Logical Reasoning - Statement and Assumption - Discussion

According to me, option E can also be right because the statement says it is not needed for people who can spend their holidays there. Therefore, it concludes that such people should not be encoraged to spend their holidays at hill stations.

@ Abhinav ,
I agree with you . Both the assumptions are implicit

Anyone of you can explain me? what does it mean by implicit here?

I say that both are not implicit because a needy person will surely not go for a holiday. And it is not related with the statement.

II is not implicit because the statement is about encouraging poor or rich. They want to accumulate money from the people who are not poor.

Had it been that the Railways should encourage people to spend their holidays at hill stations they would have given concessions to all. It clashes with the statement which says that concessions should not be given to all but only to the needy persons. At first sight it appears to be a valid assumption.

But is this a necessary one. NO. This is not.

Concession canceled means they are not supporting the people in holidays.

How we know which person is needy and who is not ?

According to Alfred Marshall's Law of Demand,

Higher the income of an individual, less elastic is her/his demand. Thus income varies inversely with elasticity of demand. This law has been universally accepted. Of course, the interdependence of other variables is neglected in this law, but it generally holds true.

Therefore, assumption-2 definitely does not hold true, since withdrawing concessions will not affect the spending of people visiting the hill station (because the statement also implies that those who can afford to go on a hill station are NOT needy).

As a result, it does not, not encourage people to spend their holidays on hill stations since it does not discourage their spending.

According to me, assumption-2 is also not valid. It implies that people who can afford to go there in the first place are not needy. It further implies that concession should not be given AT ALL to people who can go to hill stations.

This assumption does not differentiate between needy people and people who are not needy as regards to the concessions.

Therefore, Option D is correct according to me.

@Ira, from the statement we can safely assume that initially the concession was provided because it was felt that visitors to hill station needed it. Later when they realized otherwise, they stopped it. It leads to an assumption that railways should and is indeed intent on providing concessions to needy.