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

It is currently 31 Oct 2014, 04:53

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

One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1419
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 0

One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 17:32
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted of violation of the Securities and Exchange Act. Over the last five years, 8 of the 1,000 traders at Salamen, a top trading firm, have been convicted of such violations. This record clearly indicates that traders at Salamen are approximately 8 times as corrupt as traders at other trading firms.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the argument?

A) Salamen hires from business schools with the highest quality of graduates and the most scrupulous standards.

B) The Securities and Exchange Commission is far more likely to investigate trading firms than other businesses.

C) A greater number of the Salamen employees with MBAs investigated for possible violations of the Securities and Exchange Act were cleared of all wrong-doing than were their counterparts at other trading firms.

D) Most of the employees of Salamen are scrupulously honest and would not intentionally act in such a way as to violate a regulation such as the Securities and Exchange Act.

E) The level of corruption of individuals on a staff is not directly related to the proportion of these individuals who have been convicted of corrupt behavior.

please explain
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 231
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 18:08
Salamen is accused as a corrupted firm.
Need to prove somehow that the accusation is not true.

A) not clear, just because you get staff members from a good institution, it does not mean they are going to be honest...

B) Ok, but does not help to weaken the accusation

C) seems possible, a greater number of accused have been cleared compared to another firm, but not all. this statement helps to aliviate the accusation as Salamen being more corrupt.

D) we do not know this... this seems more like an opinion, not the best answer.

E) seems possible... I guess this mentions that we can not assume that all the apples are bad just because we have one bad one in the basket...

I am going with C
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 2922
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 18:49
C is best among the worst.
_________________

SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Posts: 583
Location: Munich,Germany
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR: Trading firms [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 19:17
u2lover wrote:
One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted of violation of the Securities and Exchange Act. Over the last five years, 8 of the 1,000 traders at Salamen, a top trading firm, have been convicted of such violations. This record clearly indicates that traders at Salamen are approximately 8 times as corrupt as traders at other trading firms.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the argument?

A) Salamen hires from business schools with the highest quality of graduates and the most scrupulous standards.

B) The Securities and Exchange Commission is far more likely to investigate trading firms than other businesses.

C) A greater number of the Salamen employees with MBAs investigated for possible violations of the Securities and Exchange Act were cleared of all wrong-doing than were their counterparts at other trading firms.

D) Most of the employees of Salamen are scrupulously honest and would not intentionally act in such a way as to violate a regulation such as the Securities and Exchange Act.

E) The level of corruption of individuals on a staff is not directly related to the proportion of these individuals who have been convicted of corrupt behavior.

please explain


I go with E here.

The argument makes a connection with the number of people convicted with the level of corruption. I think C makes a specific reference to those with MBAs, but what about the other employees (non MBAs). Additionally, I also think this might even strengthen the argument because it reinforces the corelation between convictions and corruption.

E clearly states that there's simply no corelation. I might be wrong, please post your views.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1133
Location: India
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 1

 [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 21:15
Leaning over E.
Choice is between C and E.
C seems less effective in weakening the argument by not accounting for Non-MBA's.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 232
Location: Arkansas, US
WE 1: 2.5 yrs in manufacturing
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 18

 [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 21:46
I wud go with E

Y not C: In this option, he's jus speakin about a small pool of employees,i.e; MBAs. So that cannot be applied for the whole population
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 09 Oct 2005
Posts: 727
Location: Madrid
Followers: 3

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

 [#permalink] New post 11 Jul 2006, 22:14
Go E!
_________________

IE IMBA 2010

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1741
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 00:40
Will go with E.

Chose C after reading it but changed my mind after reading choice E and the passage.


"This record clearly indicates that traders at Salamen are approximately 8 times as corrupt as traders at other trading firms."

Note traders at Salamen are being compared with traders of other firms on the basis of 8 persons convicted of wrong doings.
E directly attacks this casual correlation.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 9
Location: U to the... S to the A
Followers: 0

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

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 11:33
One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted of violation of the Securities and Exchange Act. Over the last five years, 8 of the 1,000 traders at Salamen, a top trading firm, have been convicted of such violations. This record clearly indicates that traders at Salamen are approximately 8 times as corrupt as traders at other trading firms.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the argument?

A) Salamen hires from business schools with the highest quality of graduates and the most scrupulous standards.

B) The Securities and Exchange Commission is far more likely to investigate trading firms than other businesses.

C) A greater number of the Salamen employees with MBAs investigated for possible violations of the Securities and Exchange Act were cleared of all wrong-doing than were their counterparts at other trading firms.

D) Most of the employees of Salamen are scrupulously honest and would not intentionally act in such a way as to violate a regulation such as the Securities and Exchange Act.

E) The level of corruption of individuals on a staff is not directly related to the proportion of these individuals who have been convicted of corrupt behavior.

A) Not relevant
B) There is no intended comparison btw traders and other businesses in the original argument, instead the comparison is btw traders @ Salamen and in other "trading" companies.
C) Defintely doesnt weaken the conclusion, instead seems to be in a way strengthening the conclusion by stating that the number of convictions is still 8 times that in other trading companies, inspite of many of the employees @ Salamen being exonerated evenutally.
D) Not Relevant
E) Correct. Even though the only one in 1,000 are said to be convicted "eventually" of corruption, could still mean, remaining corrupt people were just not convicted, say for lack of evidence. Doesnt digress and doesnt bring in extraneous reasons, unlike the case in options (A and D)
_________________

share and grow....

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 06 May 2006
Posts: 782
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 12:00
E it is...

I didn't read all the choices at first and selected C :cry: Only realized when I compared notes with the others...
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 231
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 17:14
buzzgaurav wrote:
Leaning over E.
Choice is between C and E.
C seems less effective in weakening the argument by not accounting for Non-MBA's.


good point... did not think about the non-MBA's... :oops:
I did not think of it that way... though I did come down to C or E...
made the wrong answer choice.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2005
Posts: 127
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 19:23
I go with E.

C was close but deals with only MBA, but what about me:) I don't have that degree yet.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1270
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 12 Jul 2006, 19:28
E) The level of corruption of individuals on a staff is not directly related to the proportion of these individuals who have been convicted of corrupt behavior.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 331
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR: Trading firms [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2006, 11:43
u2lover wrote:
One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted of violation of the Securities and Exchange Act. Over the last five years, 8 of the 1,000 traders at Salamen, a top trading firm, have been convicted of such violations. This record clearly indicates that traders at Salamen are approximately 8 times as corrupt as traders at other trading firms.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most weakens the argument?

A) Salamen hires from business schools with the highest quality of graduates and the most scrupulous standards.

B) The Securities and Exchange Commission is far more likely to investigate trading firms than other businesses.

C) A greater number of the Salamen employees with MBAs investigated for possible violations of the Securities and Exchange Act were cleared of all wrong-doing than were their counterparts at other trading firms.

D) Most of the employees of Salamen are scrupulously honest and would not intentionally act in such a way as to violate a regulation such as the Securities and Exchange Act.

E) The level of corruption of individuals on a staff is not directly related to the proportion of these individuals who have been convicted of corrupt behavior.

please explain



Straight E.. negate this premise and you will see that conclusion is strengthened..
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1419
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 46 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2006, 13:11
OA is E

nice explanations here!!!
  [#permalink] 13 Jul 2006, 13:11
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 Experts publish their posts in the topic A driver's license in one country is not always enough to thinktank 3 16 Mar 2013, 03:26
Many convicts who, at one time, might then have been found vaivish1723 1 03 Jul 2009, 00:39
SC1000, CR1000 and RC1000 Answers at one place BLISSFUL 0 08 Apr 2007, 09:05
PS 1000 tough ones parthac 4 24 Jul 2006, 18:40
One of the informants eventually professed ignorant of the Fuqua 8 22 May 2005, 07:44
Display posts from previous: Sort by

One in 1,000 licensed traders will eventually be convicted

  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®.