Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 16 Jan 2017, 18:59

### 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

# Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 611 [0], given: 10

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2008, 16:24
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has
done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with
a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.
Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 114
Location: São Paulo
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2008, 16:33
I think it's A

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.

Current members don't teach or give lectures, but what about the candidates?
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 1011 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2008, 17:43
C should be OA
_________________
Director
Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 733
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Jun 2008, 18:04
C for me.
Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 76
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 09:10
Man...A and C both looks good...

Whats the OA???
Manager
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 72
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 09:20
i'm leaning towards A as well.
Manager
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 114
Location: São Paulo
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 09:27
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1887
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 570 [0], given: 32

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2008, 10:04
I choose C for the reasons below. Against an answer in Red and For C in blue.

goalsnr wrote:
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.
Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
This would not make Pat's response inadequate, in fact, if he had done this, it would have helped him. The effects on current members is how potential members decide if they want to become a judge. If the current judges are still adversely affected, then quality candidates will still not be interested. If you cut the salary of school teachers in half, that change affects the current teachers. This is good evidence that because of the negative change to current school teachers, few people who would be good teachers will actually want to become a teacher. Same concept here, so if used, this would not be an inadequate resposne (IMO).
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
Pat doesn't do this. This would be like me pushing someone over and them getting mad and my response being "No, i pushed him over because he got mad." Puts the cart before the horse, and Pat doesn't do this. The cause of the change (the legislature passing law) is not claimed to be the effect of the raise in salary coupled with the ban from teaching and lecturing.
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
Pat says that because no, or few, judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have few or no negative effects. This is inadequate because the lack of a negative doesn't mean an improvement happened. It could me the status quo remained and qualified candidates still do not want to become judges.
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
Pat does offer evidence even if it's weak. His evidence is that few current judges teach or give lectures. This cannot be the answer because Pat DOES offer evidence.
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
Pat dosn't talk about change benefitting any members of the group. Pat makes a sweeping statement that the salary change does improve the situation (not limited to the most able judges). It may appear this way because logically only the most able members will be asked to teach or lecture, but Pat doesn't make this argument. He limits his statement to the ban having little or no negative effects.

_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$. GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings SVP Joined: 04 May 2006 Posts: 1926 Schools: CBS, Kellogg Followers: 22 Kudos [?]: 1011 [0], given: 1 Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink] ### Show Tags 13 Jun 2008, 18:11 ldpedroso wrote: Guys, please explain your choices... why C? I think jallenmorris has a more than good explaination why C should be OA? _________________ Manager Joined: 06 Feb 2008 Posts: 89 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0 Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink] ### Show Tags 13 Jun 2008, 19:04 For me 'B' looks good. Here cause of change can be "to equate salaries of judges who do not teach with those who teaches" and effect is "there salaries become same" so pat clearly mistaken in taking the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change. Senior Manager Joined: 07 Jan 2008 Posts: 412 Followers: 3 Kudos [?]: 215 [0], given: 0 Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink] ### Show Tags 13 Jun 2008, 23:49 CAN NOT BE C!!! C says that "merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects' while she mentions little or absence. A is the best answer. They are evaluating the effect of change and the possibility of success. Hence, they disagree with each other. SVP Joined: 30 Apr 2008 Posts: 1887 Location: Oklahoma City Schools: Hard Knocks Followers: 40 Kudos [?]: 570 [0], given: 32 Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink] ### Show Tags 14 Jun 2008, 06:04 I think it's about time for the OA. _________________ ------------------------------------ J Allen Morris **I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 170
Location: Vienna, Austria
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 06:17
no one likes E ?
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 611 [0], given: 10

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 06:51
OK people its time for the OA and the winner is ..........................
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------A

Jallen I fell for the same trap and selected C. But when I look at the CR I know my folly:

Pat in his reply considers only the current members. The current members may not be interested in earning extra money by giving lectures but the prospective candidates may be.
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3384
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 281 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 10:11
the issue at heart here is about attracting new judges..Pat arguments says Current judges dont give lectures..but what we dont know is, how will new to-be judges look at this..maybe new to-be judge will give more lectures...we dont know..

A is best!
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1887
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 40

Kudos [?]: 570 [0], given: 32

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 11:19
Ok, I understand why the authors say A, but I think it's a weak and illogical argument.
_________________

------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a.

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

SVP
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 1634
Location: Southern California
Schools: Chicago (dinged), Tuck (November), Columbia (RD)
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 201 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 15:34
A
_________________

Check out the new Career Forum
http://gmatclub.com/forum/133

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1926
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 1011 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2008, 17:24
jallenmorris wrote:
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
This would not make Pat's response inadequate, in fact, if he had done this, it would have helped him. The effects on current members is how potential members decide if they want to become a judge. If the current judges are still adversely affected, then quality candidates will still not be interested. If you cut the salary of school teachers in half, that change affects the current teachers. This is good evidence that because of the negative change to current school teachers, few people who would be good teachers will actually want to become a teacher. Same concept here, so if used, this would not be an inadequate resposne (IMO).

tricky one, I am too general to see this ex. I think this explaination is the best to help me the trap! Thanks Jall
_________________
VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1430
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 359 [0], given: 1

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Feb 2009, 17:58
I chose C and the OA is listed as A.

I dont see Pat talking about current judges. I dont see the word current/now/present. She is just talking in general about judges not giving lectures in general.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.
Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1286
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 409 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - mel and Pat [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Feb 2009, 23:33
When Pat is saying few judges teach or give lectures, it is understood that he z talking of present situation. Naturally, he z ignoring prospective judges.
icandy wrote:
I chose C and the OA is listed as A.

I dont see Pat talking about current judges. I dont see the word current/now/present. She is just talking in general about judges not giving lectures in general.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.
Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
Re: CR - mel and Pat   [#permalink] 11 Feb 2009, 23:33
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
18 Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 1 24 Aug 2013, 03:40
20 Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 23 25 Jan 2010, 01:00
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 4 19 Jun 2008, 03:32
18 Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 25 14 Jan 2008, 11:32
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 12 31 Jan 2007, 05:54
Display posts from previous: Sort by