Business owner: Around Noon

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Evidence Match Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   Unless a business provides a product or service that is valued by consumers, the business should not be allowed to make

   This answer choice would have the same meaning if it stated, "if a business does not provide a product or service that is valued by consumers then the business should not be allowed to make use of scarce city resources." The evidence does not state in any way that food trucks aren't providing a service that is valued by customers. And the argument does not conclude that food trucks should not be allowed to make use of city resources. We could call the metered parking spots "city resources," but the conclusion indicates that food trucks should be allowed to use those spaces.

   1%
2. B

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   If a serious problem exists in one part of a city, the city government should address the problem before it spreads to

   By stating that the city government "should address the problem," this answer would support an argument which concludes that the city council should pass the bill. We want support the actual conclusion, which states that the bill should be rejected.

   1%
3. C

   Bad Evidence Match2% picked this

   No proposed solution to a city problem should be implemented until the problem has

   This answer choice would have the same meaning if it stated, "if a problem has not been thoroughly studied then no proposed solution to the problem should be implemented." But the evidence in the argument states nothing about the problem not being thoroughly studied. We have no idea if the food truck problem has been thoroughly studied or not.

   2%
4. D

   Correct95% picked this

   A law that would disadvantage businesses of a certain type throughout a city should not be used to solve a problem that does not

   Why this is right

   This answer mentions disadvantaging "businesses of a certain type." That would refer to the food trucks in the argument. Food trucks throughout the city would be disadvantaged by a bill prohibiting them from parking in metered spaces in any commercially zoned area.

   Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   95%
5. E

   Bad Evidence Match1% picked this

   If a city has a serious problem, then it should not implement any policy that would aggravate that problem even if the

   The idea of aggravating an existing problem doesn't match the evidence that we were given. The argument doesn't state that the bill prohibiting food trucks from parking in metered spaces would aggravate any existing problem. It seems like the bill would create a new problem for food trucks that are currently using the metered spaces.

   1%