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

 It is currently 24 May 2019, 08:10

### 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

# Advocates argue that five-cent bottle deposits charged on

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 01 Sep 2016
Posts: 192
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2017, 10:19
In an Inference question, the correct answer must be true. Accordingly, you should hold every answer choice up to that test: if it could be false, then you can eliminated it.
Choice A here is probably true, but not guaranteed: the coach says that even the most unbelievable records will LIKELY be broken, but not that they will all be broken. Note that predictions are very hard to make in Inference questions, as much like your insurance policy they're subject to the "act of god" clause - if a meteor hits the earth and wipes out humankind, then no world records will ever be broken!
Choice B is similarly incorrect: true champions know that records will likely broken, but that doesn't mean that they cannot make predictions about whether their record is one of the few that may never be broken.
Choice C may look tempting, but look back at what the Olympic champion says: "I'm not sure" the record will ever be broken. This stops short of saying "it will not be broken," so you cannot conclusively say that he is not a true champion.
Choice D goes just a bit too far, again because the coach's point is that records will likely be broken, which is a bit short of saying that all will be broken.
Choice E is correct, in large part because of the adequately-measured wording "could be broken." Since any true champion knows that a record could be broken, if a champion does not at least think that the record could be broken he then does not fit that definition of a true champion.
_________________
we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender!
Intern
Joined: 18 Mar 2019
Posts: 1

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2019, 12:16
I think the people choosing D is picking up the tricky, but wrong reasoning. The question is not about about what proportion of what is being recycled or whatever. The real question is no matter how small the proportion is still successful without any five-cent policy in some States. Option C tells us a perfect filling of the gap that is relevant to fill.
Manager
Joined: 22 Sep 2018
Posts: 65

### Show Tags

21 Mar 2019, 11:14
Could someone help to shed some light on why option C is a better option than D?

1. put \$ on containers - > why? -> for environmental protection -> how? -> will ensure that they are recycled
2. put \$ on containers -> gives incentive -> to recycle
3. Recent study: no \$ -> more comprehensive recycling programs (included paper also)

So we need something to prove why the study was valid.

Why is option C wrong?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9238
Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2019, 01:00
1
Leonaann wrote:
Could someone help to shed some light on why option C is a better option than D?

1. put \$ on containers - > why? -> for environmental protection -> how? -> will ensure that they are recycled
2. put \$ on containers -> gives incentive -> to recycle
3. Recent study: no \$ -> more comprehensive recycling programs (included paper also)

So we need something to prove why the study was valid.

Why is option C wrong?

As is common with study/survey questions, it is important to know whether the groups being compared are actually comparable.
e.g. say in a study, people were divided into two equal groups. One group was put on a sea food diet and the other group was put on a lean meat diet. After 6 months, the average cholesterol level of group 1 was substantially lower than that of group 2.
Now to understand the validity of this result, we need to know multiple things:
1. Was the average cholesterol of group 1 comparable with that of group 2 before the study?
2. Were the exercise, medicine etc regimes of both groups the same?
etc

Let's get on with our original question now: a recent study found that states without a bottle deposit had more success in implementing comprehensive recycling programs, which include paper, plastics, and steel, in addition to the beverage containers, than did states with a bottle deposit law.
So the study says that states without a bottle deposit have more successful comprehensive recycling programs. What we need to understand is whether the two study groups (states with bottle deposit and states without bottle deposit) are comparable.

What does option (C) say?
C) When the five-cent deposit programs were implemented, were the citizens of the states that began programs as enthusiastic about recycling as the citizens of the other states?
The question is whether the states with bottle deposit were on similar level of enthusiasm before implementation as states without bottle deposit. This is similar to point 1 of example above.
Was the level of recycling similar of the two groups before the bottle deposit program started? The logic of this is that what if bottle deposit program was started in states which had very low enthusiasm towards recycling? Perhaps the bottle deposit program improved enthusiasm. The level of recycling may not be the same as in those states where the enthusiasm for recycling was anyway high but still an improvement from before. Hence it is good to know whether the level of enthusiasm in the two sets was same before the program was implemented.

As for (D),
D) Did citizens of the states with and without bottle deposit programs purchase comparable numbers of beverages in plastic, glass and aluminium containers?
The measure of success of the recycling program would be a relative parameter such as percentage of recyclable material that actually gets recycled. Say 10 million tonne of recyclable material is sold in a year in the form of beverage bottles etc. The measure of success of the program could be what percentage of this 10 million tonnes comes back to be recycled. So the actual number of bottles etc is irrelevant.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2018
Posts: 192

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2019, 23:28

Please explain the argument and correct answer. The majority have answered D but the OA is C.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9238
Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2019, 21:11
1
mallya12 wrote:

Please explain the argument and correct answer. The majority have answered D but the OA is C.

Check my solution above. I have explained why the answer is (C) and not (D)

Posted from my mobile device
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Re: Advocates argue that five-cent bottle deposits charged on   [#permalink] 25 Mar 2019, 21:11

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 26 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by