Q1. The author would most likely agree with all of the following except:
(A) A more radical leader than Hoover was needed to properly combat the Great Depression
(B) Leaders should not be automatically blamed for problems during their tenure
(C) The RFC unfairly favored large and powerful institutions.
(D) At least for a short time, the RFC had some positive effect on the economy.
(E) The impact of Hoover’s policies on the Great Depression remain controversial.
The OA for this question is C. However, I do not understand how it could be the correct answer. Any help is appreciated.
"Whatever its value to the economy, many people weren’t happy with the RFC, saying that it helped only the large and powerful. This criticism wasn’t entirely valid after mid-1932,......". The author says that the criticism is not entirely valid after mid-1932. Doesn't that leave the possibility that the author thought that the criticism was valid before mid 1932?
Regarding option (A), "A more radical leader than Hoover was needed to properly combat the Great Depression" - the passage mentions "The fact was, however, that potent remedies appeared to require a radically different approach to public finance and a revolutionary concept of the role of federal government in the time of economic crisis. Herbert Hoover had been elected to office on a platform promising safe, conservative economic programs. It was almost asking too much of him to come up with the imaginative, even radical, leadership that seemed needed to deal with the crisis."
In the second paragraph, "Perhaps his sharpest break with tradition was the establishment of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation in January, 1932."
I came to the conclusion that the author meant that establishment of the RFC by Hoover was the radical approach that was much needed for this situation.
Can you explain where I went wrong?
GMATNinja,
GMATNinjaTwo,
VeritasKarishma