Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Updated on: 09 Oct 2018, 23:34
Originally posted by Puilunchristin on 16 Jan 2006, 12:21.
Last edited by bb on 09 Oct 2018, 23:34, edited 3 times in total.
Last edited by bb on 09 Oct 2018, 23:34, edited 3 times in total.
Formatting
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
76% (02:13) correct
24%
(02:28)
wrong
based on 2395
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out of economic self-interest. However, these environmentalists are probably wrong. The initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch. Furthermore, there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations, and finally, taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching.
In the economist's argument, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C. The first supports the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist's argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist's argument.
Similar OG2019 Question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/economist-tr ... 68988.html
In the economist's argument, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states the conclusion of the economist's argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C. The first supports the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states the environmentalists' conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist's argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist's argument.
Similar OG2019 Question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/economist-tr ... 68988.html
20 Jul 2018, 13:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
BID (Boil It Down): Environ: Trop not acting in own interest; Economist: they are
The Goal: We need to identify the purpose of each statement, and the relationship between the two.
The relationship between the two: The economist provides proof that downgrades the environmentalists’ conclusion.
I love this question because it really tests who's paying attention. Sloppy readers will conflate the economist and the environmentalists, and chances are, if you missed this question, that’s exactly what you did too.
So let’s take stock (and I’m going to color code the different parties here so that each one is more visually distinct as you read):
Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists argue that Tropicorp’s actions do not serve even its own economic interest. However, the initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch; there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations; and taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching. Consequently, the environmentalists’ conclusion is probably wrong.
A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C. The first supports the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
The first bolded statement is a conclusion, but by whom? The environmentalists! How many options screw up even who is even making the argument in the first bolded statement? A, B, and E.
That leaves us with C and D.
Next let’s determine who is making the argument in the second bolded statement? The Economist. Notice we can now chuck option C?
That leaves us with the correct option. Option D. The first states the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
Choice D is correct. The first statement, which is preceded by the word “Thus,” is the environmentalists’ conclusion. The second statement, which is preceded by the word “Consequently,” is the author/economist’s conclusion.
The Bigger Picture
There's an important lesson in this question: can you pay attention/focus under timed pressure while your adrenaline is pumping?
The stats for this question show that most people miss it. Yet if you can focus in on even who is making each claim, it’s one of the easiest questions in the entire OG.
Remember this lesson! The GMAT lavishly rewards those who actually follow instructions and pay attention.
The Goal: We need to identify the purpose of each statement, and the relationship between the two.
- 1. The environmentalists’ conclusion
2. The economist’s conclusion
The relationship between the two: The economist provides proof that downgrades the environmentalists’ conclusion.
I love this question because it really tests who's paying attention. Sloppy readers will conflate the economist and the environmentalists, and chances are, if you missed this question, that’s exactly what you did too.
So let’s take stock (and I’m going to color code the different parties here so that each one is more visually distinct as you read):
Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeks profitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections of tropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created there become useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping, even though greater profits can be made from rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists argue that Tropicorp’s actions do not serve even its own economic interest. However, the initial investment required for a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for a cattle ranch; there is a shortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations; and taxes are higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching. Consequently, the environmentalists’ conclusion is probably wrong.
A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states the conclusion of the economist’s argument; the second supports that conclusion.
C. The first supports the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
The first bolded statement is a conclusion, but by whom? The environmentalists! How many options screw up even who is even making the argument in the first bolded statement? A, B, and E.
That leaves us with C and D.
Next let’s determine who is making the argument in the second bolded statement? The Economist. Notice we can now chuck option C?
That leaves us with the correct option. Option D. The first states the conclusion of the environmentalists’ argument; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
Choice D is correct. The first statement, which is preceded by the word “Thus,” is the environmentalists’ conclusion. The second statement, which is preceded by the word “Consequently,” is the author/economist’s conclusion.
The Bigger Picture
There's an important lesson in this question: can you pay attention/focus under timed pressure while your adrenaline is pumping?
The stats for this question show that most people miss it. Yet if you can focus in on even who is making each claim, it’s one of the easiest questions in the entire OG.
Remember this lesson! The GMAT lavishly rewards those who actually follow instructions and pay attention.
18 Apr 2021, 02:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Puilunchristin
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
Conclusion: “However, these environmentalists are probably wrong (about their assessment of Tropicorp’s intent).” It’s not one of the bolded phrases, so… Back to the boldfaced phrases to determine their relationship to the main conclusion: Boldface 1: Main conclusion of the argument says, essentially, that the environmentalists are wrong in thinking that Tropicorp’s decision not to pursue rubber tapping and, thereby, leave the forests intact INDICATES that Tropicorp is not entirely profit-motivated. In other words, the main conclusion disagrees with the environmentalists’ assessment of Tropicorp’s motives. So, that means that the first BF is reasoning that supports the position that the argument opposes. Boldface 2: This is the environmentalists’ conclusion, which means that it is the conclusion which the argument refutes. This is the easier of the two Boldface roles to work with first so C is the only choice that offers this option so C is the answer. Return to the answer choices and consider the first BF description in remaining choices. Once again, C is the only choice that offers the option for which we are searching.
