Type : MCQ

Intructions :

Directions: Read the following argument and answer the question that follows.

Question Statement :

The costs of monarchy are unjustifiable. Typically, monarchs and their immediate family receive substantial amounts of money from the state to maintain luxurious lifestyles, complete with servants, expensive holidays and hobbies. The state also spends a great deal to maintain and run palaces and other royal residences, which are seldom accessible to the general public who support them through their taxes. In the UK, what is officially termed as ‘Head of State Expenditure’ amounted to £40 million in the 2007-8 financial year. However, this excludes the cost of security for the numerous family members and residences. Although the security costs have not been confirmed, it is estimated that it exceeds £50 million a year.

Which of the following statements would weaken the argument?

Monarchy is highly cost-effective when compared to the alternate -expense of maintaining a Presidency with a large staff and equally stringent security requirements.
Royal residences are held in trust for the nation, and would require the same upkeep costs whether they were inhabited by a monarch or not.
Monarchy generates tourist revenue as millions visit sites associated with royalty, and through its role in promoting trade and industry abroad on royal visits.
All of the above