GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Aug 2018, 23:14

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Senior CR Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1394
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2017, 07:44
10
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

49% (01:18) correct 51% (01:33) wrong based on 436 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

Source: LSAT

_________________

Actual LSAT CR bank by Broall

How to solve quadratic equations - Factor quadratic equations
Factor table with sign: The useful tool to solve polynomial inequalities
Applying AM-GM inequality into finding extreme/absolute value

New Error Log with Timer

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Posts: 87
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Sep 2017, 03:26
broall wrote:
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

Source: LSAT


The answer is D

Acc to my reasoning, if "Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense." then they may not care about such accidents and install adequate environmental safeguards.
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Posts: 520
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Organizational Behavior
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Sep 2017, 03:50
4
broall wrote:
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

Source: LSAT

IMO A
If Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents, those that might have such accidents will be reluctant to spend on safe guarding measures apart from paying fines, as they have already believed that such an accident won't occur in future and installing adequate environmental safeguards will only be an additional unnecessary expense.

'D' was a contender till I realised that this option would actually contradict the premise which says "since businesses value their profits". This implies that if businesses can eliminate one expense, though ordinary, the saving of money would be a profit to them. So the motto would be to minimize the expense regardless of its type - ordinary or additional.
_________________

------------------------------
"Trust the timing of your life"
Hit Kudus if this has helped you get closer to your goal, and also to assist others save time. Tq :)

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Aug 2016
Posts: 51
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Sep 2017, 02:41
This definitely a great question!

I had marked option D, which is incorrect! :( .

Went through a number of online explanations to understand where I faltered!

Premise: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident.

Conclusion: Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
[This is the correct answer! Focus on the underlined sentence - " that might have such accidents will now install". Here the author assumes that such accidents in present would motivate the company to install safeguards. But if a company say underestimates such future accidents?? If it assumes that such accidents happen once in say 10 years, then it might consider not installing the safeguards. Thus, this option definitely weakens the argument!]

(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
[This is irrelevant, we are not bothered with long-term and short-term strategies, we just need to prove that the company won't install the safeguards, as its profit might not be affected]

(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
[This option kind of strengthens it and makes us believe that the company might install the safeguards - eliminated]

(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
[Now this is what I had marked! This is incorrect. The company cares for its profit. Now if it considers it as an ordinary business expense, then that means, it would have to reduce this amount from the revenue that it is generating and that might lead to the decrease in its overall profit! If it reduces the profit, which the company cares so much about, then it would definitely install the safeguards to reduce such reductions in profit. So this option kind of strengthens the argument.]

(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.
[this is irrelevant and doesn't help us weakening the argument.]
_________________

Work Hard! Have Fun! Create History! :)

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 28 Jun 2015
Posts: 94
Location: Australia
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2017, 19:31
I answered D
Reanalyzed in my head afterwards, realized that the answer should be A, and it is simple, really.
A company can [and may be will] "install adequate environmental safeguards" only if it can estimate correctly.
If it underestimates [in other words estimates wrong, either willfully or unwillingly] it simply cannot install adequate environmentall safeguards.

I channelled my thought with the notion that the company refuses to install adequate environmental safeguards, what if it cannot, because it estimates wrong[?
BSchool Forum Moderator
User avatar
D
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1102
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
CAT Tests
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Oct 2017, 02:03
1
1
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents. -Correct. If the business underestimate the future accidents, then they will not take any measures to install adequate environmental safeguards.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits. -This is a factual statement. We are just worried about the businesses that take into account future accidents.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense. -This will strengthen the argument. The business will try to avoid any unnecessary accident that might cost them their fortune.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense. -This is just a factual statement. This tells us that how the businesses maintain their books of account post the fine is levied against them. This doesn't tell us as to why the businesses will not install adequate environmental safeguards.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves. -This is irrelevant to the argument at hand.
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Long And A Fruitful Journey - V21 to V41; If I can, So Can You!!


Preparing for RC my way


My study resources:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC
7. GMAT Prep Challenge RC

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2109
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Dec 2017, 20:43
broall wrote:
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

Source: LSAT


The conclusion of the argument is that companies that might have environmental accidents will install safeguards against them. Why? Because the costs of the fines for such accidents are more than the costs of preventing the accident and companies value their profits.

Any gaps? For one, who is to say the company can predict potential environmental hazards? Also, perhaps they can't predict the costs. This latter gap is what (A) hinges on. If businesses greatly underestimate the risk of these accidents, they won't be motivated to put in the safeguards.

(B) is out of scope as it introduces long and short term issues.
(C) is out of scope -- the environmentally "right" thing is never discussed.
(D) is out of scope - how the business treat the fines is not discussed or relevant.
(E) is similarly out of scope. Even if businesses are starting to exploit our environmental awareness, they still may want to install these safeguards to protect their profits. This answer does not address the core of the argument.
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 236
Concentration: Marketing, Social Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.65
WE: Marketing (Education)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Dec 2017, 23:57
broall wrote:
Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally damaging accidents are now so high that it costs a company responsible for such an accident more to pay the fine that it would have cost to adopt measures that would have prevented the accident. Therefore, since businesses value their profits, those that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards.

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

(A) Businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents.
(B) Businesses are as concerned with long-term as they are with short-term strategies for maximizing profits.
(C) Businesses generally do the environmentally "right" thing only if doing so makes good business sense.
(D) Businesses treat fines that are levied against them as an ordinary business expense.
(E) Businesses are leaning to exploit the public's environmental awareness in promoting themselves.

Source: LSAT


At first, I chose D - while realizing that "ordinary business expense" is vague.

A is the best weakener. When businesses don't care about the future accidents, why they must install safeguards?

Thanks, good question!
_________________

There's an app for that - Steve Jobs.

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 22 Jun 2017
Posts: 26
CAT Tests
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2018, 08:51
Would you please explain why the correct answer is A instead of D? I still don't get the point after reading the discussion.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1909
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 May 2018, 17:45
patto wrote:
Would you please explain why the correct answer is A instead of D? I still don't get the point after reading the discussion.

The cost to adopt measures that would prevent accidents is LOWER than the cost of paying the fine if you have an accident. So, it would be cheaper to adopt the measures to PREVENT the accident than to pay the fine if you have an accident.

Based on that information, the author concludes that businesses that might have such accidents will now install adequate environmental safeguards. But what if those businesses think to themselves, "Well, yes, adopting the measures is cheaper than paying the fines, but we probably won't have an accident so why bother?"

If "businesses generally greatly underestimate the risk of future accidents," then they will think that they are probably NOT going to have an accident. If they are probably NOT going to have an accident, why pay all that money adopting preventative measures? Such businesses would NOT install adequate environmental safeguards because they think there is no need. Thus, (A) definitely weakens the argument.

(D) is irrelevant. The fines might be an ordinary business expense, but if a business can avoid that expense by replacing it with a cheaper expense (adopting preventative measures), then the business would still want to go with the cheaper option. (D) does not weaken the argument, so (A) is a much better answer.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Re: Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally &nbs [#permalink] 03 May 2018, 17:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Fines levied against those responsible for certain environmentally

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.