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

 It is currently 01 May 2016, 07:21

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 29 Apr 2012
Posts: 104
Location: United States
GMAT Date: 10-22-2012
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 48 [2] , given: 47

Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2012, 00:15
2
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

81% (02:30) correct 19% (02:02) wrong based on 141 sessions

### HideShow timer Statictics

Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter law that would raise the fine for littering in the
community picnic area to $1,000. Since the inception of the litter law, incremental increases in the littering fine have proven to be consistently effective at further reducing the amount of litter in the community picnic area. However, raising the fine to$1,000 would actually have the unintended effect of increasing the
amount of litter in the picnic area. Picnic area users would perceive this fine to be unreasonable and
unenforceable, and would disregard the litter law altogether
. In the argument, the two portions in boldface
play which of the following roles?
• The first is irrefutable evidence that the author offers in support of a prediction; the second is that prediction.
• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will be repeated in the case at hand; the second
raises evidence against this prediction.
• The first is a statement of fact that the author accepts to be true; the second is presented as a consequence of this
fact.
• The first is evidence that weakens the main position that the author defends; the second is that position.
• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers a
line of reasoning to support this prediction.
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 464
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V0
GPA: 3.23
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 343 [2] , given: 11

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2013, 07:16
2
KUDOS

(1) MAIN POINT: The fine will not work this time
(2) The first: the fine has worked many times (The author accepted this fact)
(3) The second:Explanation on why it will not work this time

• The first is irrefutable evidence that the author offers in support of a prediction; the second is that prediction.

• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will be repeated in the case at hand; the second
raises evidence against this prediction.

• The first is a statement of fact that the author accepts to be true; the second is presented as a consequence of this
fact.

• The first is evidence that weakens the main position that the author defends; the second is that position.
The position is not highlighted.

• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers a
line of reasoning to support this prediction.

_________________

Impossible is nothing to God.

Intern
Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 42
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 28

Re: Local authorities are considering ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2012, 06:39
Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter law that would raise the fine for littering in the
community picnic area to $1,000. Since the inception of the litter law, incremental increases in the littering fine have proven to be consistently effective at further reducing the amount of litter in the community picnic area. However, raising the fine to$1,000 would actually have the unintended effect of increasing the
amount of litter in the picnic area. Picnic area users would perceive this fine to be unreasonable and
unenforceable, and would disregard the litter law altogether. In the argument, the two portions in boldface
play which of the following roles?
• The first is irrefutable evidence that the author offers in support of a prediction; the second is that prediction.
• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will be repeated in the case at hand; the second
raises evidence against this prediction.
• The first is a statement of fact that the author accepts to be true; the second is presented as a consequence of this
fact.
• The first is evidence that weakens the main position that the author defends; the second is that position.
• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers a
line of reasoning to support this prediction.

A)Incorrect The first is a statement of fact but it doesnt support the second sentence as the second assumes that the first will cease to hold.
B)Incorrect: The author doesn't predict that continual increases in fine will continue to reduce litter - quite the opposite.
C)Incorrect: THe first is a fact but the second isn't a consequence of the fact. If the face is that fines up leads to litter down, the the consequence is fines further up, litter further down.
D)Incorrect: (tough to remove) It sounds completely right until I saw the word position, the author hasn't actually got a position (a conclusion) he just says that park users may begin to see the fine as unenforceable.
E) Correct. The first sentence is correct as the author clearly talks about the break down of the fine/litter relationship and the second is definitely a reason why the relationship will break down
_________________

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 509
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 41

Kudos [?]: 189 [0], given: 269

Re: Local authorities are considering ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2012, 03:14
+1E

BF1 - incremental increases in the littering fine have proven to be consistently effective at further reducing the amount of litter in the community picnic area
BF2 - Picnic area users would perceive this fine to be unreasonable and unenforceable, and would disregard the litter law altogether

BF1 – It is a statement of causation. It will not hold the case. It is not a statement of fact. It does not weakens the main position that the author defends. Eliminate B,C,D

Between A and E

BF1 does not support BF2, eliminate A

_________________

First Attempt 710 - first-attempt-141273.html

Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 22

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2012, 03:31
Choice E is the right choice.

Took sometime to figure out the solution. Thanks for the question
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 19
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 55

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Dec 2012, 10:13
Mr. getgyan, can u please explain what does the phrase 'statement of causation that the author predicts will not hold in the case at hand' mean?
''statement of causation ' - means?
hope case in hand - littering law?
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 346
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 179

Kudos [?]: 298 [0], given: 4

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2012, 03:54
Hi,

Let me see if I can help.

I interpret 'statement of causation' to mean the littering law.

So in this example, we see that the suggested result of the littering law is in the bold section.
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Current Student
Status: All in for MBA
Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Posts: 38
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.39
WE: Operations (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 34

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2013, 10:15
mbaiseasy wrote:

(1) MAIN POINT: The fine will not work this time
(2) The first: the fine has worked many times (The author accepted this fact)
(3) The second:Explanation on why it will not work this time

• The first is irrefutable evidence that the author offers in support of a prediction; the second is that prediction.

• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will be repeated in the case at hand; the second
raises evidence against this prediction.

• The first is a statement of fact that the author accepts to be true; the second is presented as a consequence of this
fact.

• The first is evidence that weakens the main position that the author defends; the second is that position.
The position is not highlighted.

• The first is a statement of causation that the author predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers a
line of reasoning to support this prediction.

Excellent Bifurcation of the answer choices.
Kudos

Cheers,
Ankit
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 7371
Followers: 697

Kudos [?]: 138 [0], given: 0

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2014, 00:41
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 7371
Followers: 697

Kudos [?]: 138 [0], given: 0

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2015, 07:15
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter   [#permalink] 02 Sep 2015, 07:15
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Boldface revision: Local authorities are considering an amendment 4 19 Mar 2015, 20:24
Ignoring minor crimes such as littering and vandalism 3 11 Jul 2011, 13:28
2 Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter 18 13 Oct 2009, 06:51
4 If the law punishes littering, then the city has an 20 26 Oct 2008, 03:55
If the law punishes littering, then the city has an 2 06 Jul 2007, 04:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by