It is currently 24 Nov 2017, 06:23

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 145

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 313

Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
Premium Member Reviews Badge
A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Apr 2017, 06:18
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

39% (01:42) correct 61% (01:47) wrong based on 175 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic congestion is to provide timely flexible mass transit options between the suburbs and the city. The successful implementation of this plan would cost far less than building more highways and would also reduce the number of cars clogging roads in both urban and suburban environments.

Each of the following, if true, would provide opponents of the plan outlined above with a means of weakening the argument EXCEPT:

A. Large portion of people on the road are people traveling out of town for vacation.
B. Because the suburbs are spread over a large area most residence would have to drive several miles on a highway to reach a transit station.
C. Many new highways are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists.
D. An effective mass transit system would require major repairs to many highways and the current intra-city mass transit system.
E. Less than 20% of all cars on the road in urban environments are headed to or from the suburbs.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

If you find my posts/replies helpful, please take a moment to click on the "kudos" icon.

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 313

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Mar 2017
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 184 [1], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Apr 2017, 07:41
1
This post received
KUDOS
All the options except A weakens the argument....
Large portion of people on the road are people traveling out of town for vacation---this doesnot weaken the argument in any way...
Because the suburbs are spread over a large area most residence would have to drive several miles on a highway to reach a transit station-----clearly weakens...highway is required
Many new highways are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists---If new highways are built where transit is already there then transit may not be effective in these areas....

An effective mass transit system would require major repairs to many highways and the current intra-city mass transit system---weakens cost issue

Less than 20% of all cars on the road in urban environments are headed to or from the suburbs---weakens as it wont be economical
_________________

Kudos-----> If my post was Helpful

Kudos [?]: 184 [1], given: 20

Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 21 May 2016
Posts: 23

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 90

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2017, 03:30
godot53 wrote:
A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic congestion is to provide timely flexible mass transit options between the suburbs and the city. The successful implementation of this plan would cost far less than building more highways and would also reduce the number of cars clogging roads in both urban and suburban environments.

Each of the following, if true, would provide opponents of the plan outlined above with a means of weakening the argument EXCEPT:

A. Large portion of people on the road are people traveling out of town for vacation.
B. Because the suburbs are spread over a large area most residence would have to drive several miles on a highway to reach a transit station.
C. Many new highways are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists.
D. An effective mass transit system would require major repairs to many highways and the current intra-city mass transit system.
E. Less than 20% of all cars on the road in urban environments are headed to or from the suburbs.


What is the source of this Question please? The answer choices look too vague. Option A is quite open ended when we say that most people are traveling out of town for vacation. We cannot be sure if these people need to travel via suburbs to urban areas in order to reach their end destination out of town. If yes, then it is the correct option since it doesnt weaken the conclusion. But if these people do not necessarily have to travel via urban-suburban traffic and there is a different route for people who are travelling out of town then it is weakening the conclusion.
On the other hand, Option C also can be interpreted in 2 ways. New highways being built in an area where mass transit system already exists can be totally unrelated to the conclusion. If it is something that was started in the past and the action is continuing even today (constructing the highway) then how can we conclude that it weakens the conclusion?

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 90

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 175

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 143

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Copenhagen, ESMT"19
GPA: 3.75
WE: Consulting (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Sep 2017, 14:16
A. Large portion of people on the road are people traveling out of town for vacation. correct
B. Because the suburbs are spread over a large area most residence would have to drive several miles on a highway to reach a transit station. in that case also there will be lot of congestion
C. Many new highways are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists. even though mass transit system exist highway are being built in those cities
D. An effective mass transit system would require major repairs to many highways and the current intra-city mass transit system. which will cost a lot
E. Less than 20% of all cars on the road in urban environments are headed to or from the suburbs. If only less than 20% of all cars on road are headed to or from then building a new mass transit system will not be as much effective

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 143

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Posts: 214

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 125

A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2017, 03:35
Hi all,

How does option C weakens the argument.

It talks about "Many new highways are being built" and not about establishing flexible mass transit , infact it says mass transit already exists.

Only way i can think how C can weaken is,
Despite the mass transit, highway is still constructed => implies that over-crowding in mass transit forced government to construct highway, in that way, flexible mass transit will not solve the problem, but for this reasoning, we have to assume that "mass transit is overcrowded"


Experts please help me to eliminate option C.

Thanks

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 125

Senior CR Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1259

Kudos [?]: 1018 [0], given: 61

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Oct 2017, 19:56
godot53 wrote:
A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic congestion is to provide timely flexible mass transit options between the suburbs and the city. The successful implementation of this plan would cost far less than building more highways and would also reduce the number of cars clogging roads in both urban and suburban environments.

Each of the following, if true, would provide opponents of the plan outlined above with a means of weakening the argument EXCEPT:


The argument has two major points:
1. The plan costs far less than building highways
2. The plan could reduce the number of cars clogging roads


A. Large portion of people on the road are people traveling out of town for vacation.
Correct. This choice strengthens the argument (point 2). Many people travel out of town (for whatever reason) so they could take the mass transit. Hence, the traffic congestion problem could be solved effectively.

B. Because the suburbs are spread over a large area most residence would have to drive several miles on a highway to reach a transit station.
This choice weakens the argument (point 2). If most people still has to drive, they are unlikely to take the transit.

C. Many new highways are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists.
This choice weakens the argument (point 2). There are many new highways that are being built in areas where a mass transit sub-structure already exists indicates that the plan to build flexible mass transit could be ineffective and implementing both 2 plans could cost much unnecessarily.

D. An effective mass transit system would require major repairs to many highways and the current intra-city mass transit system.
This choice weakens the argument (point 1). This plan would require additional cost so it could cost far more than building new highways.

E. Less than 20% of all cars on the road in urban environments are headed to or from the suburbs.
This choice weakens the argument (point 2). If this plan is implemented, the traffic congestion is still a main problem since the plan could reduce less than 20% of all cars on the road.
_________________

Actual LSAT CR bank by Broall

How to solve quadratic equations - Factor quadratic equations
Factor table with sign: The useful tool to solve polynomial inequalities
Applying AM-GM inequality into finding extreme/absolute value

New Error Log with Timer

Kudos [?]: 1018 [0], given: 61

Re: A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic   [#permalink] 18 Oct 2017, 19:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A cost-effective solution to the problem of urban-suburban traffic

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.