Question Type:
Principle Support
Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: The residents of Sierra should vote in favor of a local tax to fund construction of a road connecting Sierra to the Glen Veil apartment complex.
Premises: Builders won't complete the complex unless the road is built. Completion of the complex would strengthen Sierra's economy, and a stronger economy is better for every resident.
Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion introduces a new concept voting in favor of a local tax. It also makes a recommendation: Residents should vote in favor of this new tax. Anticipate an answer that says "If (something we know about the new tax), then (voters should vote in favor of the new tax)."
Correct answer:
E
Answer choice analysis:
(A) This translates to: If project necessary to strengthen economy --> residents should vote for it. But is this project really necessary to strengthen the economy? Nope. It's sufficient to strengthen it, but it isn't necessary.
(B) This translates to: If it doesn't produce benefits for all residents --> residents shouldn't vote for it. That won't ever help us conclude that residents should vote for the tax. Eliminate!
(C) This translates to: If construction project --> fund with a tax not a debt. That doesn’t help us conclude that the residents should vote for the tax, however. Eliminate!
(D) This translates to: If required to pay a tax --> benefit from the project. That doesn’t tell us diddly about who should vote for the tax. Eliminate!
(E) Finally! This translates to: If you benefit from a project --> you should vote in favor of taxes to fund the project. We know that all residents would benefit, so we can now conclude that all residents should vote for the tax.
Takeaway/Pattern:
Principle Support answers are conditional statements. The correct answer should be a bridge connecting the concepts in the premise to the concepts in the conclusion. When the conclusion is a recommendation, eliminate any answer that doesn't help you conclude that exact recommendation!
#officialexplanation