Last visit was: 16 Jul 2025, 01:49 It is currently 16 Jul 2025, 01:49
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
User avatar
gmatt1476
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Last visit: 27 Mar 2025
Posts: 334
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 62
Posts: 334
Kudos: 24,290
 [213]
9
Kudos
Add Kudos
202
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
GMATIntensive
Joined: 22 Jan 2020
Last visit: 09 Jun 2025
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
2,017
 [60]
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
Posts: 67
Kudos: 2,017
 [60]
46
Kudos
Add Kudos
14
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
gmatt1476
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Last visit: 27 Mar 2025
Posts: 334
Own Kudos:
24,290
 [11]
Given Kudos: 62
Posts: 334
Kudos: 24,290
 [11]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
avatar
Sarjaria84
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Last visit: 30 Jun 2020
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
23
 [1]
Given Kudos: 445
GMAT 1: 610 Q46 V28
GMAT 1: 610 Q46 V28
Posts: 74
Kudos: 23
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

Even though I got this correct, before I went to the answers I thought the correct answer choice would be something on the lines "even though the new banks are only available online most of the local communities can still access these banks and thus it would not have an impact on the intended purpose of the law".

And I thought while reading option E that even if there's not a complete elimination of the physical banks but the impact is substantial then too the law will loose it's purpose.
But as option E was the best available choice I went through with it.

Isn't the word 'complete elimination' too strong for the option?

Thanks
Saurabh
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,379
 [5]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,379
 [5]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Sarjaria84
Hi,

Even though I got this correct, before I went to the answers I thought the correct answer choice would be something on the lines "even though the new banks are only available online most of the local communities can still access these banks and thus it would not have an impact on the intended purpose of the law".

And I thought while reading option E that even if there's not a complete elimination of the physical banks but the impact is substantial then too the law will loose it's purpose.
But as option E was the best available choice I went through with it.

Isn't the word 'complete elimination' too strong for the option?

Thanks
Saurabh
Hello, Saurabh. It is good that you have caught on to a common trap of the GMAT™, namely the use of overreaching or absolute language. If you look at option (E) closer, though, it negates the absolute condition:

gmatt1476
E. It fails to adequately address the possibility that an increase in the number of banks of one kind in the banker's country will not lead to the complete elimination of banks of another kind.
In other words, the argument does not take into account that just because the number of online banks is increasing does not mean that the number of local banks referred to in the passage will diminish to zero. It may be a possibility either way, but the banker makes it sound definitive. Thus, the banker is using language/thinking that is too strong, to use your own words, while the correct answer points out that flaw in reasoning.

I hope that helps. (Good job on a tough question.)

- Andrew
User avatar
shameekv1989
Joined: 14 Dec 2019
Last visit: 17 Jun 2021
Posts: 820
Own Kudos:
966
 [1]
Given Kudos: 354
Location: Poland
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V27
GMAT 2: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 3: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
WE:Engineering (Consumer Electronics)
Products:
GMAT 3: 720 Q50 V38
Posts: 820
Kudos: 966
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I can't understand the impact of online banks compared to physical banks.

If online banks can serve the same purpose and that these online banks are subject to same conditions then they shouldn't have any impact per se.

Can someone elaborate on this aspect?
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,379
 [8]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,379
 [8]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shameekv1989
I can't understand the impact of online banks compared to physical banks.

If online banks can serve the same purpose and that these online banks are subject to same conditions then they shouldn't have any impact per se.

Can someone elaborate on this aspect?
I understand your rationale, shameekv1989, but keep in mind, just because online banks can serve the same purpose as their physical counterparts does not mean that they will. Because physical banks have, well, a particular location within an area, that bank is intended to serve that community. An online bank could serve the same community, but it could just as easily work with clients from around the country, or even non-citizens. With no physical address, such a bank might avoid local governmental oversight. For instance, if a country comprised 30 districts, and 50 online banks popped up within the country, how would the government determine which banks needed to invest in which communities? By examining IP addresses? Modem locations? Such banks would be operating against the local intention of the country's laws, and the argument in the passage would hold.

I hope that helps clarify the issue and allay your concerns; if not, feel free to ask away.

- Andrew
avatar
anaDarmas
Joined: 22 Sep 2016
Last visit: 30 Jul 2023
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
4
 [3]
Given Kudos: 248
Posts: 4
Kudos: 4
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is hard more so because of the language of the options.

The Banker is saying that since more banks have an online-only presence, the laws will not apply to them and the local communities will suffer.

There are two massive assumptions here:
1. Online-only banks aren't subject to the same laws as physical banks
2. The existing physical banks will no longer be servicing these impoverished communities

E is exactly what we want. Unfortunately we've had to read through C and D which are painful but can be rejected. C talks about confusing two conditions which is not discussed in the argument. D talks about correlation between two events - again not present in our argument. A and B are easier to eliminate; A doesn't directly impact our conclusion and B is out of scope.
User avatar
zoezhuyan
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Last visit: 11 Nov 2024
Posts: 429
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 147
Posts: 429
Kudos: 92
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, AnthonyRitz, CJAnish, MartyTargetTestPrep,AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian

Dear experts,

I am struggling with D.
for me, the two phenomenons stand to
1) An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.
2)But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose.

I can catch that 1) is not necessary led 2)

even if there is a strong correlation between 1) and 2), neither 1) nor 2) is necessarily responsibility for other one.

So I picked up D.

but I am not sure my reasoning bug.

I genuinely need your explanation.

thanks in advance
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,379
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,379
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zoezhuyan
GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, AnthonyRitz, CJAnish, MartyTargetTestPrep,AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian

Dear experts,

I am struggling with D.
for me, the two phenomenons stand to
1) An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.
2)But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose.

I can catch that 1) is not necessary led 2)

even if there is a strong correlation between 1) and 2), neither 1) nor 2) is necessarily responsibility for other one.

So I picked up D.

but I am not sure my reasoning bug.

I genuinely need your explanation.

thanks in advance
Hello, zoezhuyan. I think you might be overlooking the obvious. Notice that (D) is framed, even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena. Is such a strong correlation presented in the passage? Not that I can see. The question reminds me of another type of answer that pigeonholes a subset of a larger group and then spins a legitimate-sounding statement from it. An example might be something like the following:

Passage: Twenty students took a test for a class, and fifty percent of them failed, with an average of six questions missed.

Answer choice: Among students with the best scores, the average number of questions missed was zero to one.

The problem, of course, is that we have no idea what may constitute a student with the best score, and the passage would need to provide further information for us to qualify such an answer choice. Likewise, in the question at hand, we need more than a tenuous connection to a correlation for us to qualify (D). It should be one of the easier eliminations to make.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me about this tough question.

- Andrew
User avatar
zoezhuyan
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Last visit: 11 Nov 2024
Posts: 429
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 147
Posts: 429
Kudos: 92
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AndrewN
zoezhuyan
GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, AnthonyRitz, CJAnish, MartyTargetTestPrep,AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian

Dear experts,

I am struggling with D.
for me, the two phenomenons stand to
1) An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.
2)But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose.

I can catch that 1) is not necessary led 2)

even if there is a strong correlation between 1) and 2), neither 1) nor 2) is necessarily responsibility for other one.

So I picked up D.

but I am not sure my reasoning bug.

I genuinely need your explanation.

thanks in advance
Hello, zoezhuyan. I think you might be overlooking the obvious. Notice that (D) is framed, even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena. Is such a strong correlation presented in the passage? Not that I can see. The question reminds me of another type of answer that pigeonholes a subset of a larger group and then spins a legitimate-sounding statement from it. An example might be something like the following:

Passage: Twenty students took a test for a class, and fifty percent of them failed, with an average of six questions missed.

Answer choice: Among students with the best scores, the average number of questions missed was zero to one.

The problem, of course, is that we have no idea what may constitute a student with the best score, and the passage would need to provide further information for us to qualify such an answer choice. Likewise, in the question at hand, we need more than a tenuous connection to a correlation for us to qualify (D). It should be one of the easier eliminations to make.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me about this tough question.

- Andrew

dear /url],AndrewN,
thanks for your quick reply.
I have another question after reading your reply.

the phrase "even if" confused me a lot. IMO, this phrase introduces a reluctant agreement. and also I see it as a given condition, I need to assess the choice under this given condition.

appreciate for your help.

thanks in advance
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,379
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,379
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zoezhuyan
dear /url],AndrewN,
thanks for your quick reply.
I have another question after reading your reply.

the phrase "even if" confused me a lot. IMO, this phrase introduces a reluctant agreement. and also I see it as a given condition, I need to assess the choice under this given condition.

appreciate for your help.

thanks in advance
I think your confusion, zoezhuyan, may have stemmed from these two simple words. When I see even if at the head of a sentence, I do not automatically think of reluctant agreement; I think of a concession that might be used to further an opposing view. A lawyer might argue, for instance, that even if the glove had fit the hand of his client, OJ Simpson, that fact in and of itself would not implicate the man of wrongdoing.

- Andrew
User avatar
Basshead
Joined: 09 Jan 2020
Last visit: 07 Feb 2024
Posts: 927
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 432
Location: United States
Posts: 927
Kudos: 287
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I think what makes this question challenging is that we need to connect the dots very quickly.

"But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community."

This tells us that banks not physically located in the country will not have to abide by its local laws.

Choice A and B can quickly be eliminated. Choice C and D are there to take up valuable time. Under test conditions, I feel those would be tempting choices under pressure because they each take some time to process.

If we can get through C and D, then it's clear that E is the answer.
User avatar
mSKR
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,309
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,309
Kudos: 929
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi AndrewN Sir,

I have some issue in solving questions on : argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
Could you please give me some tips/strategy/methodology to tackle such questions?

Here in the question:

Quote:
Banker: My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth. This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities. But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.

The banker's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
Law requires Bank to do something to bring some effects
Now banks are offline.

what is the flaw in argument?

Quote:
C. It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

Condition: law require bank to do something
Effect: revitalize impoverished local communities.
With a condition: something else responsible for revitalizing impoverished local communities
Nothing about another condition is mentioned

Quote:
D. It overlooks the possibility that even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena, neither of those phenomena are necessarily causally responsible for the other.
Argumen doesn’t consider :
1. Banks are present in community
2. impoverished local communities

Not necessary to co-exist. 1 and 2 happen to be causally related with each other but not necessary depend on each other

Why not D then?


When i reached at E, i rejected E that such comparison is not talked about. I couldn't think more . I was already exhausted thinking exact meanings of C and D and not able to solve these type of questions of comfortably. Please suggest sir AndrewN.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,502
Own Kudos:
7,379
 [4]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,502
Kudos: 7,379
 [4]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imSKR
Hi AndrewN Sir,

I have some issue in solving questions on : argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
Could you please give me some tips/strategy/methodology to tackle such questions?

Here in the question:

Quote:
Banker: My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth. This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities. But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.

The banker's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
Law requires Bank to do something to bring some effects
Now banks are offline.

what is the flaw in argument?

Quote:
C. It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

Condition: law require bank to do something
Effect: revitalize impoverished local communities.
With a condition: something else responsible for revitalizing impoverished local communities
Nothing about another condition is mentioned

Quote:
D. It overlooks the possibility that even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena, neither of those phenomena are necessarily causally responsible for the other.
Argumen doesn’t consider :
1. Banks are present in community
2. impoverished local communities

Not necessary to co-exist. 1 and 2 happen to be causally related with each other but not necessary depend on each other

Why not D then?


When i reached at E, i rejected E that such comparison is not talked about. I couldn't think more . I was already exhausted thinking exact meanings of C and D and not able to solve these type of questions of comfortably. Please suggest sir AndrewN.
We have talked about approaching difficult questions before, imSKR. I think you may still be falling into a bad habit of attempting to make heads or tails of an answer choice as soon as you lay eyes on it. Sometimes that proves difficult, and the time and mental energy you spend seeking to qualify everything on the spot hampers your performance. My suggestion? Allow yourself to make multiple passes of the answer choices. Anything you do not understand the first time can be placed on the back burner while you look to make sense of simpler answer choices. Sometimes you may luck out and find an answer that you cannot argue against. If so, pick it, and leave the others behind. Watch your accuracy go up and your timing go down. Do not forget, either, that such an approach can set you up for success on that next question, too. Rather than carry mental baggage from one question to another, you will be able to assess each question and its accompanying answer choices on their own merits. I have discussed (D) above, in my response to zoezhuyan. As for (E), it touches on the absolute nature of the argument, namely that the argument seems to assume that online banks will replace physical banks entirely and thereby prevent the law from serving its intended purpose.

With all of that said, this is a tough question that incorporates more "legalese" than a lot of other CR questions. Just study it for what it is, look to follow the linear logic of the passage, and make sure you are answering the question being asked.

- Andrew
User avatar
mSKR
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,309
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,309
Kudos: 929
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Indeed one of the toughest questions, options talk about soecific point as in D and C. but we need to find option that covers both 2 entities as in E.

Thanks AndrewN for the insights:)
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 283
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja IanStewart GMATGuruNY

- Struggling to parse option C exactly -- here is my attempt

Quote:
C. It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

Green : If Condition 1 is present, Condition 1 will produce Effect 1
Blue : If Effect 2 is in true, Condition 2 will be the cause of Effect 2
----------------------------------------

Condition 1-- country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community/ providing mortgages....
Effect 1 -- revitalize impoverished local communities.
Condition 2-- An increasing number of banks are now solely on the Internet
Effect 2------ law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose

(1) Is my parsing of option C accurate ?
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 4,142
Own Kudos:
10,628
 [3]
Given Kudos: 97
 Q51  V47
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,142
Kudos: 10,628
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Answer C may be difficult to understand on a first read, because it seems to suggest the argument is confusing two things that one might easily think are the same: it says the argument is confusing "condition exists, effect likely happens" with "effect happened, condition likely caused it". In test conditions, I wouldn't spend much time thinking about that distinction unless I needed to; I'd just move on to other answers first, and only return to C if no other answer seemed to fit.

It's easiest to understand the distinction in answer C if you imagine rare effects that can only have one cause. For example, if I become $50 million richer tomorrow, then I probably played the lottery, since there's no other plausible way that could happen. So if the effect "I make $50 million overnight" occurs, the condition "I just played the lottery" is probably present. But if I play the lottery, I'm not at all likely to become $50 million richer tomorrow, so when the condition "I played the lottery" is present, it is not likely to produce the effect that "I make $50 million". So C does distinguish two different logical situations, and in the language of logic, it's essentially suggesting that the argument is confusing one statement with its converse (when we know, logically, you can only replace a statement with its contrapositive, not with its converse). This has nothing to do with any error in the argument here, so C is not the right answer.
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 283
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
C. It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

Hi IanStewart - Thank you for your response above. I cannot parse the green and blue to see how the green and the blue are converse. Could you please assist.

Specifically -

Per my understanding -- the following are considered converse statements
(A) If X, then Y
(B) If Y, then X


(A) and (B) are considered converse to each other.

But i dont see this pattern when i read the blue in option C unfortunately.

In the green, mathetical mapping is
(1) If X , then Y -- This matches (A) above

But

In the blue, mathematical mapping is
(2) If Y, then X is cause for Y-- This DOES NOT match (B) above

Thus, I dont see how (1) and (2) are converse off each other once (mapped mathematically)
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 283
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
C. It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

DO NOT RESPOND -- Notes for me only . I think the words 'cause' | 'effect' | 'condition' were throwing me off.

You mentioned converse and i tried mapping.

If i understand, this is how the green vs the blue are showing the argument with its converse.

Green: If x is true, then y must be true
Blue : If y is true, then x must be true


Green:
Condition: I played the lottery (Cause)
Effect: I will win 50 million overnight, legally (Effect)

Blue:
Effect: I am worth 50 million overnight, legally (effect)
Condition is probably true: I played the lottery (cause)
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7357 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts