- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:49 am
#23104
Complete Question Explanation
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
Lambert argues that the proposal to raise taxes to support mass transit is unfair, since people who do not use the mass transit will be thereby forced to pay for something which they do not use.
Keziah retorts that Lambert misunderstands the situation, because the government has always spent more per user on highway (private car) transit than on mass transit, and the new proposal will simply make the situation more fair.
It is important that you note that Keziah points out that the government currently spends more per user on highway transit, because that suggests a strong probability that the actual situation is that currently the government unfairly forces mass-transit users to pay for highway transit that they do not use. If Lambert is to hold to his principle that people ought not have to pay for what they do not use, he should be more favorable toward the support of mass transit, because the new gasoline tax might simply force highway users to return some of the money that they are possibly receiving from mass-transit users, thus reducing the amount of unfair largess possibly given to private vehicle operators at the expense of mass-transit customers.
You should focus on the way that Keziah brings in information that might cause Lambert, if he holds to his supposed principle, to view the proposal more favorably.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Keziah expands the context to include, by implication, what mass-transit users might spend on highways, which makes the proposal more acceptable under the principle that people should not have to pay for what they do not use.
Answer choice (B) Actually, Keziah buys into the concept that the situation is win-lose, because his argument is based on making the situation more equitable, not better for all, and because he implies that the highway users are unfairly profiting from mass-transit users.
Answer choice (C) Since Keziah's argument is based on equity, it makes no sense to believe that Keziah challenges fairness as an appropriate consideration.
Answer choice (D) Keziah does not assert that the tax will not increase costs to drivers; in fact, he implies the tax will require them to pay more of their fair share of the cost of maintaining highways.
Answer choice (E) Keziah clearly argues the point, and does not evade the issue, so this choice is wrong. Keziah seeks to inform Lambert, not to ignore him.
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
Lambert argues that the proposal to raise taxes to support mass transit is unfair, since people who do not use the mass transit will be thereby forced to pay for something which they do not use.
Keziah retorts that Lambert misunderstands the situation, because the government has always spent more per user on highway (private car) transit than on mass transit, and the new proposal will simply make the situation more fair.
It is important that you note that Keziah points out that the government currently spends more per user on highway transit, because that suggests a strong probability that the actual situation is that currently the government unfairly forces mass-transit users to pay for highway transit that they do not use. If Lambert is to hold to his principle that people ought not have to pay for what they do not use, he should be more favorable toward the support of mass transit, because the new gasoline tax might simply force highway users to return some of the money that they are possibly receiving from mass-transit users, thus reducing the amount of unfair largess possibly given to private vehicle operators at the expense of mass-transit customers.
You should focus on the way that Keziah brings in information that might cause Lambert, if he holds to his supposed principle, to view the proposal more favorably.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Keziah expands the context to include, by implication, what mass-transit users might spend on highways, which makes the proposal more acceptable under the principle that people should not have to pay for what they do not use.
Answer choice (B) Actually, Keziah buys into the concept that the situation is win-lose, because his argument is based on making the situation more equitable, not better for all, and because he implies that the highway users are unfairly profiting from mass-transit users.
Answer choice (C) Since Keziah's argument is based on equity, it makes no sense to believe that Keziah challenges fairness as an appropriate consideration.
Answer choice (D) Keziah does not assert that the tax will not increase costs to drivers; in fact, he implies the tax will require them to pay more of their fair share of the cost of maintaining highways.
Answer choice (E) Keziah clearly argues the point, and does not evade the issue, so this choice is wrong. Keziah seeks to inform Lambert, not to ignore him.