Tricky! Keith: Compliance with new government regulations

Oldest

Best Reply

Author

Message

TAGS:

Director

Joined: 25 Aug 2007

Posts: 959

WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT

WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain

Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 555 [1] , given: 40

Tricky! Keith: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 04:38

This post received
KUDOS

00:00

Question Stats:

79% (01:50) correct

20% (01:44) wrong

based on 4 sessions

Tricky!

Keith: Compliance with new government regulations requiring the installation of smoke alarms and sprinkler systems in all theaters and arenas will cost the entertainment industry $25 billion annually. Consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. Therefore, these regulations will harm the country’s economy.

Laura: The $25 billion spent by some businesses will be revenue for others. Jobs and profits will be gained as well as lost.

Laura responds to Keith by
(A) demonstrating that Keith’s conclusion is based on evidence that is not relevant to the issue at hand
(B) challenging the plausibility of the evidence that serves as the basis for Keith’s argument
(C) suggesting that Keith’s argument overlooks a mitigating consequence
(D) reinforcing Keith’s conclusion by supplying a complementary interpretation of the evidence Keith cites
(E) agreeing with the main conclusion of Keith’s argument but construing that conclusion as grounds for optimism rather than for pessimism

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Senior Manager

Joined: 24 Jul 2009

Posts: 301

Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 50 [1] , given: 0

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 05:38

This post received
KUDOS

ykaiim wrote:

Tricky!

Keith: Compliance with new government regulations requiring the installation of smoke alarms and sprinkler systems in all theaters and arenas will cost the entertainment industry $25 billion annually. Consequently, jobs will be lost and profits diminished. Therefore, these regulations will harm the country’s economy.

Laura: The $25 billion spent by some businesses will be revenue for others. Jobs and profits will be gained as well as lost.

Laura responds to Keith by
(A) demonstrating that Keith’s conclusion is based on evidence that is not relevant to the issue at hand >>> Laura doesn't ignore the issue.
(B) challenging the plausibility of the evidence that serves as the basis for Keith’s argument >>>>>> Laura doesn't question the validity of the evidence/data.
(C) suggesting that Keith’s argument overlooks a mitigating consequence >>> CORRECT
(D) reinforcing Keith’s conclusion by supplying a complementary interpretation of the evidence Keith cites >>> Laura doesn't reinforce the conclusion, here the conclusion is : jobs will be lost and profits diminished..
(E) agreeing with the main conclusion of Keith’s argument but construing that conclusion as grounds for optimism rather than for pessimism >>> She doesn't agree with the main conclusion

CR Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Oct 2009

Posts: 470

Location: Bangalore,India

WE 1: 4yrs in IT Industry

Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 268

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 07:50

went wrong with question

thanku nverma

Senior Manager

Joined: 01 Feb 2010

Posts: 275

Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 2

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 07:58

ykaiim wrote:

It has to be C.
C & E are the two short listed choices, but E does not talk about the conclusion of Keith's argument "hese regulations will harm the country’s economy". Hence C.

Intern

Joined: 08 Nov 2009

Posts: 44

Location: New York, NY

Schools: Columbia, NYU, Wharton, UCLA, Berkeley

WE 1: 2 Yrs mgmt consulting

WE 2: 2 yrs m&a

Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 1

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 11:05

Agree it's C.
E might come close but it's not even right because Laura never even agreed with Keith in what she said..she simply suggested the point that he overlooked. Which is C.

SVP

Joined: 17 Feb 2010

Posts: 1570

Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 6

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

14 May 2010, 12:31

it is C.

Laura suggests that Keith’s argument (jobs will be lost and profits diminished) overlooks a mitigating consequence ($25 billion spent by some businesses will be revenue for others. Jobs and profits will be gained as well as lost)

Manager

Joined: 16 Feb 2010

Posts: 178

Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 10

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink]

15 May 2010, 01:13

it must be C , as laura say mean to say that whatever the loss would occcur to the entertainment industry in the form of expendicture , would serve as a profit for the other industries as they would get the job for fiing sprinkelrs etc.
clearly its C

Re: Compliance with new government regulations [#permalink] 15 May 2010, 01:13

	Similar topics	Author	Replies	Last post
Similar Topics:	Abolition of government regulation of airfares has increased	Janice	13	05 Jan 2005, 21:47
	If FDA doesnot relax some of its regulations governing the	MA	16	02 Mar 2005, 23:00
	AWA Review - Regulation of Environment by Government	AVakil	2	18 Dec 2007, 07:01
	One way banks avoid government regulation	Ntang	0	22 Jan 2009, 07:41
	Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government	enigma123	1	15 Nov 2011, 17:01

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources

GMAT ® is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council ® (GMAC ®). GMAT Club's website has not been reviewed or endorsed by GMAC.

GMAT Courses

Admissions Consulting

Tricky! Keith: Compliance with new government regulations

Tricky! Keith: Compliance with new government regulations

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources