Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Consumer activist: By allowing major airlines to abandon, as [#permalink]
27 Sep 2006, 06:27
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Consumer activist: By allowing major airlines to abandon, as they promptly did, all but their most profitable routes, the governments decision to cease regulation of the airline industry has worked to the disadvantage of everyone who lacks access to large metropolitan airport.
Industry representative: On the contrary, where major airlines moved out, regional airlines have moved in and, as a consequence, there are more flights into and out of most small airports now than before the change in regulatory policy.
Q. The industry representatives argument will not provide an effective answer to the consumer activists claim unless which one of the following is true?
A. No small airport has fewer flights now than it did before the change in policy regarding regulation of the airline industry.
B. When permitted to do so by changes in regulatory policy, each major airline abandoned all but large metropolitan airports.
C. Policies that result in an increase in the number of flights to which consumers have easy access do not generally work to the disadvantage of consumers.
D. Regional airlines charge less to fly a given route now than the major airlines charged when they flew the same route.
E. Any policy that leads to an increase in the number of competitors in a given field works to the long-term advantage of consumers.
I think it is the right answer because the representative says that most airports have more flights. If the few have no or less flights, it means that it will be a disadvantage to the customers. A fills the gap.
D isnt correct because the activist doesn't adress financial issues.
The answer choice must deal with the number of flights flying in and out of regional (small) airports. Any answer choice that deals with cost, access, competition etc is irrelevant. Hence C, D and E are out.
Between A and B:
B states that major airlines obediently abandoned small regional airports following the regulation policy. Even if this was not true, the industry representative's claim is not irrelevant because the situation for small regional airports would not have changed then. Hence this is not a necessary assumption.
Therefore I go for A!
Try and try until you succeed! There is just no giving up!
D is very tempting here, but if you look deeper, you wwill see that money is not the point here.
In fact nobody speaks about money. The only thing in discussion is an easy access to flights.
So C is OK.
the disadvantage of everyone who lacks access to large metropolitan airport
there are more flights into and out of most small airports
so in order for the industry analyst to provide an answer to the first claim that everyone will be disadvantaged, we need to clarify because he only says more flights in most, we need to account for the everyone in the first claim.
by stating NO small airport has fewer flights then no one is at a disadvantage
This question is asking to identify the assumption in the Industry Rep's arguement... The arguement is countering the arguement that the policy will be a disadvantage... the rep's arguement states directly that this policy won't be a disadvantage.
The convoluted wording in this problem is the toughest part... once you know what to look for it's a lot easier.