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

It is currently 02 Sep 2014, 23:58

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

Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2012
Posts: 104
Location: United States
Concentration: International Business, Real Estate
GMAT Date: 10-22-2012
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 28 [2] , given: 47

GMAT ToolKit User
Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 09 Oct 2012, 23:15
2
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

82% (02:24) correct 18% (01:55) wrong based on 107 sessions
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.
2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 464
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V0
GPA: 3.23
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 192 [2] , given: 11

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 27 Jan 2013, 06:16
2
This post received
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.

Answer: E
_________________

Impossible is nothing to God.

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

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 28

Re: Local authorities are considering ... [#permalink] New post 10 Oct 2012, 05:39
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
_________________

If you find my post helpful, please GIVE ME SOME KUDOS!

Current Student
User avatar
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 514
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 33

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 269

CAT Tests
Re: Local authorities are considering ... [#permalink] New post 11 Oct 2012, 02:14
+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

:-D
_________________

First Attempt 710 - first-attempt-141273.html

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

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 22

GMAT Tests User
Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 08 Nov 2012, 02:31
Choice E is the right choice.

Took sometime to figure out the solution. Thanks for the question
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 21
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 55

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 06 Dec 2012, 09:13
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?
GMAT Pill Representative
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 346
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 137

Kudos [?]: 174 [0], given: 4

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 07 Dec 2012, 02:54
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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Status: Aiming 760
Joined: 26 Mar 2012
Posts: 35
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.2
WE: Operations (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 34

Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 26 Feb 2013, 09:15
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.

Answer: E


Excellent Bifurcation of the answer choices.
Kudos

Cheers,
Ankit
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 1748
Followers: 240

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter [#permalink] New post 03 Aug 2014, 23:41
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.
Re: Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter   [#permalink] 03 Aug 2014, 23:41
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter hogann 17 13 Oct 2009, 05:51
1 RC: Federal Authorities, local witnesses hbs2012 13 13 Oct 2008, 05:07
consider bmwhype2 12 17 Jun 2007, 21:14
Resident: Residents of this locale should not consider their ronybtl 14 01 Nov 2005, 05:50
Consider To be saurabhmalpani 10 07 May 2005, 17:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Local authorities are considering an amendment to the litter

  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®.