Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 24 Jul 2014, 07:34

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Bank depositors in the United States are all financially

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 418
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Bank depositors in the United States are all financially [#permalink] New post 08 May 2008, 11:45
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  25% (low)

Question Stats:

73% (02:23) correct 27% (01:18) wrong based on 132 sessions
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 44
Page: 133
Difficulty:


Bank depositors in the United States are all financially protected against bank failure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?

(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting a bank.
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Narenn on 07 Oct 2013, 09:44, edited 3 times in total.
Necessary Corrections for Official Guide Verbal Review 2nd Edition Project
Kaplan Promo CodeKnewton GMAT Discount CodesGMAT Pill GMAT Discount Codes
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 541
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR: Bank depositor [#permalink] New post 08 May 2008, 12:06
I agree

E. The argument depends on the fact that depositors can determine which banks are safe.

B. This weakens by saying that no insurance causes failures which is the opposite of what the economist argue.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2008
Posts: 133
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Bank depositor [#permalink] New post 08 May 2008, 12:09
lexis wrote:
Bank depositors in the United States are all financially protected against bank failure because
the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance
is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures
, since it removes from depositors any
financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure.
If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for
depositors' money.

1. The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?
(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting
a bank.
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a
significant
factor in bank failures.
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

2. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist's argument?
(A) Before the government started to insure depositors against bank failure, there was a
lower rate of bank failure than there is now.
(B) When the government did not insure deposits, frequent bank failures occurred as a
result of depositors' fears of losing money in bank failures.

(C) Surveys show that a significant proportion of depositors are aware that their deposits
are insured by the government.
(D) There is an upper limit on the amount of an individual's deposit that the government will
insure, but very few individuals' deposits exceed thislimit.
(E) The security of a bank against failure depends on the percentage of its assets that are
loaned out and also on how much risk its loans involve.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 709
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR: Bank depositor [#permalink] New post 08 May 2008, 12:17
E & B
1. The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?
(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.-> out of scope
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.->irrelevant
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting
a bank.-> may be, not necessarily the required assumption
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a
significant factor in bank failures.-> could be we are not sure
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.-> correct, thus investor will not invest the banks that are doomed to fail, thus the required assumption

2. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist's argument?
Economist's argument->"insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures" answer choice that says insurance and failure are independent is the best one

(A) Before the government started to insure depositors against bank failure, there was a
lower rate of bank failure than there is now.->supports the economist
(B) When the government did not insure deposits, frequent bank failures occurred as a
result of depositors' fears of losing money in bank failures.-> sounds good
(C) Surveys show that a significant proportion of depositors are aware that their deposits
are insured by the government.->irrelevant
(D) There is an upper limit on the amount of an individual's deposit that the government will
insure, but very few individuals' deposits exceed thislimit.-> irrelevant
(E) The security of a bank against failure depends on the percentage of its assets that are
loaned out and also on how much risk its loans involve.-> irrelevant
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1943
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 249 [0], given: 1

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: CR: Bank depositor [#permalink] New post 08 May 2008, 20:38
lexis wrote:
Bank depositors in the United States are all financially protected against bank failure because
the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance
is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures, since it removes from depositors any
financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure.
If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for
depositors' money.

1. The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?
(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting
a bank.
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a
significant
factor in bank failures.
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

2. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist's argument?
(A) Before the government started to insure depositors against bank failure, there was a
lower rate of bank failure than there is now.
(B) When the government did not insure deposits, frequent bank failures occurred as a
result of depositors' fears of losing money in bank failures.
(C) Surveys show that a significant proportion of depositors are aware that their deposits
are insured by the government.
(D) There is an upper limit on the amount of an individual's deposit that the government will
insure, but very few individuals' deposits exceed thislimit.
(E) The security of a bank against failure depends on the percentage of its assets that are
loaned out and also on how much risk its loans involve.


Hi lexis,
1.
This is OG. If you dont like the OE of OG, you can be advised by this way.
Let see the red colored boldface. That is from where the economist comes to make his conclusion and also exactly what he want to assume. Should not be lured by other things out of scope.

Basing on that clue, you should rephrase the choice so that the meaning of the correct choice is the same as meaning of the colored above!

Spend time rephrasing and see how E fits with that colore boldface! and let me know! :lol:

2. I hope you see that this argument is kind of causal reasoning. So, to weaken this causal argument, one of the common ways that GMAC want to test you is find out the alternative cause for the observed effect.
a. observed effect: high rate of bank failures
b. cause that economist claimed: goverment insurants
c. find out the alternate cause: ????B
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
Posts: 57
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 9

Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 02:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected against bank failure because the govenment insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly reponsible for the the high rate of bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumption?

1. Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
2. A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks
3. The more a depositor has to deposit, the more carefully he or she tends to be in selecting a bank
4. The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
5. Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

Pls explain your choice. I was confused of "Since...against failure" then I got the wrong choice

Last edited by Zarrolou on 29 Jun 2013, 08:22, edited 1 time in total.
Added OA.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 03:17
Clear B

Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected against bank failure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the the high rate of bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumption?

1. Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments --> this is out of scope, no mentions about the borrowers. This is about the depositors
2. A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks --> best. Because depositors deposit at several different banks, this cause the high rates of banks failures. If they maintain their account in just a few banks, the high rates of failure won't appear and banks must compete more to each other to gain more customers
3. The more a depositor has to deposit, the more carefully he or she tends to be in selecting a bank --> this is not about the amount of deposit money in banks
4. The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures -->interest rate is out of scope
5. Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure -->potential depositors are out of scope
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 45
Location: Austin
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 04:24
IMO I think its E.

Analyzing choice B:
The argument says An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the the high rate of bank failure
So, the insurance is not fully responsible for the issue at hand.Moreover,even if the depositors held accounts in several different banks, that does not guarantee a high rate of bank failures. Implies not necessary "B" is assumed.

However, only if the potential depositors are aware of the risks of bank failures, can they be more selective.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1829
Location: New York
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 427 [0], given: 5

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 05:05
Mikko wrote:
Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected against bank failure because the govenment insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly reponsible for the the high rate of bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumption?

1. Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
2. A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks
3. The more a depositor has to deposit, the more carefully he or she tends to be in selecting a bank
4. The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
5. Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

Pls explain your choice. I was confused of "Since...against failure" then I got the wrong choice


I will agree with E too.

Conclusion:
If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

negate E ..Potential depositors are not able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

then conlcusion falls apart.
_________________

Your attitude determines your altitude
Smiling wins more friends than frowning

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 840
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 13:26
Mikko wrote:
Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected against bank failure because the govenment insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly reponsible for the the high rate of bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumption?

1. Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
2. A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks
3. The more a depositor has to deposit, the more carefully he or she tends to be in selecting a bank
4. The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
5. Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

Pls explain your choice. I was confused of "Since...against failure" then I got the wrong choice


premise:Bank depositors financially protected against bank failure because the govenment insures

premise:economist argues insurance partly reponsible for bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure

coclusion: If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.


E undermines the conclusion by questioning whether depositors are able to tell which banks are secure. If they cant, then banks still fail.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 341
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 14

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 16:03
I agree with E. Though B is a contender but you can use Assumption negation technique and see that E is undermining the conclusion
_________________

Always tag your question

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 18:22
Minheequang wrote:
Clear B--> my fault, B is a strengthen. E is spot-on

Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected against bank failure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the the high rate of bank failure, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

The economist's argument makes which of the following assumption?

1. Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments --> this is out of scope, no mentions about the borrowers. This is about the depositors
2. A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks --> best. Because depositors deposit at several different banks, this cause the high rates of banks failures. If they maintain their account in just a few banks, the high rates of failure won't appear and banks must compete more to each other to gain more customers--> this is a strengthen. Drop it
3. The more a depositor has to deposit, the more carefully he or she tends to be in selecting a bank --> this is not about the amount of deposit money in banks
4. The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures -->interest rate is out of scope
5. Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure -->potential depositors are out of scope-->this is right as you said
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
Posts: 57
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 9

Re: Assumption, Re: Banking [#permalink] New post 07 May 2009, 19:44
Still can not get it :(
Tks all anyway

Answer is E
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 108
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 09 Jun 2009, 04:00
It's E clearly as denying option E means that the customers won't be able to decide whether the bank is secure or not thus shattering the argument.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 267
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 13 Jun 2009, 22:35
One more for E.....They depositors will deposit in secured banks...So they must be able to distinguish secure banks from the non secure ones....
_________________

Choose Life

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 852
WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 106

GMAT Tests User
Re: Assumption, Re: Baning [#permalink] New post 14 Jun 2009, 01:16
Another vote for E.
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ... :beer
My debrief : journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
Posts: 19
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Bank depositors in the United States are allfinancially [#permalink] New post 27 Jan 2010, 20:47
Bank depositors in the United States are allfinancially protected against bank failure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.
The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?
(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting a bank.
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

Besides the answer,
which sentence is the conclusion?
a) this insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures
b) banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

Thanks.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 365
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 197 [0], given: 47

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Re: OG CR and one more question [#permalink] New post 27 Jan 2010, 21:44
Bank depositors in the United States are allfinancially protected against bank failure because the government insures all individuals' bank deposits. An economist argues that this insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures, since it removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure. If depositors were more selective, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.
The economist's argument makes which of the following assumptions?
(A) Bank failures are caused when big borrowers default on loan repayments.
(B) A significant proportion of depositors maintain accounts at several different banks.
(C) The more a depositor has to deposit, the more careful he or she tends to be in selecting a bank.
(D) The difference in the interest rates paid to depositors by different banks is not a significant factor in bank failures.
(E) Potential depositors are able to determine which banks are secure against failure.

CN = If depositors were more selective in selecting secure banks, then banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money

IMO E.... this has a direct relation to the CN above and shows a clear assumption. Even if use the Negation Technique, this option weakens the conclusion.

####################################################################################

Besides the answer,
which sentence is the conclusion?
a) this insurance is partly responsible for the high rate of bank failures
b) banks would need to be secure in order to compete for depositors' money.

IMO B is the conclusion!
_________________

Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!! :beer

|Do not post questions with OA|Please underline your SC questions while posting|Try posting the explanation along with your answer choice|
|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|


~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 206
GMAT 1: Q V
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 5

GMAT Tests User
Re: Bank depositors in the United States are allfinancially [#permalink] New post 23 Mar 2012, 11:16
The answer to the first question is definitely E:

A. This answer choice is definitely not an assumption to the passage. Although it may be true that bank failures are caused by big borrowers, nowhere in the passage can we assume this. It could be that a lot of little borrowers could be the reason for bank failures. We just can't tell by the passage. Therefore, this answer is incorrect.

B. It is possible for depositors to maintain accounts at several different banks, but this is not a central assumption to the passage. Furthermore, why would individuals need to do this if their money is insured by the government? The reason you would want several accounts at different banks it to spread the risk, but if the government will guarantee your money, this would be unnecessary.

C. This somewhat contradicts the argument. The argument states that depositors never really look into the financial status of the banks.

D. Nowhere do we mention anything about interest rates, so this cannot be assumed.

E. This is a good answer choice because reinforces the argument. The economist states that "removes from depositors any financial incentive to find out whether the bank that holds their money is secure against failure." For many individuals, they wouldn't know whether a bank is secure or not. Therefore, the economist has made the assumption that all depositors can find information and interpret this information to come to a conclusion whether the bank is secure against failure or not.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2013
Posts: 15
GMAT Date: 04-20-2013
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

Re: Assumption, Re: Banking [#permalink] New post 11 Apr 2013, 18:42
Mikko wrote:
Still can not get it :(
Tks all anyway

Answer is E


Conclusion: Banks need to be secure to gain more depositors. Why?
Premise: (To gain/target more depositors,) especially for depositors that are more selective. Most depositors do not know which bank is more secure because of insurance.

I chose C, at first, but this is how I come to understand why C is wrong. The economist cannot assume that ALL depositors who need to deposit more money, ALL will be more selective. It is true for some depositors, but not for all depositors. However, the right answer, E, the economist can assume that for POTENTIAL depositors who know which bank is more secure, these POTENTIAL depositors are more selective. This is true for all potential depositors. Thus, E is a more precise worded assumption.
Re: Assumption, Re: Banking   [#permalink] 11 Apr 2013, 18:42
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Bank depositors in the United States are all financially imhimanshu 0 29 Jun 2013, 08:15
Bank depositors in the United States are allfinancially lys8207 0 23 Mar 2012, 11:16
Bank depositors in the US are all financially protected Mikko 0 29 Jun 2013, 08:35
Bank depositors in the United States are all financially zoom612 2 26 Jun 2006, 17:38
Bank depositors in the U.S. are all financially protected kdhong 9 17 Aug 2005, 20:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Bank depositors in the United States are all financially

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 30 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.