|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1680
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
The United States government generally tries to protect [#permalink]
 12 Jul 2004, 04:08
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (03:01) wrong based on 1 sessions
The United States government generally tries to protect valuable natural resources. But one resource has been ignored for too long. In the United States, each bushel of corn produced might result in the loss of as much as two bushels of topsoil. Moreover. In the last 100 years, the topsoil in many states. Which once was about four-teen inches thick, has been eroded to only six or eight inches. Nonetheless, federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have remained at ridiculously low levels. Total federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have been less than the allocations of some individual states.
Which one of the following best expresses the main point of the argument?
(A) Corn is not a cost-effective product and substitutes should be found where possible.
(B) A layer of topsoil only six to eight inches thick cannot support the continued cultivation of corn.
(C) Soil conservation is a responsibility of the federal government, not the states.
(D) The federal government's expenditures for soil conservation in the various states have been inequitable.
(E) The federal government should spend much more on soil conservation than it has been spending.
In stating the argument, the author does which one of the following?
(A) makes a detailed statistical projection of future topsoil loss
(B) makes a generalization about total reduction in topsoil depth in all states
(C) assumes that the United States government does not place a high value on its natural resources
(D) refrains from using slanted language concerning the level of federal expenditures
(E) compares state expenditures with federal expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
My answers:
1) E
2) E
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 417
Location: USA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
E & E for me too...........!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 245
Location: INDIA
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
my ans would be
1 ) THE E....
A) ceratinly right but ''corn ''is not the ONLY thing being said about here... there is ''soil'' too
B) good Assumption here but we don't know for sure ... do we !
C) THE STATES WOULD ONLY BE TOO HAPPY WITH THIS lot less to spend money on ... but it certainly is not what the argument means as asked ...
D) now this 's quite close but some how does not seem to say ''all'' that the argument asks...
E) this does the perfect 10 ! but since these are frm the stolyar's ''bank'' we just got be careful 
2 - the ans is D ...
A) '' detailed statistical projection future soil lozz''? thats wierd the author does not even use the word here..
B) IN ALL STATES'' should b the weak-link here the author does not certainly talk about ''all'' states
C)quite close but when it goes ''natural resources'' it certainly is absurd 'cos the author does state that the natural resources are of importance but ''one'' is neglected...
e) here the comparision is between not the federal and state expenditure but ''expenditures for the nation as a whole to the federal expenditures for the states singualrly''
D) this comes close for me... could be jus wrong ! but when the author does mention 'at ridiculously low levels' I believe that he jus refrained from abusing the federal spending !
correct me jus If 'am not correct !
hope that helps!
Have fun
_________________
the whole worldmakes way for the man who knows wer he's going... good luck
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 993
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 0
|
(E) & (B)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 02 Jun 2004
Posts: 194
Location: Kiev, Ukraine
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
My answers are also E & E.
B also held my attention for #2. However, look at what I marked in red: it says 'many states' not 'all states'. B - is close, but wrong.
Now look at what I marked in blue: a comparison between 'total federal soil-conservation spending' and 'what some of the states spend on soil-conservation locally'. Clearly, points to E.
[quote="stolyar"]The United States government generally tries to protect valuable natural resources. But one resource has been ignored for too long. In the United States, each bushel of corn produced might result in the loss of as much as two bushels of topsoil. Moreover. In the last 100 years, the topsoil in many states. Which once was about four-teen inches thick, has been eroded to only six or eight inches. Nonetheless, federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have remained at ridiculously low levels. Total federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have been less than the allocations of some individual states.
_________________
Searching for an answer...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 399
Location: Bangalore, India
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
My answers are :
1 - E
2 - E
Do let me know the OA's.
stolyar wrote: The United States government generally tries to protect valuable natural resources. But one resource has been ignored for too long. In the United States, each bushel of corn produced might result in the loss of as much as two bushels of topsoil. Moreover. In the last 100 years, the topsoil in many states. Which once was about four-teen inches thick, has been eroded to only six or eight inches. Nonetheless, federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have remained at ridiculously low levels. Total federal expenditures for nationwide soil conservation programs have been less than the allocations of some individual states.
Which one of the following best expresses the main point of the argument?
(A) Corn is not a cost-effective product and substitutes should be found where possible.
(B) A layer of topsoil only six to eight inches thick cannot support the continued cultivation of corn.
(C) Soil conservation is a responsibility of the federal government, not the states.
(D) The federal government's expenditures for soil conservation in the various states have been inequitable.
(E) The federal government should spend much more on soil conservation than it has been spending.
In stating the argument, the author does which one of the following?
(A) makes a detailed statistical projection of future topsoil loss
(B) makes a generalization about total reduction in topsoil depth in all states
(C) assumes that the United States government does not place a high value on its natural resources
(D) refrains from using slanted language concerning the level of federal expenditures
(E) compares state expenditures with federal expenditures
_________________
Awaiting response,
Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1957
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
My answers:
1. E
2. D the author seems to be concerned and mild in his tone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 323
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
For me. E&B
_________________
"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'r gonna get"
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1680
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
the official answers are E and E
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2004
Posts: 447
Location: Cary,NC
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
E&E
sorry i'm late and took too much time !
2min and 1:30
I request clubbers to post their time too. By timing myself I constrain myself to think faster.
- ash
_________________
ash
________________________
I'm crossing the bridge.........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
