Politician: Over the next decade, our city will be replacing all of its street signs with signs that are designed for...

Grace on December 24 at 04:05PM

C?

I got the correct answer, but could you please explain why this is the right answer and why the others are wrong? I am not 100% sure why C is correct.

1 Reply

Ravi on December 24 at 05:36PM

@GLEE,

Happy to help.

In the stimulus, we're given background info that over the next decade, the politician's city will be replacing all of its street signs with signs that are designed for improved readability. Then, we're given the politician's argument. She says since no one is complaining about the current signs, installing the new ones is a colossal waste of time and money.

The question stem asks us to pick the answer that would be most useful to know in evaluating the politician's argument.

Answer A is irrelevant, as it doesn't help us evaluate the strength of the argument. If the signs are bigger, have different colors, or new fonts now, so what? We still don't know if their installations is a waste of time and money.

Answer B is tricky, but it doesn't help us. Answer B is hoping that we confuse 'manufacture' for 'install,' so it's important that we read carefully. The manufacturing costs are only pertinent to the producer of the signs. While it's true that the city is presumably a client of the producer of these signs, we do not know how much the city is purchasing the signs for. it's possible that the sign makers are giving the city free signs as a form of promoting their business, or that they are not taking any profits on the signs. There are too many additional uncertainties with answer B, so it doesn't help us evaluate the stimulus's argument.

Answer C would really help us evaluate the politician's argument, and it's our answer. If the city replaces 0-1% of its signs annually, then it makes it more likely that installing the new signs would be a colossal waste of time and money (assuming that the city is bearing the costs of installation). Conversely, if the city replaces almost all of its signs annually, then it makes it less likely that installing the new signs would be a colossal waste of time and money since they're being replaced annually anyway.

Answer D doesn't help us evaluate the argument. What other cities are doing has no bearing on what the politician's city is doing and whether or not the installation of the new signs is a colossal waste of time and money.

Answer E doesn't matter. Who cares if experts were consulted? Whether or not experts were consulted doesn't help us better evaluate the argument without having to make a bunch of new assumptions.

Hope this helps. Let us know if you have more questions—we're here to help!