It is currently 18 Nov 2017, 03:42

### 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

# Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Status: Finally Done. Admitted in Kellogg for 2015 intake
Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Posts: 533

Kudos [?]: 4209 [2], given: 217

Location: United Kingdom
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V45
GPA: 2.9
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2011, 17:01
2
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

79% (00:54) correct 21% (01:06) wrong based on 628 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.

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

A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.

B. the proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.

C. Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.

D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.

E. The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Best Regards,
E.

MGMAT 1 --> 530
MGMAT 2--> 640
MGMAT 3 ---> 610
GMAT ==> 730

Kudos [?]: 4209 [2], given: 217

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 734 [4], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2011, 03:08
4
KUDOS
Hi egnima,

First, you should not boldface your confused choices. You make other cannot improve through critical thinking. Second, just spoil your choices in the question. OK? Please, edit your question :D. Thank you so much.

New regulation will make the price of good increase => decrease the export

Quote:
A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment (NPCE) for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.

In this choice, you will realize that NPCE will become popular all over the world, and price of all product relate to that industry also increase while the demand is still remain comparably to the last year. So, export of Risemia will not be affected by increased price

Quote:
D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.

Does it stick to price, the main factor affected to the export of Risemia? This choice talk about standard of good. Ok, before and after regulation. The quality of Risemia products is acceptable. It does not prove anything. Rights?

Hope that help.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 734 [4], given: 44

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10145

Kudos [?]: 270 [1], given: 0

Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Nov 2013, 00:43
1
KUDOS
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 270 [1], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 87

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 30

Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2013, 07:15
Hi Enigma123

A is the best option, reason- The conclusion says that annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels. Now If you see the conclusion it is more a certain claim then a possibility of it to happen. The best answer would be any that can induce a certain degree of uncertainty in it. The right answer has to just doubt about the certainty of diminished level.

I hope this might clear you doubt.

thanks
Sid

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 30

Intern
Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 10

Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Feb 2014, 18:39
Y A?
I dont understand how an increase in sale of NPCE will affect the export of the actual goods being exported...2 different items here ryt?

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 268

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 2405

GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V31
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 3: 610 Q47 V28
GMAT 4: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 5: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 6: 690 Q48 V35
GMAT 7: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT 8: 730 Q50 V39
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2014, 18:06
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.

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

A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.

B. the proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.

C. Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.

D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.

E. The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.

Last edited by TooLong150 on 04 Sep 2014, 19:10, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 2405

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 268

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 2405

GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V31
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 3: 610 Q47 V28
GMAT 4: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 5: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 6: 690 Q48 V35
GMAT 7: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT 8: 730 Q50 V39
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2014, 21:57
anujohnsgmat wrote:
Y A?
I dont understand how an increase in sale of NPCE will affect the export of the actual goods being exported...2 different items here ryt?

Yes, but the new pollution control equipment is still considered a manufactured good.

Kudos [?]: 125 [0], given: 2405

Director
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 831

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 61

Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2014, 22:39
A seems best : the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge---->the fact that "a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge" weaken the argument

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 61

Intern
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 24

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 4

Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2014, 12:44
My answer is A. The argument talks about increased input cost to manufacturers because of increased cost of compliance with regulations and how this will lead to increased prices, lowering the levels of exports. The only way to weaken this conclusion is for the the country to become a leader in developing equipment for pollution control, equipment that will be exported to other countries.

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Posts: 57

Kudos [?]: 34 [1], given: 3

Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V45
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2014, 09:43
1
KUDOS
A is the right choice. It weakens the assumptions that the author has made.

the author's statement is basically - "price increase will lead to the loss of some export markets, therefore, annual exports will be at diminished levels. " the author has assumed that some losses in the export markets WON'T be offset by anything else to keep the export levels the same.. so we need to chose a option that weakens this assumption.

Option C is definitely wrong, because it serves the opposite purpose.. it basically says " the savings from reusing the filtered chemicals will be far less than the maintenance cost" i.e the maintenance costs will still be very high anyway.
This is actually strengthens the arguement rather than weakening it.

Kudos [?]: 34 [1], given: 3

Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 194

Kudos [?]: 400 [0], given: 886

Location: United States
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT Date: 10-16-2013
GPA: 3
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2014, 11:27
TooLong150 wrote:
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument in the editorial?

A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
B. the proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
C. Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.
E. The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.

Posting here, because the other topic for this question has the OA clearly highlighted.

Conclusion : Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
If we somehow come to think of an answer that will say that even with the rising cost of exports , this will not hurt the exports then we will get to the answer.
Choice A states just that - the decline in exports of manufactured goods if is accompanied by export of other technology then overall the export industry is not hurt.
_________________

Kudos me if you like my post !!!!

Kudos [?]: 400 [0], given: 886

Intern
Joined: 23 Dec 2011
Posts: 36

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 26

Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.83
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2015, 04:04
IMO - A

Conclusion : Annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
Assumption: The export loss due to resultant price increase will NOT be countered by any other means at the same time.

Hit the assumption to get the weakener: The export loss due to resultant price increase will be countered by any other means at the same time.

So, we need to check the option which is inline with our weakener hence obtained.
A) CORRECTLY weakens the conclusion and is inline with our weakener (obtained via hitting the assumption)
B) This can't reverse or counter the increase cost, rather favor the increase.
C) can't be drawn is there is any effect on export loss.
D) So what. Nothing to do with export loss again.
E) This is strengthening the conclusion. If manuf. corp. are pressurising to comply, cost will definetly rise. This can't reverse or counter the increase cost, rather favor the increase.

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 26

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Mar 2012
Posts: 360

Kudos [?]: 91 [0], given: 4

Schools: Schulich '16
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2015, 05:28
Hi enigma,

Happy to help

for D..u can simply avoid it by seeing the premises of the argument - "Regulations recently imposed"

regulations have been imposed already..so we dont think if its less or not.

A is the best.

Kudos [?]: 91 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Posts: 102

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 10

GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2015, 03:14
A is the only one which proves that Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia might not result in annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods in the future to occur at diminished levels.

This is because while the "existing" manufactured goods might decrease in exports, a new area of exports might pop up: new pollution control equipment. Since A says that a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge for this new pollution control equipment, it clearly tell us that is is not necessary that the overall exports will decrease.

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 10

Current Student
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Posts: 903

Kudos [?]: 433 [0], given: 69

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2016, 04:54
TooLong150 wrote:
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.

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

A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
B. the proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
C. Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.
E. The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.

Posting here, because the other topic for this question has the OA clearly highlighted.

Conclusion says that annual exports will diminish in R because new equipment will require expensive maintenance. Cost increase will lead to loss in some markets.

In order to weaken the conclusion, we should find out something that shows that new equipment will actually or likely to increase the export.

Only option A does that
_________________

I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+

Kudos [?]: 433 [0], given: 69

Board of Directors
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 3097

Kudos [?]: 1114 [0], given: 327

Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Re: Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2016, 09:20
TooLong150 wrote:
Editorial: Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets.Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.

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

A. the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
B. the proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
C. Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
D. By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.
E. The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.

Posting here, because the other topic for this question has the OA clearly highlighted.

Ok so there is a chain as below

 Reductions in the amounts of pollutants--->New pollution control equipment--->expensive maintenance--->price increases --->diminished level of exports

Based on preliminary examination of options only (A) and (C) can be contenders

(A) the need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.

Infact option (A) states that it is an opportunity to boost export by the sale of pollution control equipments

Increase in Exports possible.

(C) Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.

Savings > Cost of maintaining the equipment.

This choice goes halfway and doesn't prove anything it is just a casual statement / comment and doesn't weaken the conclusion...

_________________

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )

Kudos [?]: 1114 [0], given: 327

Intern
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 102

Concentration: Marketing, Finance
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Nov 2016, 02:33
IMO

A -This choice has 2 strong reasons that it is a weakner.
If the demand of such devices increases in the future,then other countries will start to import the same device , which will lead to -
First, they will know why the Manu. goods' export prices increased in Risemia and Second, one more branch of exportation will open in Risemia(exporting such devices) .Thus, the Export will not diminish definitely. - does not destroy but definitely weakens.

B - if companies will not follow the regulations, then some fines likely to be deducted . that will also add in the same goods' prices, which will again lead to decrease in the export of good. - Strengthens

C - Cost is really high - Same, it will also lead to decrease in the export of goods. - Strengthens

D - This choice is really interesting but the Argument has not talked that the Regulations in Risemia are imposed because of International Standards - Out of scope
E - Clearly out of scope.

Hope it helps.

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 102

Re: Editorial : Regulations recently imposed by the government   [#permalink] 17 Nov 2016, 02:33
Display posts from previous: Sort by