How severe should the punishment be for a corporate crime- e.g., a cri

Hi,
took 16 minutes and got 5/6 correct. Took 6 minutes to read, write paragraphs summaries and main point formulation.

P1 Economists' view on penalties for severe crimes
P2 Economists' view on application of morality on penalties
P3 impracticality of E's view because of detection ratios
P4 call for an improved way of deciding penalties for SC

MP: to present conomists' view on a topic, highlight the impracticality of their view and to suggest an improved method

1)Which one of the following most accurately captures the main point of the passage?

refer to main point formulation

(A) Because not all corporate crimes are detected, courts must supplement the reckoning of cost and benefit by taking detection ratios into account when determining penalties for such crimes if the penalties are to be both practical and fair. in the last paragraph it is clear that this would not be enough
(B) The reckoning of cost and benefit as the sole basis for determining penalties for corporate crimes would be an appropriate means of assessing such penalties if it took estimated detection ratios into account. in the last paragraph it is clear that detection ratios retaken into account but as the way as for now it is not an efficient combo
(C) Because they argue that the reckoning of cost and benefit should be the sole basis for determining penalties for corporate crimes, economists do an injustice to communities that believe that the penalties must affect not only corporate earnings but corporate morality. no injustice is mentioned
(D) Because it does not take detection ratios into account, the reckoning of cost and benefit as the sole basis for determining penalties for corporate crimes results in penalties that are not high enough both to satisfy community moral standards and to send a message about the importance of preventing corporate crime.stisfying community moral standard is not discussed. plus detection ratios are taken into account but not in a way that would be useful
(E) Because the need to take detection ratios into account makes reckoning cost and benefit impractical as the sole basis for determining penalties for corporate crimes, another method of determining the penalties must be found to supplement such reckoning. correct and in line with the author's overall reasoning

2) The primary purpose of the passage is to

again refer to the main point analysis

A) criticize courts for their leniency in punishing corporate crime courts are never criticized
(B) describe some of the reasons corporations engage in corporate crime no reason is mentioned, outside of the scope
(C) condemn corporations for failing to consider the moral implications of their actions moral implications should not be included as per the passage. plus this argument is confined to the second paragraph and it is not broad enough to be a MP
(D) argue against some economists' view of how to penalize corporate crime the all passage is in contrast with the economist view so correct
(E) urge the implementation of a specific proposal for penalizing corporate crime the passage does not communicate a sense of urgency and there is no SPECIFIC proposal

3) Suppose a corporation is convicted of a crime having a detection ratio of l-in-10. Based on the passage, the author would be most likely to endorse which one of the following penalties

even tough it might be tempting to look at paragraph 3 to answer this question the answer is in P4

(A) a fine exactly equal to the corporation's profit from committing the crime the passage states that in any case the penalty should be at least a little higher than the profit made by violating the law
(B) a fine slightly higher than the corporation's profit from committing the crime [/b]good but it doesn't at all take into consideration the detection ratio[/b]
(C) a fine enough higher than the corporation's profit from committing the crime to demonstrate community opinion of the crime without putting the corporation out of business this sums up why it is impractical to use detection ratios now. detection ratios might be right or wrong and if low as 1/10 they might lead to a penalty that would make many companies out of business
(D) a fine determined by taking the corporation's profit from committing the crime and raising it tenfold in order to reflect the detection ratio although tempting this is why the author thinks that DR are impractical and unfair so it is incorrect
(E) a fine high enough to put the corporation out of business -opposite


4)The author ascribes which one of the following views to the economists discussed in the passage?

refer to paragraphs 1 and 2 for the economists view

(A community's moral judgment of certain corporate crimes is most reliable when the crime in question endangers the community as a whole. never the moral judjemnt according to economists is a convenient choice
(B) A community's moral judgment of certain corporate crimes is only occasionally useful in determining penalties for such crimes. same as for choice A
(C) A community's moral judgment of certain corporate crimes is often more severe than the penalties levied against such crimes. no mention
(D) A community's moral judgment of certain corporate crimes is irrelevant to assessing the morality of corporations that commit the crimes. assessing the morality was never discussed
(E) A community's moral judgment of certain corporate crimes is inappropriate in determining penalties for such crimes. as P2 states


5)Which one of the following most accurately represents the organization of the passage?

refer to my paragraphs summary

(A) A question is raised; (Indeed) one answer to the question is summarized(the economists' view); an important aspect of this answer is presented(economists' view on morality); a flaw in the answer is identified(P3 states the impracticality of E'view); the need for an alternative answer is affirmed. (as last paragraph states)
(B) A problem is posed; one solution to the problem is summarized; a view held by those who favor the solution is presented(this is not true); a criticism of the solution is identified; the criticism is evaluated and rejected.
(C) A view is summarized; the ethics of those who hold the view are discussed(the ethics of economists is not discussed); a flaw in the ethics of those holding the view is identified and described in detail; the view is rejected; an alternative view is offered.(no alternative view but a call for an alternative method is made)
(D) A question is raised; two answers to the question are identified and compared(one answer); an assumption underlying each answer is identified(no mention); the assumption of one answer is found to be incorrect and this answer is rejected.(nowhere)
(E) A problem is posed; the consequences of failing to solve the problem are described(no consequences about failing mentioned); one solution to the problem is suggested(no solution is suggested but a solution is called for); an objection to this solution is described(no solution then no objection); the proposed solution is rejected.


6) With which one of the following statements would the economists discussed in the passage be most likely to agree?

refer to the last paragraph

(A) The possibility of a corporation's going out of business should not be a factor in determining the size of the penalty levied against the corporation for committing a crime. correct. Refer to the first lines of the last paragraph: the reasoning here is that as for now detection rates used by the economists' approach are 1/10 and this means that penalties could be very very high and put companies out of business
(B) The community's opinion of the moral offensiveness of a corporate crime should not be a factor in assigning a moral weight to that crime.moral weight is not discussed
(C) The moral offensiveness of a corporate crime should not be a factor in determining the penalty levied against the corporation unless it tends to increase the size of the penalty.inconsistent because morality should never be used according to economists
(D) The likelihood of a corporation's recommitting a particular crime should be the main factor in determining the size of the penalty levied against the corporation for committing the crime. no mention
(E) The penalty levied against a corporation for a particular crime should increase in direct relation to the number of times the corporation has previously been convicted of the crime. no mention of the repetitiveness of crimes as a factor determining the pnealties