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 portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that criticism.

The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that defense.

The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second is a consideration raised by the argument in support of that criticism.

The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second presents a consideration that has been raised against that criticism.

The first presents a plan whose consequences the argument seeks to evaluate; the second is presented by the argument as one likely consequence that is undesirable.

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: Current system: Property taxes → School funding (e.g., $10 million annually) Source: Author's view (factual background)
(Boldface 1) "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 replace property taxes with a 3% sales tax on all store purchases Visualization: Proposed change: Property tax system → 3% sales tax on retail purchases (e.g., $100 purchase = $3 tax) What it does: Introduces the new plan that the entire argument will discuss Source: Author's view (describing the plan)
"Critics protest that three percent of current retail sales falls short of the amount raised for schools by property taxes."	What it says: People oppose the plan, saying 3% of current sales won't raise enough money compared to property taxes Visualization: Critics' concern: Current retail sales at 3% = $8 million vs Property taxes = $10 million (shortfall of $2 million) What it does: Presents the main objection to the plan Source: Critics' view
"The critics are correct on this point."	What it says: The author agrees that current sales tax revenue would be less than property tax revenue Visualization: Author confirms: 3% of current retail sales = $8 million < $10 million from property taxes What it does: Acknowledges the validity of the criticism Source: Author's view
"Nevertheless, implementing the plan will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools."	What it says: Despite agreeing with critics, the author believes schools won't lose money Visualization: Author's prediction: Final result = Schools still get $10 million (or more) despite the change What it does: States the main conclusion that contradicts the critics' concern Source: Author's view
(Boldface 2) "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"	What it says: Big stores are coming to Aroca, and they will attract shoppers from nearby cities Visualization: Future scenario: New big stores in Aroca → Shoppers from neighboring cities travel to Aroca → More total customers What it does: Provides the key evidence for why sales will increase dramatically Source: Author's view
"where sales are taxed at rates of six percent and more."	What it says: The neighboring cities charge 6% or higher sales tax Visualization: Tax comparison: Neighboring cities = 6%+ sales tax vs Aroca = 3% sales tax What it does: Explains why shoppers will prefer Aroca (lower taxes) Source: Author's view
"In consequence, retail sales in Aroca City are bound to increase substantially."	What it says: As a result, Aroca will have much higher sales volume Visualization: Expected outcome: Current sales volume → Substantially higher sales volume (e.g., doubling from $250 million to $500 million annually) What it does: Concludes that higher sales volume will offset the revenue concern Source: Author's view

Overall Structure

The author is defending a proposed policy change against criticism. The flow: Policy proposal → Critics' objection → Author agrees with objection → Nevertheless, author argues policy won't have the feared negative consequence → Evidence for why the outcome will be different than critics expect.

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

Boldface Segments

Boldface 1: In place of this system, the city plans to introduce a sales tax of three percent on all retail sales in the city.
Boldface 2: 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

Boldface Understanding

Boldface 1:

Function: Introduces the policy proposal that is being defended
Direction: Same direction (supports author's position) - this is the plan the author ultimately defends

Boldface 2:

Function: Provides the key evidence/reason for why the author believes the policy will work despite critics' concerns
Direction: Same direction (supports author's position) - this evidence supports the main conclusion

Structural Classification

Boldface 1:

Structural Role: The policy/proposal being defended; sets up the entire discussion
Predicted Answer Patterns: "a proposal that the argument defends," "a plan that the argument supports"

Boldface 2:

Structural Role: Key evidence/premise supporting the main conclusion
Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence supporting the argument's conclusion," "a consideration that supports the author's position"

Answer Choices Explained

The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that criticism.

'The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism' - ✓ CORRECT - The sales tax plan is what the author ultimately defends, concluding it won't reduce school funding despite critics' concerns
'the second gives part of the basis for that criticism' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface about new retailers actually supports the author's defense, not the critics' position. Critics worry about insufficient revenue, but new retailers provide evidence for increased sales

The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism; the second gives part of the basis for that defense.

'The first presents a plan that the argument seeks to defend against a certain criticism' - ✓ CORRECT - The author defends the sales tax plan against critics who say it won't raise enough money
'the second gives part of the basis for that defense' - ✓ CORRECT - The new retailers provide key evidence for why sales will increase substantially, supporting the author's conclusion that schools won't lose funding

The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second is a consideration raised by the argument in support of that criticism.

'The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes' - ✗ WRONG - The author doesn't criticize the sales tax plan; instead, the author defends it by arguing it won't reduce school funding
'the second is a consideration raised by the argument in support of that criticism' - ✗ WRONG - Since the first part is wrong and the author doesn't criticize the plan, this follow-up is also incorrect

The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes; the second presents a consideration that has been raised against that criticism.

'The first presents a plan that the argument criticizes' - ✗ WRONG - The author supports the plan, not criticizes it. The conclusion states the plan 'will probably not reduce the money going to Aroca's schools'
'the second presents a consideration that has been raised against that criticism' - ✗ WRONG - This part might seem tempting, but since the first part incorrectly identifies the author as criticizing the plan, the whole choice fails

The first presents a plan whose consequences the argument seeks to evaluate; the second is presented by the argument as one likely consequence that is undesirable.

'The first presents a plan whose consequences the argument seeks to evaluate' - ✗ WRONG - While the author does evaluate consequences, the primary purpose is to defend the plan against criticism, not neutrally evaluate it
'the second is presented by the argument as one likely consequence that is undesirable' - ✗ WRONG - The new retailers are presented as a positive development that will increase sales, not as something undesirable

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...