|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 50
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 7
|
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]
 26 Jul 2011, 12:08
Question Stats:
58% (01:49) correct
41% (01:13) wrong based on 0 sessions
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government. Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives. C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public. D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas. E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2009
Posts: 457
Location: United States (MA)
Followers: 14
Kudos [?]:
83
[0], given: 46
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 12:59
I think its B.
"argues most strongly against the suggestion of letting private groups handle the National parks."
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the
private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. - Out of scope
B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions
from major donors and general public. - out of scope
D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas. - Neutral
E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the
private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources. - - out of scope
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 311
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 620 Q39 V35
GMAT 2: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q50 V40
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
54
[1] , given: 3
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 13:53
1
This post received
KUDOS
I would go with A, This was a pretty tricky one , this is my explanation for the argument : UtterNonsense wrote: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.
Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the
private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.
Possible solution.see explanation below.
B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
Possible solution.see explanation below.
C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions
from major donors and general public.
argument doesn't mention anything about contributions or if the government too is collecting contributions.Eliminate
D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
Maybe.but is not a strong enough argument.If anything competition will get us the best private environmental group. Eliminate
E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the
private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.
Irrelevant.Eliminate
Now the questions says :Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion aboveA although far fetched,is realistically possible. B is also a realistic possibility. now if A and B were to come true. the consequences of A are much worse than B . Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives but at least they try to achieve the conservation objective. If someone looking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks joins the private environmental groups as member and eventually takes over their leadership : this situation is worse than the previous one. Consequences of A > consequences of BHence A is a stronger argument.
_________________
My GMAT Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/third-time-s-a-charm-142800.html#p1145912
Quant Concept Videos : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/2012/07/gm ... ideos.html
My GMAT Blog : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 167
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
31
[0], given: 12
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 19:09
Tricky question.... Initially went with B. Option A is the right answer.
Option A talks about "abolishing all restrictions on exploitation the natural resources"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 50
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 7
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 19:46
Nice explanation. Even the OG didn't explain it that well. Kudos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 28
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 20:29
Crazy question. Maybe it is late, but that whole stimulus threw me for a loop. The answers weren't any help either.
_________________
GMAT Day: Nov. 19, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 50
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 7
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
26 Jul 2011, 21:57
UtterNonsense wrote: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.
Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?
The question suggests that conservative objectives would be better served if private environmental groups take over.
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the
private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. If people (in this case environmental groups) who seek to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources ( i.e. opposite of conservation) take over than the very motive of conservation is negated. Hence the right choice.
B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives. Close choice. The two parties might agree on ways to achieve conservation but it doesn't say that both of them are not interested in conservation. Hence it can not weaken.
C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions
from major donors and general public.
D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the
private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 58
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 6
|
Re: Conservation Objective [#permalink]
27 Jul 2011, 13:11
Good one! A it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Conservation Objective
[#permalink]
27 Jul 2011, 13:11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
