Candidate: The government spends $500 more each year promoting highway

Question

Candidate: The government spends $500 more each year promoting highway safety than it spends combating cigarette smoking. But each year many more people die from smoking smoking-related diseases than die highway accidents. So the government would save lives by shifting funds from highway safety programs to antismoking programs.

The flawed reasoning in which one of the following arguments most closely parallels the flawed reasoning in the candidate's argument?

A. The government enforces the speed limit on freeways much more closely than on tollways. But many more people die each year in auto accidents on freeways than die on auto accidents on tollways. So the government would save lives by shifting funds from enforcement of speed limits on freeways to enforcement of speed limits on tollways.

B. A certain professional musician spends several times as many hours practicing guitar as she spends practicing saxophone. But she is hired much more often to play saxophone than to play guitar, so she would increase her number of playing engagements by spending less time practicing guitar and more time practicing saxophone.

C. Automobiles burn more gas per minute on highways than on residential streets. But they get fewer miles per gallon on residential streets. Therefore, gas would be saved by driving less on residential streets Therefore, gas would be saved by driving less on residential streets and more on highways.

D. The local swim team spends many more hours practicing the backstroke than it spends practicing the breaststroke. But the team's lap time for the breaststroke are much better than its times for the backstroke, so the team would win more swim meets if it spent less time practicing the backstroke and more time practicing the breaststroke.

E. Banks have higher profit margin on loans that have a higher interest rate than on loans that have a low interest rate. But borrowers are willing to borrow larger sums at low rates than at high rates. Therefore, bankds would be more profitable if they gave more loans at low rates and fewer loans at high rates.

jeeteshsingh · Accepted Answer

IMO B....

Approach:
You need to parallel the reasoning given in the stem with the reasoning given in the answers. The error in the reason available in the answers should also be the same as error in the reason of the stem. These questions are based on the organisation of the arguement and not the content.

Stem understanding:
P1 = Govt spends more on Highway safety than Combating Smoking
P2 = People die more because of Smoking than on Highway accident
CN = Hence Govt should shift funds from Highway Safety to Combating Smoking

(A)
P1 = Govt enforces speed limit more closely on Freeways than on Tollways
P2 = But people  still  die more on Freeways than on Tollways
CN = Govt should shift funds from Freeways to Tollways.
Logically this structure is not the same as the ques stem because the answer is asking you to shift the funds even if the accidents are more on Freeway. This is not analogous to the reasoning in Stem.
  Hence INCORRECT

(B)
P1 = Musiciain spends more hours practising guitar than saxaphone
P2 = But she is hired to play more of Saxaphone than guitar
CN = Hence she should practise less of guitar and more of Saxaphone
Same structure as stem.   Hence CORRECT
  
(C)
P1 = Automobiles burn more gas on highway than on residential streets
P2 = But on residential streets you get few miles per gallon than Highways
CN = Hence gas would saved by driving less on residential streets and more on Highways
Logically this structure is not the same as the ques stem because the answer is comparing gas usage and miles per gallon (2 factors) to reach the conclusion. This is not analogous to the reasoning in Stem.
  Hence INCORRECT

(D)
P1 = Swim teams prac more of backstrokes than breast stroke
P2 = Swim team has better timing in breast stroke than back stroke
CN = Hence team would win more swim meets if they prac more on backstroke.
Logically this structure is not the same as the ques stem because the answer is asking the team to practise more of backstroke since the team already has a good timing in breast stroke. This is not analogous to the reasoning in Stem.
  Hence INCORRECT

(E)
P1 = Banks have more profit margin on loans with higher rates than loans with lower rates
P2 = But loans with high amount and with lower rates are preferred by borrowers
CN = Hence Banks would be more profitable if they give more loans with lower rates and few loans with higher rates
Logically this structure is not the same as the ques stem. This is not analogous to the reasoning in Stem.
  Hence INCORRECT

onedayill · Answer

Fact1: Govt spends $500mill more on HS than CS. 
Fact2: CS claims more lives than HS
Conc: Govt would save lives   by spending less on HS and more on CS.
Goal: Claim less lives - Does our conc. meet this goal with support of facts? Yes.

(B) Fact1: Musician spends more hours on G than S. 
 Fact2: Gets more jobs for S than G
 Conc: Get more jobs by spending less hours on G and more on S 
 Goal: Get more jobs - Does our conc. meet this goal with support of facts? Yes.
 
(D) Fact1: Swim team spends more hours on backstroke than breaststroke 
 Fact2: Breaststroke times are better than backstroke times
 Conc: Win more meets by spending less time on backstroke & more time on breaststroke.
 Goal: Win more meets - Does our conc. meet this goal with support of facts? No.

(D) clearly misses the point in connecting Conc. with with Fact2. 
Conc deals with winning races, Fact2 deals with better times. 
There is no stated fact that better times lead to more winned races. 
In Stimulus and (B) the conclusion, while flawed, is based off stated facts..

Shreyaa21 · Answer

I am confused between B and C. Why is C incorrect?

sayantanc2k · Answer

The passage is about a choice between two options - it suggests that the choice should be made on the basis of the return that would be possible by investing in that option. But the flaw in this argument could be a wrong estimation of the return. It is possible that the anti-smoking investment would not be able influence people as effectively as a high-way safety campaign does so the reduction in number of deaths as expected would not be achieved.

Option B shows a similar flaw - the investment (time of practicing) in saxophone may not bring in the return (more engagements) one estimates. It is possible that the people who come to listen to saxophone programs is already nearly at its peak level. Further betterment of the saxophone skill may not draw more listeners as expected.

Thus B is similar to the passage.

However you would not be able to find such a flaw in option C. If you drive on highways you would definitely save more fuel. There is no flaw in this.

Another way of looking at the problem:
The passage and option B are about making a choice. But option C is not about making a choice - if a person needs to travel to a different city, he would require to take a highway and if he wants to go to the market, he has to take residential streets. There is no choice involved in option C - if someone wants to go to market, he cannot take a highway and if one wants to go to a different city, he cannot take residential streets.

kitkat4620 · Answer

E-> one flaw is willing to buy but question has definitive statement about number of accidents
2nd flaw is we cant say if they'll be more profitable just on the basis of number of high interest or low interest loans, it also depends on rate of interest -> so E is out
D -> team wins more swim meets -> we don't know if these competitions are for backstroke or breastroke so this is a different flaw
C -> flaw here is that we don't know about duration the automobile is on highway or residential street. 
B ->option says that she will increase her total number of playing engagements if she practiced more of S and less of G but this could lead to her getting hired lesser for playing Guitar -> hence total engagements may not increase : looks similar to how by shifting funds there is a possibility that number of lives saved does not increase. 
Consider a case say 10 die on Road accidents and 15 die from smoking ciggs, if the funds shifted then maybe one car which had 6 people -> all could die in comparison to 1-2 people being saved from smoking ciggs -> so the total number of lives saved doesn't increase necessarily even if funds are shifted. 
A -> this says govt enforces speed limit on Freeways > Tollways , death Freeways > Tollways but funds shifted from Freeways to Tollways 
This structure itself is different

Candidate: The government spends $500 more each year promoting highway

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Candidate: The government spends $500 more each year promoting highway

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards