Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property. In place of this system, the city plans to...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Boldface

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property. In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city. Critics protest that three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes. The critics are correct on this point. Nevertheless, implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools. Several large retailers have selected Aroca City as the site for huge new stores, and these are certain to draw large numbers of shoppers from neighboring municipalities, where sales are taxed at rates of six percent and more. In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially.

In the argument given, the two potions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first is an objection that has been raised against a certain plan; the second is a prediction that, if accurate, undermines the force of that objection.

The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is a point the argument makes in favor of adopting an alternative plan.

The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is the main reason cited by the argument for its endorsement of the criticism.

The first is a claim that the argument seeks to refute; the second is the main point used by the argument to show that the claim is false.

The first is a claim that the argument accepts with certain reservations; the second presents that claim in a rewording that is not subject to those reservations.

Solution

Understanding the Passage

Text from Passage	Analysis
"Aroca City currently funds its public schools through taxes on property."	What it says: The city gets money for schools by taxing property owners Visualization: Property owners pay taxes (e.g., $2,000/year per property) → School funding (e.g., $10 million total) Source: Author's factual statement
"In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city."	What it says: The city wants to switch from property taxes to a 3% sales tax on all store purchases Visualization: Current system: Property tax → New system: 3% sales tax (e.g., $100 purchase = $3 tax) What it does: Sets up the proposed change that the argument will evaluate Source: Author's factual statement
(Boldface 1) "Critics protest that three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes."	What it says: Critics argue that 3% tax on current sales won't raise enough money compared to property taxes Visualization: Current property taxes: $10 million/year vs. 3% of current sales: $8 million/year (shortfall of $2 million) What it does: Presents the main objection to the proposed plan Source: Critics' view
"The critics are correct on this point."	What it says: The author agrees that critics are right about the funding shortfall Visualization: Author confirms: Current sales tax revenue < Property tax revenue What it does: Author validates the critics' concern, making it seem like the plan has a serious flaw Source: Author's agreement with critics
"Nevertheless, implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools."	What it says: Despite agreeing with critics, the author says school funding probably won't decrease Visualization: Final outcome: School funding likely stays at $10 million/year (or higher) What it does: This is the author's main conclusion - contradicts what we'd expect after agreeing with critics Source: Author's main position
"Several large retailers have selected Aroca City as the site for huge new stores, and these are certain to draw large numbers of shoppers from neighboring municipalities, where sales are taxed at rates of six percent and more."	What it says: Big stores are coming to Aroca, and they'll attract shoppers from nearby cities where sales tax is 6%+ (much higher than Aroca's planned 3%) Visualization: Neighboring cities: 6%+ sales tax vs. Aroca: 3% sales tax → Shoppers drive to Aroca for savings What it does: Provides the key reason supporting the author's conclusion Source: Author's factual premise
(Boldface 2) "In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially."	What it says: As a result of the factors mentioned, retail sales in Aroca will definitely go up by a lot Visualization: Current sales: $250 million/year → Future sales: $400 million/year → Tax revenue: $12 million/year (exceeding original $10 million) What it does: This explains how the funding shortfall problem gets solved - more sales means more total tax revenue Source: Author's logical conclusion

Overall Structure

The author is defending a proposed policy change against critics' objections. The flow: Critics say the plan won't raise enough money → Author agrees with their math but disagrees with their conclusion → Author explains why the plan will actually work due to increased sales volume.

Main Conclusion: Implementing the sales tax plan will probably not reduce money going to Aroca's schools.

Boldface Segments

Boldface 1: three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes
Boldface 2: retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially

Boldface Understanding

Boldface 1:

Function: States the critics' main objection to the proposed plan
Direction: Opposes the author's conclusion (argues the plan will fail)
The author actually agrees this statement is factually correct, but uses it as a stepping stone to make a stronger counterargument

Boldface 2:

Function: Provides the key explanation for why the author's conclusion is correct
Direction: Supports the author's conclusion (explains how the plan will succeed despite the critics' valid concern)
This resolves the apparent problem raised in Boldface 1

Structural Classification

Boldface 1:

Structural Role: Counterevidence/opposing view that the author acknowledges as factually correct
Predicted Answer Patterns: "an objection that the argument acknowledges but overcomes," "a concern that the argument addresses"

Boldface 2:

Structural Role: Key supporting evidence/explanation for the main conclusion
Predicted Answer Patterns: "explains how the main conclusion will be achieved," "provides the reason the argument's conclusion is likely correct"

Answer Choices Explained

The first is an objection that has been raised against a certain plan; the second is a prediction that, if accurate, undermines the force of that objection.

"The first is an objection that has been raised against a certain plan" - ✓ CORRECT - Boldface 1 presents the critics' objection that 3% of current sales won't raise enough money for schools
"the second is a prediction that, if accurate, undermines the force of that objection" - ✓ CORRECT - Boldface 2 predicts substantial sales increases, which would solve the funding shortfall problem raised in the objection

The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is a point the argument makes in favor of adopting an alternative plan.

"The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan" - ✗ WRONG - While the author agrees the criticism is factually correct, this mischaracterizes the overall structure. The first boldface is the critics' objection, not the author's criticism of the funding plan
"the second is a point the argument makes in favor of adopting an alternative plan" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface isn't directly advocating for the plan; it's explaining why the plan will work despite the critics' concerns

The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan; the second is the main reason cited by the argument for its endorsement of the criticism.

"The first is a criticism, endorsed by the argument, of a funding plan" - ✗ WRONG - Same issue as Choice B - this mischaracterizes the role of the first boldface
"the second is the main reason cited by the argument for its endorsement of the criticism" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface doesn't support the criticism; it actually explains why the criticism won't matter in practice

The first is a claim that the argument seeks to refute; the second is the main point used by the argument to show that the claim is false.

"The first is a claim that the argument seeks to refute" - ✗ WRONG - The argument actually agrees that the first boldface is factually correct, so it's not trying to refute it
"the second is the main point used by the argument to show that the claim is false" - ✗ WRONG - The argument doesn't try to show the first claim is false; instead, it shows why this true claim won't prevent the plan from working

The first is a claim that the argument accepts with certain reservations; the second presents that claim in a rewording that is not subject to those reservations.

"The first is a claim that the argument accepts with certain reservations" - ✗ WRONG - The argument accepts the claim completely without reservations - it explicitly says "The critics are correct on this point"
"the second presents that claim in a rewording that is not subject to those reservations" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is completely different content (about sales increases), not a rewording of the first

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...