Re: Vorland’s government is planning a nationwide ban on smoking in restau
[#permalink]
21 Sep 2021, 10:14
Conclusion : The objection that the ban would reduce restaurants’ revenues is ill founded. >> Ban would not reduce revenues
Defence: Other towns where restaurants ban smoking show incresed revenue
To undermine the defence, we need to either show that the restuarents where smoking is banned have other resons for increased revenue OR Smoking is still permitted somehow.
Lets look at the answer choices:
A. When the state first imposed a restaurant meal tax, opponents predicted that restaurants’ revenues would decline as a result, a prediction that proved to be
correct in the short term. >>> Talks about mean tax. Out of scope.
B. The tax on meals in restaurants is higher than the tax on many other goods and services. >>> Out of scope
C. Over the last five years, smoking has steadily declined throughout Vorland. >>> Out of scope
D. In many of the towns that restrict smoking in restaurants, restaurants can maintain separate dining areas where smoking is permitted. >>> Smoking is allowed, but under restrictions. Bingo! Answer!
E. Over the last five years, government revenues from sales taxes have grown no faster in the towns with restaurant smoking restrictions than in the towns that have no such restrictions. >>> talks about same growth rate of sales taxes. Not adding any value.