Summary
The mayor concludes that it’s not financially feasible to pave the city’s roads with rubberized asphalt, which would make winter ice removal easier and less expensive. Why not? Because rubberized asphalt is more expensive than regular asphalt—and the city cannot increase its budget to build and maintain roads.
Notable Assumptions
For the argument to make sense, the mayor must assume that using rubberized asphalt would require increasing the city’s road budget, despite any cost savings during winter ice removal. In other words, the necessary assumption is that rubberized asphalt would increase costs by a greater amount than the savings it would create.
A
Using rubberized asphalt to pave roads would not have any advantages besides facilitating the removal of ice on roads.
The mayor isn’t arguing that rubberized asphalt wouldn’t be beneficial, just that it wouldn’t fit in the budget. It’s not necessary that there be no other advantages.
B
The severity of winters in the region in which the city is located does not vary significantly from year to year.
Whether the city’s winters vary in severity doesn’t affect the argument—even if some winters were much more severe than others, the argument would still make sense.
C
It would cost more to add particles of rubber to asphalt than to add particles of rubber to other materials that are used to pave roads.
The mayor’s conclusion that rubberized asphalt wouldn’t fit in the city’s budget can stand whether or not asphalt is more expensive to rubberize than other road materials. That means this is irrelevant.
D
Savings in the cost of ice removal would not pay for the increased expense of using rubberized asphalt to pave roads.
In other words, rubberized asphalt would overall increase the city’s spending on roads. If we negated this, and the savings matched or outweighed the costs, then the mayor’s conclusion would be unsupported—making this necessary to assume.
E
The techniques the city currently uses for removing ice from city roads are not the least expensive possible, given the type of road surface in place.
The city’s ability to save money on ice removal is irrelevant, except for how it compares to the cost of rubberized asphalt. This doesn’t get to the mayor’s assumption that that cost would exceed ice removal savings, so it’s not necessary to assume.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that cable companies won’t be able to survive the fiber-optic revolution. This is because fiber-optic cables allow telephone companies to offer 150 channels for the same price cable companies charge for 50 channels.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that customers will generally choose packages with more channels at the same price. This means the author either believes customers simply like having more channels, or that some of the channels are ones customers want but don’t have access to. The author also assumes that cable companies don’t bundle their TV services with other products (i.e. internet service) in a way that would be cost-efficient for customers.
A
The initial cost per household of installing new fiber-optic television service will exceed the current cost of installing cable television service.
This seems to weaken the argument for the fiber-optic revolution. Even if telephone companies can offer channels at a cheaper price, the installation fee might mitigate some of that benefit.
B
The most popular movies and programs on channels carried by cable companies will also be offered on channels carried by the fiber-optic lines owned by the telephone companies.
Customers generally won’t lose out on any of their favorite programs if they switch to fiber-optic. They’ll simply get more choices at a lower price point.
C
Cable television companies will respond to competition from the telephone companies by increasing the number of channels they offer.
If anything, this seems to weaken the author’s argument. The whole benefit of fiber-optic is that more channels will be available.
D
Some telephone companies own cable companies in areas other than those in which they provide telephone services.
Irrelevant. The author never talks about telephone companies own cable companies.
E
The new fiber-optic services offered by telephone companies will be subject to more stringent governmental programming regulations than those to which cable companies are now subject.
This may actually weaken the author’s argument. Some people’s favorite shows might be regulated out of existence on the fiber-optic services.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that personnel managers should not ask about job candidates’ hobbies because a candidate’s enthusiasm for a hobby might indicate that he cares more about play than work.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author concludes that managers shouldn’t ask about candidates’ hobbies. However, she overlooks any possible benefits of asking candidates about their hobbies. For example, a candidate’s hobbies may indicate other skills and abilities and may provide managers with a more complete understanding of the candidate.
Also, even if a candidate’s enthusiasm does indicate that the candidate is less concerned with work than with play, the author never explains why this is negative. Perhaps it’s helpful for managers to learn this information in interviews.
A
A candidate’s involvement in particular hobbies may indicate a capacity to make long-term commitments.
If a candidate’s hobby shows his ability to make long-term commitments, managers might benefit from asking about hobbies to assess this. The author overlooks this potential benefit.
B
Candidates who have no hobbies may pretend that they have one when asked in an interview.
This presents another potential downside of asking candidates’ about their hobbies: the candidates might lie. Thus, (B) isn’t an example of a potential benefit of asking about hobbies that the author overlooked.
C
Inquiries about a hobby may put candidates at ease, eliciting more honest responses about important questions.
If asking candidates about hobbies leads to more honest answers, it could be helpful for managers to ask. The author overlooks this potential benefit.
D
Having certain kinds of hobbies may indicate that a candidate has good organizational skills.
Asking about a candidate’s hobbies may teach a manager something about that candidate’s organizational skills. The author overlooks this potential benefit.
E
Personnel managers may make better choices among candidates if they are not restricted from asking particular types of questions.
(E) suggests that if managers are allowed to ask about candidates’ hobbies, they may make better hiring decisions. The author overlooks this potential benefit of asking about hobbies.