Question

A government's proposed 8 percent cut in all subsidies to art groups will be difficult for those groups to absorb. As can be seen, however, from their response to last year's cut,  it will not put them out of existence. Last year there was also an 8 percent cut, and though private fund-raising was very difficult for the art groups in the current recessionary economy, they did survive.  
The reasoning in the argument is flawed because of the  argument

पर्याय

• Relies without warrant on the probability that the economy will improve.

• Overlooks the possibility that the cumulative effect of the cuts will be more than the arts group can withstand. 

• Equates the mere survival of the arts groups with their flourishing. 

• Does not raise the issue of whether there should be  any government subsidies to arts groups at all.

Answer 1

Overlooks the possibility that the cumulative effect of the cuts will be more than the arts group can withstand. 

Explanation:

The flaw of the argument in given in 'Overlooks the possibility that the cumulative effect of  the cuts will be more than the arts group can withstand.' that it overlooks the possibility that even though out groups survived on 8% cut (last year), they may not survive another 8% cut as this will result in two cumulative cuts (8% + 8%) and will be move unfavorable to them than shown in the argument.