Party spokesperson: The opposition party's proposal to stimulate economic activity in the province by refunding $600 million in provincial taxes to taxpayers, who could be expected to spend the money, envisions an illusory benefit. █████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ██ ██ ████████ ██████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██ █████████ ██ ████ ███████ ███ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ █████████ ███ ██████████ ████████
The spokesperson concludes the opposition party’s plan to stimulate the economy envisions an illusory benefit. As evidence, the spokesperson states the province’s budget is required to be in balance. Either new taxes need to make up for the shortfall, or workers for the province will be dismissed. As a result, there will be no net increase in spending to stimulate the economy.
The spokesperson counters the position held by the opposing party. He does this by pointing out that an anticipated advantage of the opposing party’s plan would be offset by a disadvantage. Even if the province’s taxpayers are refunded $600 million, the need for a new tax to make up for the shortfall or the need to dismiss workers will negate the positive effects of the refunds.
The spokesperson proceeds by
reinterpreting a term ████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ ████████ ████████
arguing that a █████████ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ██ ████████████ ████████████
casting doubt on ███ ███████ ██ █████████
drawing a distinction ███████ █████████ █████ ██ ████████ ████████
seeking to show ████ ███ ██████████ ████ █████████ █████ █████ █████ ████ █████ ██ ████████ ██ ████ ██ ███████