Lambert: The proposal to raise gasoline taxes to support mass transit networks is unfair. Why should drivers who w...

Sangwook on May 31, 2014


I don't understand what the answer (c) means. Is there any proposal on Keziah's argument? What method does he use to "elaborate"the context of the issue? Thanks

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Melody on June 5, 2014

I'm going to assume you meant answer choice (A) not answer choice (C). This is a Methods of Reasoning question. We are analyzing how Keziah responds to Lambert's question on the fairness of the proposal to raise gasoline taxes to support mass transit; Keziah's response does not have a proposal in it. Rather, it elaborates on a proposal that was mentioned by Lambert. Keziah tells Lambert that Lambert has misunderstood the circumstances surrounding the issue. The issue is not that drivers who never use mass transit are being forced to pay for them through the increase in gasoline taxes. Rather, the issue is the already existing inequity of funding between highways and mass transit: "the government has always spent far more, per user, from general revenue sources to fund highways than to fund mass transit." By pointing out this overarching issue, Keziah is elaborating on the background of the issue that the proposal attempts to mitigate. Keziah is merely explaining that the proposal allows transportation funds to be distributed more equally because the additional revenue from gasoline tax can be used to support mass transit. Therefore, Keziah is "elaborating the context of the issue in order to place the proposal in a more favorable light," i.e. answer choice (A). Hope that helped! Let us know if you have any other questions.