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:
In response to mounting pubic concern, an airplane [#permalink]
28 Dec 2004, 22:49
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
In response to mounting pubic concern, an airplane manufacturer implemented a program with the well-publicized goal of reducing by half the total yearly amount of hazardous waste generated by its passenger-jet division. When the program began in 1994, the
divisionâ€™s hazardous waste output was 90 pounds per production worker; last year it was 40 pounds per production worker. Clearly, therefore, charges that the manufacturerâ€™s program has not met its goal are false.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The amount of nonhazardous waste generated each year by the passenger-jet division has not increased significantly since 1994.
B. At least as many passenger jets were produced by the division last year as had been produced in 1994.
C. Since 1994, other divisions in the company have achieved reductions in hazardous waste output that are at least equal to that achieved in the passenger-jet division.
D. The average number of weekly hours per production worker in the passenger-jet division was not significantly greater last year than it was in 1994.
E. The number of production workers assigned to the passenger-jet division was not significantly less in 1994 than it was last year.
Because I think the question described the production of each worker, is there any matter with the number of worker?
This is a really bad twisted question. Here Author employs -ve of a -ve is +ve technique. The key to solving this problem is to understand the last sentence "Clearly, therefore, charges that the manufacturerâ€™s program has not met its goal are false" really means "clearly the goal has been met". Now, if you read the question in this context you would see in order for author's assumption to be true E has to be assumed. Does it make sense now?. _________________
i am between B and E. there is a significant relationship between the number of workers in production and actual planes produced. if they build the same number of planes in both yeras, [choice B] => waste per worker goes from 90 to 40 for the same amount of planes => they cut the waste more than half. hence answer B
but E on the other hand might also be a good assumption. the wording in E seems strange to me. anyone has a better explanation on E please post it. whats the OA??
It is a good ques. Had me thinking between D and E. However, there is only 1 measure of failure of success here, that is total prod waste should reduce. Author assumes that Total waste (i.e. measure of success)= lbs / worker * no of workers. Author is clearly assuming that between the yrs the no of workers r same and the total waste can be directly proportional to lbs/worker. "B" is out of scope as the stem doesn't tell anything abt a relation between production of no of planes to waste prod, relation is only between workers and waste.
B talks about count of planes. There is no data in the argument that says the higher the # of planes, the higher is the waste. May be there are some planes who discharge less and some discharge more. This way the overall affect is same.
Take an example with E.
1994 - Lets say there were 100 workers, so total = 90*100 = 9000
2005 - Lets say workers have increaded 10 times = 40 * 1000 = 40,000