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

 It is currently 05 Dec 2019, 10:48

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

Current legislation that requires designated sections for

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2004
Posts: 417
Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

Updated on: 27 Sep 2017, 00:42
2
15
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

64% (01:58) correct 36% (02:17) wrong based on 802 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Current legislation that requires designated sections for smokers and non-smokers on the premises of privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the private sector that cannot be justified. The fact that studies indicate that non-smokers might be harmed by inhaling the smoke from others' cigarettes is not the main issue. Rather, the main issue concerns the government's violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rule.

Which one of the following is principle that, if accepted, could enable the conclusion to be properly drawn?

(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses is justified only when individuals might be harmed.
(B) The right of individuals to breathe safe air supersedes the right of businesses to be free from government intrusion.
(C) The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.
(D) It is the duty of private businesses to protect employees from harm in the workplace.
(E) Where the rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict, the main issue is finding a successful compromise.

Source: LSAT

Originally posted by vprabhala on 22 Mar 2005, 18:15.
Last edited by broall on 27 Sep 2017, 00:42, edited 2 times in total.
Reformatted question
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 982
Location: United States
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 23:49
10
umeshpatil wrote:
Everyone is only telling the answer. Can anyone help me to understand this argument?

Deaer umeshpatil. I'm more than happy to help.

This is assumption question. First and most important is to determine the conclusion correctly. If you cannot find the conclusion, you couldn't solve the question. Next, you must find an assumption that makes the conclusion hold. Because the wording in this question is very convoluted, to understand what the question says, you should paraphrase the stimulus.

Premise: The right of an individual be protected from inhaling the smoke from others' cigarettes is not the most important. (original phrase: not the main issue). ask your self what is the most important?

Conclusion: Private business sector concludes that government's violation to the right of private business sector cannot be accepted (original phrase: cannot be justified). let ask yourself why private businesses say that government violates their right?

Assumption: Probably private businesses maintain that their right to self-determination is more important the right of individual who need to be protected from inhaling the smoke.

Now please look at C: The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.

I bet you understand why C is correct

Hope it helps you a little bit.

TAKE AWAY:
For assumption questions, determine the conclusion is the most important.
General Discussion
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 520
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 18:25
C it is...This is what connets fact withe conclusion.
Manager
Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 192
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 18:39
One more for C. All the other choices do not seem to agree with the stimulus
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 433
Location: Milwaukee
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 18:41
C as well

Only C provides the necessary condition to justify the authors conclusion (the main issue concerns the government's violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rule)
CEO
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 3422
Location: Singapore
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Mar 2005, 19:14
(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses is justified only when individuals might be harmed.
- Weakens the argument

(B) The right of individuals to breathe safe air supersedes the right of
businesses to be free from government intrusion.
- Weakens the argument

(C) The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.
- This should be the answer. The author strongly feels that private businesses should have a right to determine their own policies and rule, rather than be regulated by the government.

(D) It is the duty of private businesses to protect employees from harm in the workplace.
- Out

(E) Where the rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict, the main issue is finding a successful compromise.
- Out

C it is.
Director
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 871
Location: Taiwan
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Mar 2005, 00:46
vprabhala wrote:
Current legislation that requires designated sections for smokers and nonsmokers on the premises of privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the private sector that cannot be justified. The fact that studies indicate that nonsmokers might be harmed by inhaling the smoke from others' cigarettes is not the main issue. Rather, the main issue concerns the government's violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rule.
Which one of the following is principle that, if accepted, could enable the conclusion to be properly drawn?
(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses
is justified only when individuals might be harmed.
(B) The right of individuals to breathe safe air supersedes the right of
businesses to be free from government intrusion.
(C) The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right
or duty the government may have to protect the individual.
(D) It is the duty of private businesses to protect employees from harm in
the workplace.
(E) Where the rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict, the
main issue is finding a successful compromise.

go with C.

....the main issue concerns the government's violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rule. ....

It supports that the right of businesses to self-determination overrides health matters.
Director
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 835
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

18 Apr 2013, 12:51
C must be the answer.. concern here is the govt's intrusion into the policy making decision of the govt.......the option describing the health concerns must be overlooked...its nt the main point of the argument.

archit
Intern
Joined: 22 Aug 2012
Posts: 16
GMAT Date: 09-02-2013
GPA: 3
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

26 Apr 2013, 14:33
going with:-
(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses
is justified only when individuals might be harmed.
Manager
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 108
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Apr 2013, 21:22
Everyone is only telling the answer. Can anyone help me to understand this argument?
SVP
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1703
Location: India
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Jul 2018, 05:42
vprabhala wrote:
Current legislation that requires designated sections for smokers and non-smokers on the premises of privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the private sector that cannot be justified. The fact that studies indicate that non-smokers might be harmed by inhaling the smoke from others' cigarettes is not the main issue. Rather, the main issue concerns the government's violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rule.

Which one of the following is principle that, if accepted, could enable the conclusion to be properly drawn?

(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses is justified only when individuals might be harmed.
(B) The right of individuals to breathe safe air supersedes the right of businesses to be free from government intrusion.
(C) The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.
(D) It is the duty of private businesses to protect employees from harm in the workplace.
(E) Where the rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict, the main issue is finding a successful compromise.

Source: LSAT

+1 : C

E is out of scope. A,B, and D favor the government. Only C is in support of the business firm.
_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2018
Posts: 169
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

17 Feb 2019, 23:13
I am finding it hard to understand the argument.
"Current legislation that requires designated sections for smokers and non-smokers on the premises of privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the private sector that cannot be justified."
what does this mean?

premise 2: nonsmokers might be harmed by inhaling the smoke is not an issue.

conclusion :govt's violation of the right of private business to determine their own rules and policies.
am i right?

And how do we get to the answer??
Manager
Joined: 09 May 2017
Posts: 227
Location: Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for  [#permalink]

Show Tags

07 May 2019, 01:39
pqhai wrote:
umeshpatil wrote:
Everyone is only telling the answer. Can anyone help me to understand this argument?

Deaer umeshpatil. I'm more than happy to help.

This is assumption question. First and most important is to determine the conclusion correctly. If you cannot find the conclusion, you couldn't solve the question. Next, you must find an assumption that makes the conclusion hold. Because the wording in this question is very convoluted, to understand what the question says, you should paraphrase the stimulus.

Premise: The right of an individual be protected from inhaling the smoke from others' cigarettes is not the most important. (original phrase: not the main issue). ask your self what is the most important?

Conclusion: Private business sector concludes that government's violation to the right of private business sector cannot be accepted (original phrase: cannot be justified). let ask yourself why private businesses say that government violates their right?

Assumption: Probably private businesses maintain that their right to self-determination is more important the right of individual who need to be protected from inhaling the smoke.

Now please look at C: The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.

I bet you understand why C is correct

Hope it helps you a little bit.

TAKE AWAY:
For assumption questions, determine the conclusion is the most important.

THIS IS NOT ASSUMPTION QUESTION !
this is Justify the Conclusion—PR. question
_________________
Re: Current legislation that requires designated sections for   [#permalink] 07 May 2019, 01:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by