|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Verbal GMAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2011
Posts: 280
Followers: 13
Kudos [?]:
154
[1] , given: 19
|
Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
28 Apr 2012, 19:53
1
This post received KUDOS
Question Stats:
71% (01:00) correct
28% (01:20) wrong based on 35 sessions
Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author is arguing that ____. A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal b) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals e) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals
_________________
******************** Push +1 kudos button please, if you like my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Trying.... & desperate for success.
Joined: 17 May 2012
Posts: 69
Location: India
Concentration: Leadership, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: Q33 V27
GPA: 2.92
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 46
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
03 Sep 2012, 10:48
GetThisDone wrote: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author is arguing that ____. A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal b) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals e) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals
I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part. So why C could be correct? If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct. Can anyone help by explaining this question?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 101
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 66
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 04:55
navigator123 wrote: GetThisDone wrote: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author is arguing that ____. A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal b) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals e) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals
I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part. So why C could be correct? If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct. Can anyone help by explaining this question? c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence --> as the argument talks about self monitoring and if implementation is given to chemical industry we will have more carcinogens released in air. This aptly answers the question. d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals--> to extreme and uses strong words .. so it cannot be correct
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 509
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 20
Kudos [?]:
86
[0], given: 262
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 07:52
navigator123 wrote: GetThisDone wrote: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author is arguing that ____. A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal b) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals e) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals
I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part. So why C could be correct? If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct. Can anyone help by explaining this question? First of all, this is a CR question not an SC.  (Just kidding) You must flow with the stem while reading the options. Here the author is ARGUING, arguing what? Something which is given in the stem, what is given in the stem? not option D(to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals) but our answer i.e. option C (allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence) by stating that "If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air" Hope this helps !
_________________
First Attempt 710 - first-attempt-141273.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 973
Location: Toronto
Followers: 167
Kudos [?]:
443
[0], given: 3
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 14:35
As the question stem says, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens, when earlier it says that the purpose of the proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. So C is the correct answer, since the stem is arguing that the proposal will achieve the opposite of its purpose. As for the other answer choices, the argument is about the effectiveness of the clean air proposal, so B and E are not right. Nor is the argument about what proportion of chemical companies will comply with the proposal, so A is not right. And the argument is specifically about self-monitoring among chemical plant polluters, and not about self-monitoring in general, so D is not right.
_________________
Nov 2011: After years of development, I am now making my advanced Quant books and high-level problem sets available for sale. Contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com for details.
Private GMAT Tutor based in Toronto
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 01 Jun 2012
Posts: 26
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Social Entrepreneurship
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 4
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 21:04
I don't think the author in anywhere has said the chemical companies are untrustworthy. His concern is only about their self-monitoring. So "A", "B", "D" and "E" are out.
The correct answer is "C"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: struggling with GMAT
Joined: 06 Dec 2012
Posts: 323
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Accounting
GMAT Date: 04-06-2013
GPA: 3.65
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
27
[0], given: 46
|
Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
06 Mar 2013, 15:33
Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air.
The author is arguing that ____. (A)no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal (B)the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air (C)allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence (D)to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals (E)benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals Need help
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 1739
Followers: 55
Kudos [?]:
565
[1] , given: 467
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
06 Mar 2013, 19:08
1
This post received KUDOS
Hi mun let me say some thoughts about this question to help you. 1) this is not an assumtpion question, because based on two things (the word that at the and of the question stem ND the mood of the question) this is NOT an assumption question but rather an INFERENCE or MUST BE TRUE question. 2) I suggest you to to go to this topic and go step-by-step throughout the post to improve you Cr skills critical-reasoning-megathread-145178.htmlbest-critical-reasoning-shortcuts-notes-tips-91280.htmlThis is because if on one hand is useful to post here you questions (we are happy to help you) on the other hand if you do not take control, if you do not have the tools to crack the questions (i. e. study a lot) you do not have a clear compass about: where you go, how attack the question, an efficient strategy to use, and so on....I hope you know what I mean  Now back to the question Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. Ok here we have a fact that the governement wants to make effective The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. here we have the purpose of the proposal and the fact that the industry itself should control the implementation of a plan If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. basically here is stated this: IF the industry control all the situation we will not have benefits; the opposite: we will have worst effects. So from this we can deduce that the industry is not able to do nothing by itself(in a few words) The author is arguing that ____. (INFERNCE) (A)no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal too extreme as answer and we are not completely sure of this (B)the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air About this statistic we haven't enough indformation (C)allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence This is what, precisely, I said in the stimulus. The industry, if it pursues the implementation of the proposal , then the same is not able to do nothing without the engagement of the gov. perfect. correct (D)to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals Is not what we care about. the goverment (E)benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals The chemicals are not our concern C is indeed the correct answer Hope this helps you to comprehend better the whole situation
_________________
KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Posts: 421
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
94
[0], given: 48
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
20 Apr 2013, 20:20
All duplicate threads on this topic have been merged. Please check and follow the Guidelines for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum before posting anything.
_________________
PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: Rules for Posting in Verbal GMAT forum
Collection of Questions: .... Verbal Challenge 1.1: SC Questions .... Verbal Challenge 1.2: CR Questions
Resources: .... Common Redundancies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided
[#permalink]
20 Apr 2013, 20:20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar topics |
Author |
Replies |
Last post |
|
Similar Topics:
|
|
|
|
At a recent session, the French government has decided that
|
dipaksingh |
4 |
15 May 2005, 13:08 |
|
|
|
At a recent session, the French government has decided that
|
Dilshod |
4 |
28 Jul 2005, 13:03 |
|
|
|
At a recent session, the French government has decided that
|
nakib77 |
13 |
15 Oct 2005, 05:45 |
|
|
|
At a recent session, the French government has decided that
|
asaf |
8 |
13 Dec 2006, 13:12 |
|
|
|
Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided
|
mun23 |
0 |
06 Mar 2013, 19:08 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|