GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Jun 2019, 00:06

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

A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl

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

Hide Tags

 
Retired Moderator
User avatar
B
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 436
Location: United States (DE)
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 01 Apr 2019, 04:52
2
7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

91% (01:23) correct 9% (01:37) wrong based on 1299 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a home builder argued that because more than 90 percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, residential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the home builder’s argument?


(A) Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires.

(B) Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope.

(C) The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers.

(D) In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average.

(E) The largest proportion of property damage that results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present.


Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 31
Page: 127


The Official Guide for GMAT Review, 10th Edition, 2003

Practice Question
Question No.: CR 18
Page: 503


Project CR Butler:Day 44:Critical Reasoning (CR2)


For all CR butler Questions Click Here

Originally posted by WaterFlowsUp on 16 Oct 2013, 07:11.
Last edited by Bunuel on 01 Apr 2019, 04:52, edited 4 times in total.
Updated
Board of Directors
User avatar
D
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3364
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2013, 14:15
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 488
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Feb 2015, 13:52
1
01:09 straight E... B,C,D are either irrelevant or strengthen the argument. Only A could be a contender here
Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires - However, 90 percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, that means they just don't need any training......
_________________
When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

Share some Kudos, if my posts help you. Thank you !

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jul 2013
Posts: 16
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Feb 2015, 08:15
A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a home builder argued that because more than 90 percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, residential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the home builder’s argument?


(A) Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires.
(B) Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope.
(C) The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers.
(D) In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average.
(E) The largest proportion of property damage that
results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present.



While considering weakening questions focus on the conclusion of the stimulus, here the homebuilder talks about how fires are extinguished by household members 90% of the time and gives additional reasoning saying that the sprinklers would marginally help stopping the fires and decrease the property damage. One way of weakening would be to show or give stats saying that the absence of household members would cause the fire to propagate and perpetuate. Hence we go through the answer options to check if anything matches this consideration.

A> out of scope -- no mention of training so it isnt even tangential so not essential to the stimulus
B>though it would be narrow in scope this option does not address the conclusion and should be eliminated
C>while this does talk about the merit of a smoke detector over a sprinkler it does not talk about damage control so is definitely out of context
D>again out of scope-- we're considering sprinkler installation over household member presence so cannot be considered
E> this is the correct answer, it correctly points out the weakness in the housebuilder's argument and the key here is matching the phrase property damage.

hope this helps!
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 38
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Apr 2016, 07:49
The homebuilder assumes that ~10% of residential fires would not cause significant damage. Answer choice which undermines this assumption will weaken the argument.

Another way to look at this argument is to negate the conclusion and look for an answer choice that supports this conclusion:
~Conclusion: Res Sprinklers would significantly decrease property damage caused by residential fires.
Now look for an answer choice that supports this conclusion.
Current Student
avatar
B
Joined: 20 Jun 2017
Posts: 64
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Reviews Badge
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2017, 17:58
A) Most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires.- not relevant here. We have to look for an answer that talks about property damage.
(B) Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would be extremely narrow in scope. - not a great pick.
(C) The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers.- there is no mention of cost in the argument.
(D) In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average.- so? It doesn't matter.
(E) The largest proportion of property damage that
results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present.- correct. Even though 90%of the times, fire is caused by household member and can be extinguished, the damage to property can be huge in these cases.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Mannheim Thread Master
User avatar
S
Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 183
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Aug 2017, 06:35
E is correct - Identifies a weakness in the home builder's argument by showing that most damage occurs when no household member is present to put out the fire.
_________________
2017-2018 MBA Deadlines

Threadmaster for B-school Discussions
Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 4611
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Nov 2018, 16:10
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl   [#permalink] 26 Nov 2018, 16:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinkl

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


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