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.
Jun 1511:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus?  Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Jun 1210:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Your formula for GMAT success! Seasoned instructors + realistic practice = total confidence for test day. Use code SCORE20. Ends 6/16.
Jun 1203:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
Jun 1608:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!- Jun 21
11:00 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
14 Jan 2010, 18:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
67% (01:52) correct
33%
(01:56)
wrong
based on 1647
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Federal agricultural programs aimed at benefiting one group whose livelihood depends on farming often end up harming another such group.
Which of the following statements provides support for the claim above?
I. An effort to help feed-grain producers resulted in higher prices for their crops, but the higher prices decreased the profits of livestock producers.
II. In order to reduce crop surpluses and increase prices, growers of certain crops were paid to leave a portion of their land idle, but the reduction was not achieved because improvements in efficiency resulted in higher production on the land in use.
III. Many farm workers were put out of work when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves.
(A) I, but not II and not III
(B) II, but not I and not III
(C) I and III, but not II
(D) II and III, but not I
(E) I, II and III
Which of the following statements provides support for the claim above?
I. An effort to help feed-grain producers resulted in higher prices for their crops, but the higher prices decreased the profits of livestock producers.
II. In order to reduce crop surpluses and increase prices, growers of certain crops were paid to leave a portion of their land idle, but the reduction was not achieved because improvements in efficiency resulted in higher production on the land in use.
III. Many farm workers were put out of work when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves.
(A) I, but not II and not III
(B) II, but not I and not III
(C) I and III, but not II
(D) II and III, but not I
(E) I, II and III
16 Jan 2010, 13:06
Kudos
Bookmarks
IMO...C...
Explanation:
Federal agricultural programs aimed at benefiting one group whose livelihood depends on farming often end up harming another such group.
Case 1:
An effort to help feed-grain producers resulted in higher prices for their crops, but the higher prices decreased the profits of livestock producers.
Group benefited = feed-grain producers
Group harmed = livestock producers
Case 2:
In order to reduce crop surpluses and increase prices, growers of certain crops were paid to leave a portion of their land idle, but the reduction was not achieved because improvements in efficiency resulted in higher production on the land in use.
Since the reduction in crop surplus didn't happen, ideally this case doesn't given any benefit of a group on the cost of another group's harm!
Case 3:
Many farm workers were put out of work when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves
Group benefited = Grain growers - They got the grains without actually growing them
Group harmed = Farm workers - No employment as no grains were actually grown.
hence case 1 and case 3 support the claim in the question.
Explanation:
Federal agricultural programs aimed at benefiting one group whose livelihood depends on farming often end up harming another such group.
Case 1:
An effort to help feed-grain producers resulted in higher prices for their crops, but the higher prices decreased the profits of livestock producers.
Group benefited = feed-grain producers
Group harmed = livestock producers
Case 2:
In order to reduce crop surpluses and increase prices, growers of certain crops were paid to leave a portion of their land idle, but the reduction was not achieved because improvements in efficiency resulted in higher production on the land in use.
Since the reduction in crop surplus didn't happen, ideally this case doesn't given any benefit of a group on the cost of another group's harm!
Case 3:
Many farm workers were put out of work when a program meant to raise the price of grain provided grain growers with an incentive to reduce production by giving them surplus grain from government reserves
Group benefited = Grain growers - They got the grains without actually growing them
Group harmed = Farm workers - No employment as no grains were actually grown.
hence case 1 and case 3 support the claim in the question.
General Discussion
16 Jan 2010, 16:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
jeeteshsingh ...very good explanation
