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.
May 0808:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the special YouTube live-stream for selecting the winners of GMAT Club MBA Scholarships sponsored by Juno live. Watch who gets these coveted MBA scholarships offered by GMAT Club and Juno.
05 May 2026, 19:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
24% (01:55) correct
76%
(01:59)
wrong
based on 37
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Economist: Universal Basic Income (UBI) may help mitigate wealth disparity and alleviate socioeconomic issues caused by increased industrial automation in many countries. However, since the long-term feasibility of UBI is unknown, I do not recommend its implementation.
Cabinet Member: This position is quite different from your usual stand. You routinely recommend traditional economic measures that carry a significant risk of failure, so it seems unlikely that feasibility concerns are the true reason behind your reluctance to support UBI.
The flaw in the Cabinet Member’s argument is its failure to take into consideration that
A. the factors that affect the feasibility of UBI are different from those that affect the risk of traditional economic measures
B. the economist may not believe that UBI has been definitively proven to be effective
C. the risk of failure of established measures can be weighed against the benefits of such measures, but the risk of failure of unestablished measures cannot
D. it takes time for the feasibility risks inherent in an economic policy to become apparent
E. if wealth disparity and the socioeconomic issues caused by increased industrial automation are not addressed, they can lead to severe social unrest
Cabinet Member: This position is quite different from your usual stand. You routinely recommend traditional economic measures that carry a significant risk of failure, so it seems unlikely that feasibility concerns are the true reason behind your reluctance to support UBI.
The flaw in the Cabinet Member’s argument is its failure to take into consideration that
A. the factors that affect the feasibility of UBI are different from those that affect the risk of traditional economic measures
B. the economist may not believe that UBI has been definitively proven to be effective
C. the risk of failure of established measures can be weighed against the benefits of such measures, but the risk of failure of unestablished measures cannot
D. it takes time for the feasibility risks inherent in an economic policy to become apparent
E. if wealth disparity and the socioeconomic issues caused by increased industrial automation are not addressed, they can lead to severe social unrest
05 May 2026, 19:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
Prethinking:
Economist says: UBI might help, but I don’t recommend it because its long-term feasibility is unknown.
Cabinet Member says: that’s inconsistent because you often support traditional policies that also have risk → so feasibility concern must not be the real reason.
Flaw: treating “unknown feasibility of a new policy” as equivalent to “known risk in established policies.” The argument ignores a key difference between types of risk.
Now eliminate:
A. correct. It points out that feasibility concerns for UBI may be fundamentally different from risks in traditional policies. This directly weakens the Cabinet Member’s comparison.
B. irrelevant. Economist already accepts UBI “may help”; issue is feasibility, not proven effectiveness.
C. too extreme. Says risks of unestablished measures cannot be weighed at all. That’s not required to explain the flaw.
D. irrelevant. Time for risks to appear doesn’t address the comparison flaw.
E. out of scope. Talks about consequences of not acting, not about the reasoning flaw.
Answer: A
Economist says: UBI might help, but I don’t recommend it because its long-term feasibility is unknown.
Cabinet Member says: that’s inconsistent because you often support traditional policies that also have risk → so feasibility concern must not be the real reason.
Flaw: treating “unknown feasibility of a new policy” as equivalent to “known risk in established policies.” The argument ignores a key difference between types of risk.
Now eliminate:
A. correct. It points out that feasibility concerns for UBI may be fundamentally different from risks in traditional policies. This directly weakens the Cabinet Member’s comparison.
B. irrelevant. Economist already accepts UBI “may help”; issue is feasibility, not proven effectiveness.
C. too extreme. Says risks of unestablished measures cannot be weighed at all. That’s not required to explain the flaw.
D. irrelevant. Time for risks to appear doesn’t address the comparison flaw.
E. out of scope. Talks about consequences of not acting, not about the reasoning flaw.
Answer: A
05 May 2026, 22:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
economist: UBI may help mitigate wealth disparity and alleviate socioeconomic issue
but long term feasibility of UBI is unknown, so i dont recommend it.
minister- you routinely recommend measure that carry high risk of failure. so this feasibility concerns are not the real reason behind your reluctance.
A even if the factors are different it doesnt provide anything on what minister is missing.
B its not about him being definitive here. reject.
C so if you know what are good and bad effects of any traditional actions you take, you prepare yourself accordingly so you can try to mitigate the risk but here the feasibility factors are completely unknown so it cant be compared against the traditional measures. so this helps
D thats very generic things for anything that has risk associated with it. but has no impact here, reject.
E completely out of scope, reject.
but long term feasibility of UBI is unknown, so i dont recommend it.
minister- you routinely recommend measure that carry high risk of failure. so this feasibility concerns are not the real reason behind your reluctance.
A even if the factors are different it doesnt provide anything on what minister is missing.
B its not about him being definitive here. reject.
C so if you know what are good and bad effects of any traditional actions you take, you prepare yourself accordingly so you can try to mitigate the risk but here the feasibility factors are completely unknown so it cant be compared against the traditional measures. so this helps
D thats very generic things for anything that has risk associated with it. but has no impact here, reject.
E completely out of scope, reject.
ExpertsGlobal5
