back on and think through the argument. There's nothing here that's over your head - you just need to do what the question stem tells you to do, i.e. find the problem in the argument.

mundasingh123 wrote:A gas tax of one cent per gallon would raise one billion dollars per year at current consumption rates. Since a tax of fifty cents per gallon would therefore raise fifty billion dollars per year, it seems a perfect way to deal with the federal budget deficit. This tax would have the additional advantage that the resulting drop in the demand for gasoline would be ecologically sound and would keep our country from being too dependent on foreign oil producers.
Which one of the following most clearly identifies an error in the author"Ÿs reasoning?
(A) The author cites irrelevant data.
(B) The author relies on incorrect current consumption figures.
(C) The author makes incompatible assumptions.
(D) The author mistakes an effect for a cause.
(E) The author appeals to conscience rather than reason.

Kindly offer explanation if you think u found the correct answer

Good question Mundasingh --- i was also confused the first time I read the options. Got it correct in the next reading..The key problem in the reasoning is that the latter part contradicts the first part...

1.By direct relation -- author assumes that increase in tax will have direct effect on the revenue and the revenue will increase by the same factor. This means that the consumtion will remain same
In the next statement -- author assumes that there will be a drop in the consumption and sees it as an additional advantage. Hence, these two statements are contradictory.. Therefore INCOMPATIBLE ASSUMPTIONS. ANSWER C