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

It is currently 29 Aug 2014, 06:33

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

History has shown that severe and sudden political

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 243
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 68 [1] , given: 8

History has shown that severe and sudden political [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2011, 20:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

48% (03:05) correct 52% (02:01) wrong based on 58 sessions
History has shown that severe and sudden political instability strikes country Y roughly once every 50 years. The most recent example was the attempt on the president's life in 1992. The reaction of average investors in country Y to crisis situations in the country cannot be predicted in advance. The government's fiscal affairs department has introduced an electronic protection mechanism into the stock market of country Y in the hopes of avoiding a prolonged large-scale selloff. The mechanism is triggered in specific instances based on estimations of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the electronic protection mechanism?

(A) Sometime within the next 50 years an attempt on the president's life will trigger the protection mechanism.
(B) Whether the protection mechanism will function appropriately in response to a sudden political event depends on whether the event is seen by investors as positive or negative.
(C) It is unclear how well the protection mechanism would work in the event of a sudden political coup if such an event is partially or wholly unrelated to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.
(D) There would be no way for the protection mechanism to differentiate between market fluctuations resulting from economic factors and those that are caused by political instability.
(E) The protection mechanism would be purposely destroyed by political insurgents if they were able to infiltrate the government's fiscal affairs department.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Kaplan OE
The president of country Y is sure having a hard time of it, being shot at and all. No matter. The real issue here is this electronic market regulation gizmo that's supposed to help the country avoid a major economic disaster. Our job is to draw a conclusion about it.

There's a lot going on here, so let's recap: Roughly every 50 years, country Y experiences political instability. The reaction of average investors to such crises cannot be predicted, so a crisis leads to, or causes, uncertainty. Country Y has created an electronic protection mechanism for its financial market that relies on estimates of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators. The purpose of the mechanism is to avoid a major market selloff. The correct answer will draw an inference that logically connects the different ideas stated in the evidence. It's difficult to prephrase the correct answer here, so your best bet is to test the choices rigorously, looking for the one that absolutely must be true.

(A) goes too far in its inference that an attempt on the president's life will happen within 50 years. The 1992 attempt was only an example of the political instability that occurs roughly every 50 years, and the 50-year period was an average, not an absolute limit. Furthermore, even if there is an attempt on the president's life, it is unclear how investors will react because their behavior in such situations cannot be predicted in advance. For all we know, the market will go up and the mechanism will not be needed.

(B) goes beyond the scope of the argument. Whether investors perceive sudden political events positively or negatively isn't mentioned in the stimulus, so we can't infer that that perception makes any difference to the accuracy of the mechanism.

(C) draws a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence. If political instability involves changes in corporate data and economic indicators, then the mechanism should work the way it is designed to work. But if the incident does not involve those elements, then the way the mechanism will work becomes unclear, because the behavior of investors will be unpredictable. (C) wins.

(D) This statement goes too far to be inferable. The mechanism might be able to differentiate
between various types of market fluctuations, even though it might not be able to trigger
appropriate responses to some of them.

(E) takes the argument far beyond its original scope. Nothing in the stimulus leads to a prediction
of what might happen to the protection mechanism in the event of political instability.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Kaplan GMAT Prep Discount CodesKnewton GMAT Discount CodesGMAT Pill GMAT Discount Codes
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1691
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 30

Kudos [?]: 288 [0], given: 36

GMAT Tests User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2011, 20:44
bschool83 wrote:
History has shown that severe and sudden political instability strikes country X roughly once every 50 years. The most recent example was the attempt on the President's life a few years ago. The reaction of average investors in country X to crisis situations in the country cannot be predicted in advance. The government's fiscal affairs department has introduced an electronic protection mechanism into the market in the hopes of avoiding a prolonged large-scale selloff. The mechanism is triggered in specific instances based on estimations of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the electronic protection mechanism?

a. Sometime within the next 50 years an attempt on the President's life will trigger the protection mechanism. - Goes beyond the scope

b. Whether the protection mechanism will function appropriately in response to a sudden political event depends on whether the event is seen by investors as positive or negative. - Nothing in passage suggests so.

c. It is unclear how well the protection mechanism would work in the event of a sudden political coup if such an event is partially or wholly unrelated to changes in corporate data and economic indicators. - Correct choice

d. There would be no way for the protection mechanism to differentiate between market fluctuations resulting from economic factors and those that are caused by political instability. Extremely far fetched conclusion

e. The protection mechanism would be purposely destroyed by political insurgents if they were able to infiltrate the government's fiscal affairs department. - Irrelevant, nothing in passage suggests this.

_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 397
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 13

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2011, 20:52
I would go with C as well.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Posts: 88
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 23

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2011, 03:21
IMO C
_________________

Conquer the Hell and make it Haven. Brain is your hell and Success is your haven!

"Kudos" is significant part of GMAT prep. If you like it, you just click it :)

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Posts: 88
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 23

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2011, 03:22
IMO C
_________________

Conquer the Hell and make it Haven. Brain is your hell and Success is your haven!

"Kudos" is significant part of GMAT prep. If you like it, you just click it :)

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 20
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2011, 04:48
IMO C
Whats OA?
_________________

Regards,
Vijendra Lakshmana Rao,
GMAT score target is 700

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 May 2011
Posts: 243
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 8

Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 15 Jul 2011, 05:26
Based on the stimulus, there are three main references here: political instability, protection mechanism, and corporate data and economic indicators.

C best summarizes the facts above.

Also watch out for the tone, for e.g., D is too extreme to be an answer.'

OA is C
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 85
Location: United States (AL)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 22

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 25 Jul 2011, 00:53
+1 for C
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
Posts: 244
Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-16-2012
GPA: 3.4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 25

Reviews Badge
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 21 Sep 2011, 01:00
IMO C
Based on the evidence provided in the argument 'how well' protection mechanism will work if unrelated events occurs is unclear
_________________

-------Analyze why option A in SC wrong-------

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: Retaking next month
Affiliations: None
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 229
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V27
GPA: 3.01
WE: Sales (Manufacturing)
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 32

Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 21 Sep 2011, 01:57
I will go with C.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 25
Followers: 0

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

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 23 Sep 2011, 19:13
Correct Answer is C
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 152
GMAT Date: 10-21-2011
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 15

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 24 Sep 2011, 20:40
**
bschool83 wrote:
History has shown that severe and sudden political instability strikes country Y roughly once every 50 years. The most recent example was the attempt on the president's life in 1992. The reaction of average investors in country Y to crisis situations in the country cannot be predicted in advance. The government's fiscal affairs department has introduced an electronic protection mechanism into the stock market of country Y in the hopes of avoiding a prolonged large-scale selloff. The mechanism is triggered in specific instances based on estimations of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the electronic protection mechanism?

(A) Sometime within the next 50 years an attempt on the president's life will trigger the protection mechanism.
(B) Whether the protection mechanism will function appropriately in response to a sudden political event depends on whether the event is seen by investors as positive or negative.
(C) It is unclear how well the protection mechanism would work in the event of a sudden political coup if such an event is partially or wholly unrelated to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.
(D) There would be no way for the protection mechanism to differentiate between market fluctuations resulting from economic factors and those that are caused by political instability.
(E) The protection mechanism would be purposely destroyed by political insurgents if they were able to infiltrate the government's fiscal affairs department.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Kaplan OE
The president of country Y is sure having a hard time of it, being shot at and all. No matter. The real issue here is this electronic market regulation gizmo that's supposed to help the country avoid a major economic disaster. Our job is to draw a conclusion about it.

There's a lot going on here, so let's recap: Roughly every 50 years, country Y experiences political instability. The reaction of average investors to such crises cannot be predicted, so a crisis leads to, or causes, uncertainty. Country Y has created an electronic protection mechanism for its financial market that relies on estimates of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators. The purpose of the mechanism is to avoid a major market selloff. The correct answer will draw an inference that logically connects the different ideas stated in the evidence. It's difficult to prephrase the correct answer here, so your best bet is to test the choices rigorously, looking for the one that absolutely must be true.

(A) goes too far in its inference that an attempt on the president's life will happen within 50 years. The 1992 attempt was only an example of the political instability that occurs roughly every 50 years, and the 50-year period was an average, not an absolute limit. Furthermore, even if there is an attempt on the president's life, it is unclear how investors will react because their behavior in such situations cannot be predicted in advance. For all we know, the market will go up and the mechanism will not be needed.

(B) goes beyond the scope of the argument. Whether investors perceive sudden political events positively or negatively isn't mentioned in the stimulus, so we can't infer that that perception makes any difference to the accuracy of the mechanism.

(C) draws a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence. If political instability involves changes in corporate data and economic indicators, then the mechanism should work the way it is designed to work. But if the incident does not involve those elements, then the way the mechanism will work becomes unclear, because the behavior of investors will be unpredictable. (C) wins.

(D) This statement goes too far to be inferable. The mechanism might be able to differentiate
between various types of market fluctuations, even though it might not be able to trigger
appropriate responses to some of them.

(E) takes the argument far beyond its original scope. Nothing in the stimulus leads to a prediction
of what might happen to the protection mechanism in the event of political instability.


Our subject: electronic protection mechanism
Premise/Basis: hard to predict investors' reactions to crisis situations in Ctry Y --> risk of prolonged large-scale sell-off --> put in place the electronic protection mechanism
Assumption: electronic protection mechanism may help prevent prolonged large-scale sell-off (BUT... mechanism is helpful only when average investors' reactions are caused by changes in corporate data and economic indicators.)

What happens when reactions are not in relation to changes in corporate data and economic indicators?? UNCLEAR!!

--> Answer: C
_________________

"The best day of your life is the one on which you decide your life is your own. No apologies or excuses. No one to lean on, rely on, or blame. The gift is yours - it is an amazing journey - and you alone are responsible for the quality of it. This is the day your life really begins." - Bob Moawab

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Target MBA
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 212
Location: Singapore
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 12

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR Political Instability [#permalink] New post 27 Sep 2011, 06:45
bschool83 wrote:
History has shown that severe and sudden political instability strikes country Y roughly once every 50 years. The most recent example was the attempt on the president's life in 1992. The reaction of average investors in country Y to crisis situations in the country cannot be predicted in advance. The government's fiscal affairs department has introduced an electronic protection mechanism into the stock market of country Y in the hopes of avoiding a prolonged large-scale selloff. The mechanism is triggered in specific instances based on estimations of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.

If the statements above are true, which of the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the electronic protection mechanism?

(A) Sometime within the next 50 years an attempt on the president's life will trigger the protection mechanism.
(B) Whether the protection mechanism will function appropriately in response to a sudden political event depends on whether the event is seen by investors as positive or negative.
(C) It is unclear how well the protection mechanism would work in the event of a sudden political coup if such an event is partially or wholly unrelated to changes in corporate data and economic indicators.
(D) There would be no way for the protection mechanism to differentiate between market fluctuations resulting from economic factors and those that are caused by political instability.
(E) The protection mechanism would be purposely destroyed by political insurgents if they were able to infiltrate the government's fiscal affairs department.

[Reveal] Spoiler: Kaplan OE
The president of country Y is sure having a hard time of it, being shot at and all. No matter. The real issue here is this electronic market regulation gizmo that's supposed to help the country avoid a major economic disaster. Our job is to draw a conclusion about it.

There's a lot going on here, so let's recap: Roughly every 50 years, country Y experiences political instability. The reaction of average investors to such crises cannot be predicted, so a crisis leads to, or causes, uncertainty. Country Y has created an electronic protection mechanism for its financial market that relies on estimates of how average investors will react to changes in corporate data and economic indicators. The purpose of the mechanism is to avoid a major market selloff. The correct answer will draw an inference that logically connects the different ideas stated in the evidence. It's difficult to prephrase the correct answer here, so your best bet is to test the choices rigorously, looking for the one that absolutely must be true.

(A) goes too far in its inference that an attempt on the president's life will happen within 50 years. The 1992 attempt was only an example of the political instability that occurs roughly every 50 years, and the 50-year period was an average, not an absolute limit. Furthermore, even if there is an attempt on the president's life, it is unclear how investors will react because their behavior in such situations cannot be predicted in advance. For all we know, the market will go up and the mechanism will not be needed.

(B) goes beyond the scope of the argument. Whether investors perceive sudden political events positively or negatively isn't mentioned in the stimulus, so we can't infer that that perception makes any difference to the accuracy of the mechanism.

(C) draws a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence. If political instability involves changes in corporate data and economic indicators, then the mechanism should work the way it is designed to work. But if the incident does not involve those elements, then the way the mechanism will work becomes unclear, because the behavior of investors will be unpredictable. (C) wins.

(D) This statement goes too far to be inferable. The mechanism might be able to differentiate
between various types of market fluctuations, even though it might not be able to trigger
appropriate responses to some of them.

(E) takes the argument far beyond its original scope. Nothing in the stimulus leads to a prediction
of what might happen to the protection mechanism in the event of political instability.


It's a tough one. It took me 2:21 minutes to reach to an answer, which was C
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
GM.

Re: CR Political Instability   [#permalink] 27 Sep 2011, 06:45
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Experts publish their posts in the topic The new school of political history that daagh 0 12 Oct 2013, 06:16
3 The sudden outbreak of a devastating disease that has not cici 25 06 Mar 2009, 06:20
1 The new school of political history that emerged in the lexis 13 09 Jul 2008, 01:03
This is from a Kaplan Test: History has shown that severe fernandong 7 08 Jan 2008, 10:07
History has shown that severe and sudden political jjhko 4 26 Aug 2006, 06:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by

History has shown that severe and sudden political

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.