Question

Statement: Should income tax be abolished in India?
Arguments:

I. Yes. It is an unnecessary burden on the wage earners.
II. No. It is a good source of revenue.

a.

Only argument I is strong

b.

Only argument II is strong

c.

Either I or II is strong

d.

Neither I nor II is strong

Posted under Logical Reasoning

Answer: (b).Only argument II is strong

Interact with the Community - Share Your Thoughts

Uncertain About the Answer? Seek Clarification Here.

Understand the Explanation? Include it Here.

Q. Statement: Should income tax be abolished in India? Arguments: I. Yes. It is an unnecessary burden on the wage earners. II. No. It is a good source of revenue.

Similar Questions

Explore Relevant Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

Q. Statement: Should there be a ceiling on the salary of top executives of multinationals in our country?
Arguments:

I. Yes. Otherwise it would lead to unhealthy competition and our own industry would not be able to withstand that.
II. No. With the accent on liberalization of economy, any such move would be counter-productive. Once the economy picks up, this disparity will be reduced.

Q. Statement: Should school education be made free in India?
Arguments:

I. Yes. This is the only way to improve the level of literacy.
II. No. It would add to the already heavy burden on the exchequer.

Q. Statement: Should import duty on all the electronic goods be dispensed with?
Arguments:

I. No. This will considerably reduce the income of the government and will adversely affect the developmental activities.
II. No. The local manufacturers will not be able to compete with the foreign manufacturers who are technologically far superior.

Q. Statement: Should colleges be given the status of a university in India?
Arguments:

I. Yes. Colleges are in a better position to assess the student's performance and therefore the degrees will be more valid.
II. No. It is Utopian to think that there will not be nepotism and corruption in awarding degrees by colleges.

Q. Statement: Should the prestigious people who have committed crime unknowingly, be met with special treatment?
Arguments:

I. Yes. The prestigious people do not commit crime intentionally.
II. No. It is our policy that everybody is equal before the law.

Q. Statement: Can pollution be controlled?
Arguments:

I. Yes. If everyone realizes the hazards it may create and cooperates to get rid of it, pollution may be controlled.
II. No. The crowded highways, factories and industries and an ever-growing population eager to acquire more and more land for constructing houses are beyond control.

Q. Statement: Should the railways in India be privatized in a phased manner like other public sector enterprises?
Arguments:

I. Yes. This is the only way to bring in competitiveness and provide better services to the public.
II. No. This will pose a threat to the national security of our country as multinationals will enter into the fray.

Q. Statement: Should internal assessment in colleges be abolished?
Arguments:

I. Yes. This will help in reducing the possibility of favouritism.
II. No, teaching faculty will lose control over students.

Q. Statement: Should children be legally made responsible to take care of their parents during their old age?
Arguments:

I. Yes. Such matter can only be solved by legal means.
II. Yes. Only this will bring some relief to poor parents.

Q. Statement: Should there be reservation in Government jobs for candidates from single child family?
Arguments:

I. No. This is not advisable as the jobs should be offered to only deserving candidates without any reservation for a particular group.
II. Yes. This will help reduce the growing population in India as the parents will be encouraged to adopt single child norm.

Q. Statement: Should higher education be completely stopped for some time?
Arguments:

I. No. It will hamper the country's future progress.
II. Yes. It will reduce the educated unemployment.

Q. Statement: Should we scrap the 'Public Distribution System' in India?
Arguments:

I. Yes, Protectionism is over, everyone must get the bread on his/her own.
II. Yes. The poor do not get any benefit because of corruption.

Q. Statement: Should India have no military force at all?
Arguments:

I. No. Other countries in the world do not believe in non-violence.
II. Yes. Many Indians believe in non-violence.

Q. Statement: Should there be uniforms for students in the colleges in India as in the schools?
Arguments:

I. Yes, this will improve the ambience of the colleges as all the students will be decently dressed.
II. No. The college students should not be regimented and they should be left to choose their clothes for coming to the college.

Q. Statement: Should India engage into a dialogue with neighbouring countries to stop cross border tension?
Arguments:

I. Yes. This is the only way to reduce the cross border terrorism and stop loss of innocent lives.
II. No. Neighbouring countries cannot be relied upon in such matters, they may still engage in subversive activities.

Q. Statement: Should there be a world government?
Arguments:

I. Yes. It will help in eliminating tensions among the nations.
II. No. Then, only the developed countries will dominate in the government.

Q. Statement: Should the practice of transfers of clerical cadre employees from government offices of one city to those of another be stopped?
Arguments:

I. No. Transfer of employees is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it.
II. Yes. It involves lot of governmental expenditure and inconvenience too many compared to the benefits it yields.

Q. Statement: Is paying ransom or agreeing to the conditions of kidnappers of political figures, a proper course of action?
Arguments:

I. Yes. The victims must be saved at all cost.
II. No. It encourages the kidnappers to continue their sinister activities.

Q. Statement: Should government jobs in rural areas have more incentives?
Arguments:

I. Yes. Incentives are essential for attracting government servants there.
II. No. Rural areas are already cheaper, healthier and less complex than big cities. So ? Why offer extra incentives!

Q. Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?
Arguments:

I. Yes. This will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgement for casting their vote.
II. No. In a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no restrictions.

Recommended Subjects

Are you eager to expand your knowledge beyond Logical Reasoning? We've handpicked a range of related categories that you might find intriguing.

Click on the categories below to discover a wealth of MCQs and enrich your understanding of various subjects. Happy exploring!