Candidate for Mayor: My opponent argues that the best way to increase the city's tax revenues is to double the tax on rental cars so that non-residents provide the bulk of the additional income. This plan is unethical because it constitutes taxation without representation: we should not excessively tax those who cannot vote on the plan. Moreover, if car rental prices are too high in our city, people may simply rent cars in neighboring cities to avoid the tax surcharge. The candidate responds to her opponent's plan by
Candidate for Mayor: My opponent argues that the best way to increase the city's tax revenues is to double the tax on rental cars so that non-residents provide the bulk of the additional income. This plan is unethical because it constitutes taxation without representation: we should not excessively tax those who cannot vote on the plan. Moreover, if car rental prices are too high in our city, people may simply rent cars in neighboring cities to avoid the tax surcharge. The candidate responds to her opponent's plan by
The correct option is C Implying that the plan may result in the opposite of the intended effect.
We are asked to analyze the candidate's argument: what reasoning does she employ in her response to the opponent's plan? The opponent proposes a way to increase tax revenues. The candidate provides two reasons for rejecting the plan: first, the plan is morally wrong, and, second, it may not even work because people may rent cars in other cities instead. The correct answer must describe one or both of these objections.
(A) The candidate does introduce a moral concern, but does not present it as a quandary that cannot be solved without more data. In fact, the candidate takes a very specific stand, claiming unequivocally that the plan is morally wrong.
(B) The candidate does not argue for, or even mention, an alternate strategy by which to raise the city's tax revenues.
(C) CORRECT. The candidate suggests, via her second objection, that people might choose to rent cars in neighboring cities to avoid the higher tax. If this occurred, it could potentially reduce the number of car rentals in the candidate's city, with the result that the city's tax revenues from this source would decrease - the opposite of the opponent's intended goal.
(D) In her second objection, the candidate offers a reason whythe plan might not work as intended. Her objection relies on a conjecture about how people would behave. It does not, therefore,demonstrate(i.e.,prove) that the plan would fail.
Implying that the plan may result in the opposite of the intended effect.
We are asked to analyze the candidate's argument: what reasoning does she employ in her response to the opponent's plan? The opponent proposes a way to increase tax revenues. The candidate provides two reasons for rejecting the plan: first, the plan is morally wrong, and, second, it may not even work because people may rent cars in other cities instead. The correct answer must describe one or both of these objections.
(A) The candidate does introduce a moral concern, but does not present it as a quandary that cannot be solved without more data. In fact, the candidate takes a very specific stand, claiming unequivocally that the plan is morally wrong.
(B) The candidate does not argue for, or even mention, an alternate strategy by which to raise the city's tax revenues.
(C) CORRECT. The candidate suggests, via her second objection, that people might choose to rent cars in neighboring cities to avoid the higher tax. If this occurred, it could potentially reduce the number of car rentals in the candidate's city, with the result that the city's tax revenues from this source would decrease - the opposite of the opponent's intended goal.
(D) In her second objection, the candidate offers a reason whythe plan might not work as intended. Her objection relies on a conjecture about how people would behave. It does not, therefore,demonstrate(i.e.,prove) that the plan would fail.
