BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

change the tax code

Expert replies
by muzali » Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:40 pm
Economies in which a high percentage of resources are invested in research and development show greater growth in the long run than do those in which resources are channeled into consumption. Japanese workers spend a higher percentage of their income investing in research and development than do American workers.
To grow as fast as Japan has in the past three decades, the United States must change the tax code in order to encourage savings and investment and discourage debt.
Which of the following, if true, tends to weaken the argument?
(A) Japanese research is more focused on consumers than is research by American firms.
(B) Class mobility, highly valued in American culture, is encouraged by a growing rather than a stagnant economy.
(C) Studies have shown that countries with high consumption rates prosper in the short run.
(D) Proposed changes to the tax code could involve strict limits on the deductability of interest, and increased allowance for research.
(E) Because a decreasing percentage of the United States is under 40, an age when savings are traditionally low, the savings rate will increase without changes to the tax code.

OA is E
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by amitabhprasad » Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:40 pm
Conclusion of the argument is
US must change the tax code to increase saving and according to the passage assumption is increase saving will result in higher %age of resource for R&D activity.
we are suppose to WEAKEN this argument.
"E" states that since increased population is over 40 and they any way tend to save more, so the thinking that increased saving will lead to higher R&D may no be true.
Join the discussion

by rohangupta83 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:09 am
(A) Japanese research is more focused on consumers than is research by American firms. - Out of Scope

(B) Class mobility, highly valued in American culture, is encouraged by a growing rather than a stagnant economy. - Out of Scope

(C) Studies have shown that countries with high consumption rates prosper in the short run. - Out of Scope (Passage talks about 'long run' and not 'short run')

(D) Proposed changes to the tax code could involve strict limits on the deductability of interest, and increased allowance for research. (strengthens the argument because allowance for research increases)

(E) Because a decreasing percentage of the United States is under 40, an age when savings are traditionally low, the savings rate will increase without changes to the tax code. (weakens the conclusion - as explained by amitabhprasad)

imo - E
Join the discussion

by scoobydooby » Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:17 am
hey rohan and amitabh,

just curious, for weaken questions is it easier to look for a choice that weakens the conclusion or weakens the assumption?. i find it hard to weaken an assumption

in this one, for E: my thinking was- if the savings increase w/o changing the tax codes, then the US would not need to change the tax code, this contradicted the conclusion that it must change tax codes.

should i try weakening an assumption or weakening the conclusion?
Join the discussion

by niraj_a » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:12 am
gotta focus on the conclusion.

if you can, identify and use the assumption to weaken the conclusion.
Join the discussion

by iamcste » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:14 am
scoobydooby wrote:hey rohan and amitabh,

just curious, for weaken questions is it easier to look for a choice that weakens the conclusion or weakens the assumption?. i find it hard to weaken an assumption

in this one, for E: my thinking was- if the savings increase w/o changing the tax codes, then the US would not need to change the tax code, this contradicted the conclusion that it must change tax codes.

should i try weakening an assumption or weakening the conclusion?

weaken the conclusion and not assumption!
Join the discussion

by amitabhprasad » Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:44 pm
@ scoobydooby
This is the strategy I follow for weakening

How to weaken an Argument:
• Always ask (when choosing the correct answer), if this choice will make the author reconsider his position or respond to something.
• Look at the conclusion, and while keeping the assumption in mind, find something that takes away from what is said.
• Weakening Scenarios:
1. The author fails to consider all the possibilities
2. Comparison of items that are different (flaw)
3. Open conclusion

If you want you can refer the attached notes.
I got the notes from this form itself.
Attachments
Critical Reasoning2.doc
(123.5 KiB) Downloaded 136 times
Join the discussion

by vanessa.m » Fri May 13, 2016 1:50 am
I picked option E as the correct option
Join the discussion

by nicolette » Fri May 13, 2016 1:50 am
I will Go with option E in this case
Join the discussion