Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStatement and Arguments

Consider the following statement regarding public utility management:

Statement: Should the state water authority mandate the installation of smart water meters in all residential households with immediate effect, penalizing non-compliance by entirely disconnecting the municipal water supply?

Which of the following arguments are considered logically STRONG in response to this statement? (Select all that apply)

  1. Yes, because smart meters provide real-time consumption data that can significantly reduce water wastage and help authorities identify underground infrastructure leaks promptly in water-scarce regions.Answer
  2. No, because immediate implementation coupled with disconnection penalties would unfairly target low-income households that cannot afford the upfront installation costs on such short notice.Answer
  3. C
    Yes, because it is a proven geographical fact that less than three percent of the world's total water supply consists of accessible fresh water.
  4. D
    No, the government should instead permanently shut down the central municipal water supply network and require every neighborhood to independently source its own groundwater.

Answer

The argument supporting the mandate based on the benefits of real-time data, and the argument opposing the mandate based on the economic burden on low-income households, are both logically strong.
The correct selections are the two arguments that directly and realistically address the specific policy proposed in the statement. The first valid argument is strong because it logically connects the technological feature of the policy (smart meters) to a realistic administrative benefit (leak detection and waste reduction). The second valid argument is strong because it directly targets the harsh implementation timeline and penalties outlined in the statement, accurately pointing out a realistic socioeconomic consequence (an unfair financial burden on low-income households).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core components of the statement.
The statement involves mandating smart water meters, doing so with immediate effect, and applying strict disconnection penalties for non-compliance.
Identifying the specific mechanisms and conditions in the policy is necessary to evaluate if the arguments directly address them.
2
Evaluate the supportive argument regarding real-time consumption data.
The argument is strong because it logically connects the mechanism of the policy (smart meters) to a realistic, highly relevant positive outcome (reducing wastage and finding leaks).
Strong arguments must demonstrate direct relevance and non-trivial justification.
3
Evaluate the opposing argument regarding low-income households.
The argument is strong because it validly targets the harsh implementation conditions ('immediate effect' and 'penalizing'), pointing out a realistic negative socioeconomic consequence.
A strong argument can validly oppose a policy by pointing out practical implementation flaws or realistic harms.
4
Evaluate the argument referencing the global percentage of fresh water.
The argument is weak. Although it states a true fact, it fails to connect logically to the specific punitive administrative mandate.
Factual truth alone does not constitute a logically sound argument for a specific policy action.
5
Evaluate the argument proposing the shutdown of the municipal water supply.
The argument is weak because it suggests abandoning public infrastructure entirely.
Extreme or disproportionate administrative measures are considered weak logical arguments.

Key Concept

Evaluating the logical validity, direct relevance, and realistic impact of arguments in response to public policy statements.
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic