Congress is considering a "National Service" program under which high

Question

Congress is considering a "National Service" program under which high school graduates who need federal assistance for college would serve for two years in the military or on a community service program rather than receive and repay a government-sponsored loan.

The stimulus talks about those who need assistance. It does not talk about does who can afford. So can we not assume that those who can afford will not be entitled to the National Service program?

Which one of the following points would be most useful to an opponent of the National Service program?

A. Students who choose not to go to college should not be obligated to participate in a National Service program.

B. Women would have fewer choices of positions in the military.

C. Students well-off enough not to need federal financial assistance could forego National Service

D. The federal assistance offered by a National Service program would not be adequate to completely pay for a college education.

E. Today's youth are greatly lacking in civic values and social responsibility.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

The way the question stem is structured, it is not looking for something that weakens our conclusion. It is looking for something that will support the opponent. How are these two different? To support the opponent, we can point out a weakness of the plan. We don't necessarily have to rebut the point made by the supporter.

Supporter - The pro of the plan is that everyone benefitting will recognise responsibilities. 
Opposer - The con of the plan is that those not benefitting will be able to get away from responsibilities. One would expect that all students must participate in a national service program as part of their duty towards their nation. But the rich will be able to get away because of this plan. Only those taking financial aid will need to participate. If all must participate then linking the plan to financial incentive is meaningless.

That is why (C) is correct.

(D) The federal assistance offered by a National Service program would not be adequate to completely pay for a college education.

Even if the assistance is not enough to completely pay off the college fees, it will still support. People needing aid will need to arrange for a smaller amount so they will be helped by the democratic society. It is not a point in favour of the opposers.

carcass · Answer

Congress is considering a "National Service" program under which high school graduates who need federal assistance for college would serve for two years in the military or on a community service program rather than receive and repay a government-sponsored loan.

The stimulus talks about those who need assistance. It does not talk about does who can afford. So can we not assume that those who can afford will not be entitled to the National Service program?

A. Students who choose not to go to college should not be obligated to participate in a National Service program.

B. Women would have fewer choices of positions in the military.

C. Students well-off enough not to need federal financial assistance  could forego  National Service

D. The federal assistance offered by a National Service program would not be adequate to completely pay for a college education.

E. Today's youth are greatly lacking in civic values and social responsibility.

C is the answer

nayas96 · Answer

The conclusion mentions that "nation's youth that  everyone benefiting from the rights of a democratic society  must also recognize his or her responsibilities to that society." In terms of " everyone benefiting from the rights of a democratic society ", the author explains on the "federal assistance" provided by the government.

In option (C), the students who are well off are  not benefiting from the rights of a democratic society , since they are not using the "federal assistance", then how can we say that, this is a weakener! The author makes a jump from "federal assistance" to "rights of a democratic society", which is the assumption over here. And hence considering the above 2 points, how can we say that option (C) is an apt weakener.

Doesnt option (D) make even more sense, which says that the people are actually benefitting from the rights of a democratic society since as mention in option (D) " The federal assistance offered by a National Service program would not be adequate to completely pay for a college education. ", they are not able to completely repay for the services.

Sajjad1994   carcass   egmat   GMATNinja   GMATNinja Two  nightblade354   KarishmaB   carouselambra 
Kindly please help me clarify my discrepancy.

AnirudhaS · Answer

Congress is considering a "National Service" program under which high school graduates  who need federal assistance  for college would serve for two years in the military or on a community service program rather than receive and repay a government-sponsored loan.

The stimulus talks about those who need assistance. It does not talk about does who can afford. So can we not assume that those who can afford will not be entitled to the National Service program?

Its_me_aka_ak · Answer

"Proponents say that it will show the nation's youth that everyone benefiting from the rights of a democratic society must also recognize his or her responsibilities to that society."
C is out of scop as the passage just talks about the ones benefitting by the aid. the people who do not need the aid are not even the part.
 KarishmaB

KarishmaB · Answer

'Rights of a democratic society' include the 'right to education even if one doesn't have the means.' So federal aid (govt loan) is provided which is later repaid by the student. The point being made here is that these students seeking federal aid will be asked to pay in kind (as service to the community), not just repay the money as a financial transaction. 
The proponents say that this is to show the nation's youth that everyone benefiting from the rights of a democratic society must also recognize his or her responsibilities to that society.

The opponents could say that everyone living in a democracy benefits from the 'rights of a democratic society' (which are many) and by focussing on only those who take out govt loans, you are letting the wealthy go scot-free. How will the wealthy recognise their responsibilities to the society? So basically, don't link it to financial aid. e.g. make everyone do community service for a year or two etc.

Its_me_aka_ak · Answer