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

 It is currently 21 Feb 2019, 20:08

### 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

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

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in February
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
272829303112
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272812
Open Detailed Calendar

February 21, 2019

February 21, 2019

10:00 PM PST

11:00 PM PST

Kick off your 2019 GMAT prep with a free 7-day boot camp that includes free online lessons, webinars, and a full GMAT course access. Limited for the first 99 registrants! Feb. 21st until the 27th.
• ### Free GMAT RC Webinar

February 23, 2019

February 23, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Learn reading strategies that can help even non-voracious reader to master GMAT RC. Saturday, February 23rd at 7 AM PT

# A recent report on an environmental improvement program was

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1647
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
A recent report on an environmental improvement program was  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 May 2009, 23:04
4
13
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

63% (01:55) correct 37% (02:17) wrong based on 661 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A recent report on an environmental improvement program was criticized for focusing solely on pragmatic solutions to the large number of significant problems that plague the program instead of seriously trying to produce a coherent vision for the future of the program. In response the report’s authors granted that the critics had raised a valid point but explained that, to do anything at all, the program needed continued government funding, and that to get such funding the program first needed to regain a reputation for competence.

1.The basic position taken by the report’s authors on the criticism leveled against the report is that
(A) addressing the critics’ concern now would be premature
(B) the critics’ motives are self-serving
(C) the notion of a coherent vision would be inappropriate to a program of the sort at issue
(D) the authors of the report are more knowledgeable than its critics
(E) giving the report a single focus is less desirable than the critics claim

Spoiler: :: OA
A

2. Which one of the following, if true, would best serve the critics of the report in their attempt to undermine the position taken by the report’s authors?
(A) The government does not actually provide a full l00 percent of the program’s funding.
(B) The program will continue to have numerous serious problems precisely because it lacks a coherent vision for its future.
(C) The program had a coherent vision at its inception, but that vision has proved impossible to sustain.
(D) The government has threatened to cut off funding for the program but has not acted yet on this threat.
(E) The program has acquired a worse reputation for incompetence than it deserves.

Spoiler: :: OA
B

_________________
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 335
Location: San Francisco

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2010, 19:12
6
1
Hey All,

Even though a lot of agreement on this one in terms of the answer, no one seems to have really gone all out to explain what's going on through technique. Because at least one person had questions, I figured I'd take them on. Let's do it!

A recent report on an environmental improvement program was criticized for focusing solely on pragmatic solutions to the large number of significant problems that plague the program instead of seriously trying to produce a coherent vision for the future of the program. In response the report’s authors granted that the critics had raised a valid point but explained that, to do anything at all, the program needed continued government funding, and that to get such funding the program first needed to regain a reputation for competence.

Criticism: Report criticized for focusing on fix problems, not thinking of future.
Response: To move forward, need funding, and funding comes with competence.

1.The basic position taken by the report’s authors on the criticism leveled against the report is that
(A) addressing the critics’ concern now would be premature
ANSWER: This argument is about the future, and the authors are focusing on the present. This is correct, because they're arguing that they need to get funding (in the present) before worrying about the future).

(B) the critics’ motives are self-serving
PROBLEM: No information is given on the motives of the critics.

(C) the notion of a coherent vision would be inappropriate to a program of the sort at issue
PROBLEM: We can't ignore that "critics raised a valid point". They agree about the vision, but only say they can't worry about it unless they continue to get funding.

(D) the authors of the report are more knowledgeable than its critics
PROBLEM: Whether or not this is true, the authors do not mention that they have any kind of special knowledge.

(E) giving the report a single focus is less desirable than the critics claim
PROBLEM: Again, they don't disagree with the critics, except to say that they need to worry about something else first.

2. Which one of the following, if true, would best serve the critics of the report in their attempt to undermine the position taken by the report’s authors?

(A) The government does not actually provide a full l00 percent of the program’s funding.
PROBLEM: Doesn't have to be a full 100%. Now, if it only provided 1%, that would be a different issue.

(B) The program will continue to have numerous serious problems precisely because it lacks a coherent vision for its future.
ANSWER: This means that they will never be seen as competent until they worry about the future, so the authors argument doesn't make any sense.

(C) The program had a coherent vision at its inception, but that vision has proved impossible to sustain.
PROBLEM: This wouldn't help at all. In fact, it might even hurt the argument to say that the vision is impossible to sustain (because then why would it be worth worrying about?).

(D) The government has threatened to cut off funding for the program but has not acted yet on this threat.
PROBLEM: Again, this would probably HELP the author's argument, because their worries about government funding in the present are critical.

(E) The program has acquired a worse reputation for incompetence than it deserves.
PROBLEM: This doesn't help anyone, because even if the program isn't as bad as it sounds, it still needs funding, and it still needs vision.

Hope that helps!

-t
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 10 May 2009
Posts: 56

### Show Tags

19 May 2009, 00:08
1. A ( others are irrelevant)
2. B ( because the program will have problems, the program will never gain the reputation for comptence)
Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 212

### Show Tags

19 May 2009, 01:18
IMO A, B

A recent report on an environmental improvement program was criticized for focusing solely on pragmatic solutions to the large number of significant problems that plague the program instead of seriously trying to produce a coherent vision for the future of the program. In response the report’s authors granted that the critics had raised a valid point but explained that, to do anything at all, the program needed continued government funding, and that to get such funding the program first needed to regain a reputation for competence.

1.The basic position taken by the report’s authors on the criticism leveled against the report is that
(A) addressing the critics’ concern now would be premature --> best. (use POE)
(B) the critics’ motives are self-serving -->no info
(C) the notion of a coherent vision would be inappropriate to a program of the sort at issue -->the reports' author does not deny the valid point of the notion of coherent vision
(D) the authors of the report are more knowledgeable than its critics --> ridiculous
(E) giving the report a single focus is less desirable than the critics claim -->counter fact

2. Which one of the following, if true, would best serve the critics of the report in their attempt to undermine the position taken by the report’s authors?
(A) The government does not actually provide a full l00 percent of the program’s funding -->out of scope
(B) The program will continue to have numerous serious problems precisely because it lacks a coherent vision for its future -->strengthen
(C) The program had a coherent vision at its inception, but that vision has proved impossible to sustain -->weaken
(D) The government has threatened to cut off funding for the program but has not acted yet on this threat -->weaken
(E) The program has acquired a worse reputation for incompetence than it deserves -->weaken
Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 245

### Show Tags

19 May 2009, 03:11
IMO A, D...

in the second question, D is more attractive than B as it directly attacks the authors claim that its pragmatic solutions are needed for government funding. and if Govt funding is threatened, then the authors claim is weakened.
Manager
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 183
Location: nj

### Show Tags

20 May 2009, 13:50
A
B ( if the problems continued then the program will never regain its reputation for competence)
Intern
Status: A continuous journey of self-improvement is essential for every person -Socrates
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 46

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2011, 20:01
Thanks Tommy for explaining the difference between B and D in second question. +1.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1007
Location: United States
Re: A recent report on an environmental improvement program was  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Mar 2013, 13:09
A and B are correct. Here my 2 cents.

For the 1st question:
Premise: Critics say the program focuses only on pragmatic solutions and it doesn't have coherent vision for the future of program.
Premise: Author: to get government funding, the program has to regain reputation first. Assumption is: reputation will be sustained in the long term. (if the reputation couldn't be sustained, the government won't finance the program.). That's the key assumption.
Author's conclusion: critics raised a valid point, but to do anything.

The author means the critics' point is valid but premature to conclude that the program has no coherent vision. --> A

For the 2nd question:
To break the author's logic, critics must show the flaw of author's assumption. B clearly supports critics by showing that the program's reputation couldn't be sustained in the long term. Hence, B is correct.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Intern
Joined: 04 Apr 2013
Posts: 12
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GPA: 3
Re: A recent report on an environmental improvement program was  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2013, 01:24
Has to be 'A'.

PS Why do people put down two answers, like 'My answer is A & B'? Makes no sense, you can only have ONE ANSWER
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3637
Re: A recent report on an environmental improvement program was  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Sep 2018, 04:50
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.
_________________
Re: A recent report on an environmental improvement program was   [#permalink] 05 Sep 2018, 04:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by