Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 20:32 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 20:32

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Kudos
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 110
Own Kudos [?]: 5428 [6]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Corea
Send PM
User avatar
CEO
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 2709
Own Kudos [?]: 1538 [2]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 Sep 2003
Posts: 192
Own Kudos [?]: 23 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: US
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 103
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: New York
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Paul wrote:
Clearly, A is best.

Mel says: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job

A) says that the ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements will not affect the situation and in that in fact, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. However, Pat's response is based on current members "Since very few judges [current judges] teach or give lectures..." This is not sufficient to explain how that ban will not hamper the recruitment of the best candidates as mentioned in Mel's argument.

D) Pat does give evidence to support his argument. "Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect" is his argument although it is a weak one as explained above


Hey Paul, here I go. :)

A here as well, the best answer, imo
User avatar
CEO
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 2709
Own Kudos [?]: 1538 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
I demand that those who said D back up their answers :o
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
Posts: 212
Own Kudos [?]: 237 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Paul wrote:
I demand that those who said D back up their answers :o

gee is this an ultimatum??
Pat's response to Mel about salary is just an opinion without any evidence or convincing logic. Among all the options D comes pretty darn close IMHO.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Posts: 103
Own Kudos [?]: 7 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: New York
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
mirhaque wrote:
Paul wrote:
I demand that those who said D back up their answers :o

gee is this an ultimatum??
Pat's response to Mel about salary is just an opinion without any evidence or convincing logic. Among all the options D comes pretty darn close IMHO.


D.by pointing to the absence of negative effects simply denies MelтАЩs claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial

Pat states that very few judges teach, so he actually does put some evidence forward to back upi his statements. IMO, D is incorrect, and also incomplete :)
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 110
Own Kudos [?]: 5428 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: Corea
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Paul wrote:
I demand that those who said D back up their answers :o


hi Paul
apologies for being late in reverting back.
I do not posess the OA for this question, I got this CR frm a yahoo grp archive.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [1]
Given Kudos: 17
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Obviously A is the answer.

Pat explains that current Judges includes few who teaches or give lectures...whereas Mel was talking about attracting potential candidates which might want to go for teaching and lectures.

So mere raising salary govt. might not still get good quality of judges.....
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 37
Own Kudos [?]: 19 [0]
Given Kudos: 49
Schools: ISB '16 NUS '15
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Hi,
We need to weaken the argument stated by PAT,who states that the situation does improve buy citing a evidence about the few judges.

Now option E states that the changes (that is the raise in salary) will benefits most of able members of a group (that is few judges ) will benefits all members of that group.

So isn't it the correct assumption?

Just to know the rights reason to know eliminates this option.

Thanks :)
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17222
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
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 Bot
Re: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne