Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 28 May 2017, 06:26

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 41
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 47 [2] , given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2006, 04:33
2
KUDOS
19
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

66% (02:18) correct 34% (01:46) wrong based on 706 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker's income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 41
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 47 [5] , given: 0

### Show Tags

25 Dec 2006, 05:08
5
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi All:
There is no OA for this question. I will post my answer for this question. Thanks

Q30:
Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept
jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers
cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any workerâ€™s income above what
government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed.
Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would
entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of
the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families.

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has.

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.

Question Type: Weakening question
Conclusion: The unemployed people do not have any financial incentive to accept jobs.
Premise1: The unemployed people receive government assistance.
Premise1: The employed people with low income plus government supplement will not exceed the government assistance. Let us do a math:

The government assistance = $50 The income =$30
Thus, the supplement= 50-20=$30 In order to weakening this argument, let us attack the conclusion. If we can prove that the unemployed people DO have financial incentive to accept jobs it will break the conclusion. Let us take a look at the choices: A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families. Taxes will not create any incentive for employment. Out of scope B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has. Low wage creates no incentive for employnment-Strengths the conclusion C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed. If people take low income job, they will get a high income job later. Thus, there is a financial incentive of taking low income jobs. weakens the conclusion. Answer. D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level. This satement will strengths the conclusion because the supplement is higher than the low income. E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.The word â€˜sometimesâ€™ does not give a definite conclusion. Senior Manager Joined: 24 Sep 2006 Posts: 275 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 0 Re: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government [#permalink] ### Show Tags 25 Dec 2006, 11:50 C it is. C creates a financial incentive for unemployed to be employed and earn more in new job _________________ AimHigher Director Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 591 Location: Kuwait Followers: 15 Kudos [?]: 291 [0], given: 0 Re: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government [#permalink] ### Show Tags 25 Dec 2006, 12:02 I got stuck between A and C how come paying less taxes is not a financial incentive ? SVP Joined: 08 Nov 2006 Posts: 1557 Location: Ann Arbor Schools: Ross '10 Followers: 14 Kudos [?]: 191 [0], given: 1 Re: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government [#permalink] ### Show Tags 25 Dec 2006, 12:10 Mishari wrote: I got stuck between A and C how come paying less taxes is not a financial incentive ? Yes, not payin taxes is indeed beneficial. A indicates that people are better off without taking up lower paying jobs because they will have to pay taxes on their salaries. This is in agreement with the editorial, thus strengthening it. We need to weaken the editorial. C does that. _________________ My Profile/GMAT/MBA Story http://www.gmatclub.com/forum/111-t59345 GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings Director Joined: 30 Nov 2006 Posts: 591 Location: Kuwait Followers: 15 Kudos [?]: 291 [0], given: 0 Re: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government [#permalink] ### Show Tags 25 Dec 2006, 12:17 Duh ! what's wrong with me ? thanks ncprasad Senior Manager Joined: 24 Nov 2006 Posts: 349 Followers: 1 Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0 Re: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government [#permalink] ### Show Tags 01 Jan 2007, 14:37 Good analysis, ttanvir. Just one thing: if gov assistance is 50 and income is 30, shouldnÂ´t the supplement be 20? ttanvir wrote: Hi All: There is no OA for this question. I will post my answer for this question. Thanks Q30: Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any workerâ€™s income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement. Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial? A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families. B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has. C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed. D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level. E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work. Answer: Question Type: Weakening question Conclusion: The unemployed people do not have any financial incentive to accept jobs. Premise1: The unemployed people receive government assistance. Premise1: The employed people with low income plus government supplement will not exceed the government assistance. Let us do a math: The government assistance =$50
The income = $30 Thus, the supplement= 50-20=$30

In order to weakening this argument, let us attack the conclusion. If we can prove that the unemployed people DO have financial incentive to accept jobs it will break the conclusion. Let us take a look at the choices:

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed
individuals and their families. Taxes will not create any incentive for employment. Out of scope

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer
must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently
has. Low wage creates no incentive for employnment-Strengths the conclusion

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs
than job seekers who are unemployed. If people take low income job, they will get a high income job later. Thus, there is a financial incentive of taking low income jobs. weakens the conclusion. Answer.

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less
than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level. This satement will strengths the conclusion because the supplement is higher than the low income.

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy
the work.The word â€˜sometimesâ€™ does not give a definite conclusion.
VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1120
Location: India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2007, 21:48
C after reading thorugh the killer explaination by ttanvir.
_________________

Trying hard to conquer Quant.

Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 76
Location: London
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2007, 04:08
C...

The financial incentive is that they will be able to get a better paying job later. It's the only choice that weakens the argument that "unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would
entitle them to the supplement".
Director
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 910
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 78 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2007, 19:02
Initially I thought A but then I realized "A" is talking about "unemployed individuals" and not about newly employed people who were unemployed.

If I negate A then only relevant option left is C.

Once unemployed become employed, they may look for a new job that may offer them higher salary.....

I am going with C.

- Brajesh
SVP
Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 2476
Followers: 70

Kudos [?]: 774 [0], given: 19

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2007, 19:56
bkk145 wrote:
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government assistance. To reduce unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.
D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.

C. very ideal Gmat question.
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3361
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 297 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2007, 21:05
down to C and E...

i think C makes the cut..E is weak cause it says "some"..
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1442
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2007, 22:04
OA=C
thanks guys.
Intern
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 45
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2007, 22:12
bkk145 wrote:
Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families.
B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.
C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.
D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level.
E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work.

E.
The statment assumes that people should be employed only for income.
E states that may prompt people to take up because they like rather than for the sole purpose of getting payed.
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 297
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2007, 10:52
bkk145 wrote:
Editorial:
unemployment, the government proposes to supplement the income of those who accept jobs that pay less than government assistance, thus enabling employers to hire workers cheaply. However, the supplement will not raise any worker’s income above what government assistance would provide if he or she were not gainfully employed. Therefore, unemployed people will have no financial incentive to accept jobs that would entitle them to the supplement.

Which of the following, if true about Ledland, most seriously weakens the argument of the editorial?

A. The government collects no taxes on assistance it provides to unemployed individuals and their families. (This is an incentive not to get a job, as they would be paying taxes on their earnings as opposed to having a full tax free employment)

B. Neighboring countries with laws that mandate the minimum wage an employer must pay an employee have higher unemployment rates than Ledland currently has.(wrong country)

C. People who are employed and look for a new job tend to get higher-paying jobs than job seekers who are unemployed.(an incentive to get a job, because it will eventually lead to higher pay --good)

D. The yearly amount unemployed people receive from government assistance is less than the yearly income that the government defines as the poverty level. (poverty level is outside of the scope)

E. People sometimes accept jobs that pay relatively little simply because they enjoy the work. (we are looking for economic benefits, so outside of the scope)

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 292
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 May 2008, 13:47
Yeah C can be an incentive and can go against the editorial's conclusion!
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 98
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 May 2008, 17:35
I'm going with C
_________________

MBA Blog: University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management- http://unconventionalapplicant.blogspot.com/

Manager
Joined: 19 May 2008
Posts: 164
Location: Mumbai
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 May 2008, 21:08
C it is - that weakens the argument
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 791
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 25

### Show Tags

22 May 2008, 21:14
C as it weakens the argument by stating obvious financial incentives.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 962
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 808 [0], given: 36

### Show Tags

28 Jun 2010, 21:08
A is actually strengthening - "assistance is good. No financial incentive on the job"
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 42 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of 0 19 May 2016, 09:20
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government 0 27 Nov 2015, 17:11
36 Editorial: The government claims that the country's nuclear 17 21 Oct 2016, 08:19
9 Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government 16 17 Nov 2016, 02:33
Editorial: In Ledland, unemployed adults receive government 0 08 Aug 2016, 08:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by