#25 - Situation: In the island nation of Bezun, the

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (E)

The unusual format of this double-stimulus is actually similar enough to many other questions, which present the situation and analysis in a single paragraph.

The situation is that the government taxes gasoline heavily to reduce driving, and then uses the tax revenue to reduce the prices charged for electricity.

The analysis is that when greater success is achieved in reducing driving, less success will be achieved in reducing the prices charged for electricity.

In general, there is a trade-off in how well the tax can accomplish the goals. If the tax succeeds at the goal of discouraging driving, the tax will provide less money for electricity subsidy. Since you are asked to parallel the situation, you should look for a situation in which there is similarly a trade-off in how well a method can accomplish two goals.

Answer choice (A): The goals are to discourage lateness and remind clients who are late to return their books. Even if the fees do virtually eliminate lateness, that should not much diminish the library’s ability to send reminders using the fees, since now far fewer people need to be reminded. This plan does not involve a necessary trade-off, so this choice is wrong.

Answer choice (B): The goals are to discourage use of overnight delivery and to pay for the cost of overnight delivery. Even if the surcharges do virtually eliminate overnight deliveries, each customer that still wants overnight delivery will have to pay the surcharge (which covers delivery cost), so there is no trade-off between the goals, and this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): This situation does not involve a clear trade-off. Though there are many reasons to discard this choice, one of the simplest is that the management seems to decide that since low fees will not pay for both upkeep and new projects, the management will not engage in new projects. That involves admittedly discarding the potential goal of new projects in favor of the goal of keeping fees low, which is dissimilar to the stimulus.

Answer choice (D): The goals are customer convenience and employee wage-augmentation. The restaurant uses a multi-stepped method of automatic tipping and tip-sharing. The goals are compatible, and since this method includes more steps than the one in the stimulus, so this choice is wrong.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. The toll is used with the goal of discouraging bridge use and raising money for a new bridge. As does the stimulus, that involves a trade-off between goals, because if people stop using the old bridge, the toll will no longer provide much funding for the new bridge.

[Coleman]

Hi,

I don't understand why answer choice B is incorrect.
It states, "A mail-order store imposes a stiff surcharge for overnight delivery in order to limit the use of this option. The store uses revenue from the surcharge to pay the extra expenses it incurs for providing the overnight delivery service."

If we greatly achieved the first goal since overnight delivery is virtually eliminated because people are trying to avoid the stiff surcharge, our second goal will be less successive because we didn't raise enough funds to provide the overnight delivery service.

Could you explain what is the problem in this reasoning? It feels like I'm captured in this cycle of logic which makes me really hard to get through. I don't understand why the surcharge here is just a way of passing on costs to the consumer.

Thanks in advance!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Coleman,

Why wouldn't the fees collected pay for the service needed for answer choice (B)? If the surcharge is successful in limiting overnight delivery, wouldn't it also decrease the money needed to pay for overnight delivery? We are looking for a situation where the success of the first hurts the success of the second. In our stimulus, the success of the gasoline surcharge in inducing people to avoid driving will hurt the success of using the fees to pay for electricity. The need for electricity wouldn't drop as people drove less in the same way that the cost of overnight delivery would drop as people stop using the option.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[dshen123]

I don't understand why A is incorrect. If the late fee is so high, no one would return books late and the 2nd plan would fail completely...Thus the more successful A is, the less successful B is ?

[Adam Tyson]

But in answer A, if the first objective is successful, everyone (or almost everyone) would return books on time, rather than keep them late. Eventually, no money would be raised because nobody would be late. The second objective wouldn't fail, because there would be no need for it! Your hypothetical of people just not returning the books is in conflict with the analysis, because that would mean the first objective was not achieved.