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

 It is currently 18 Sep 2018, 22:37

### 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

# If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 893
If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 01:46
2
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

52% (00:51) correct 48% (01:25) wrong based on 78 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one less vehicle emitting pollution into the air than there would be otherwise. Threfore if people would walk whenever it is feasible for them to do so, the pollution will be greatly reduced.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) Cutting down on pollution can be acheived in a variety of ways.
B) Taking public transportation rather than driving is not always feasible
C) Walking is the only feasible alternative to driving that results in reduction in pollution
D) there are people who never drive but who often walk
E) People sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the arguement?

A) If automobile passengers who never drive walk instead of ride, there will not be fewer vehicles on the road as a result.
B) Nonmoving running vehicles, on average, emit half as much pollution per second as moving vehicles, but the greater congestion is, the more nonmoving running vehicles there are
C) Since different vehicles can pollute at diffferent rates, it is possible for one driver who walks to make a greater contribution to pollution prevention than another driver who walks.
D) On average, buses pollute more than cars do, but buses usually carry more passengers than cars do.
E) Those who previously rode as passengers in a vehicle whose driver decides to walk instead of drive migh themselves decide to drive.
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 54
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 06:20
joemama142000 wrote:
If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one less vehicle emitting pollution into the air than there would be otherwise. Threfore if people would walk whenever it is feasible for them to do so, the pollution will be greatly reduced.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) Cutting down on pollution can be acheived in a variety of ways.
B) Taking public transportation rather than driving is not always feasible
C) Walking is the only feasible alternative to driving that results in reduction in pollution
D) there are people who never drive but who often walk
E) People sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the arguement?

A) If automobile passengers who never drive walk instead of ride, there will not be fewer vehicles on the road as a result.
B) Nonmoving running vehicles, on average, emit half as much pollution per second as moving vehicles, but the greater congestion is, the more nonmoving running vehicles there are
C) Since different vehicles can pollute at diffferent rates, it is possible for one driver who walks to make a greater contribution to pollution prevention than another driver who walks.
D) On average, buses pollute more than cars do, but buses usually carry more passengers than cars do.
E) Those who previously rode as passengers in a vehicle whose driver decides to walk instead of drive migh themselves decide to drive.

E for the first one.

For the second one I don't think any of those options strengthens the argument.
Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2009
Posts: 99
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 10:35
Answer to 1st question is E.

Second one is too confusing. my guess is C. OA and explanation please
Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Location: Streamwood IL
Schools: Kellogg(Evening),Booth (Evening)
WE 1: 5 Years
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 12:56
1
For second one

A) If automobile passengers who never drive walk instead of ride, there will not be fewer vehicles on the road as a result.Weakens- says that if passengers in the carpool walk instead of take a ride, the driver would continue to drive. So his/her walking would make no difference.
B) Nonmoving running vehicles, on average, emit half as much pollution per second as moving vehicles, but the greater congestion is, the more nonmoving running vehicles there are. If more people decide to walk, 2 things can happen. 1) Pollution caused by their own cars would be eliminated, which is obvious. 2) That would result in reducing congestion, hence exponentially reduce the emissions from other cars. Correct Answer
C) Since different vehicles can pollute at diffferent rates, it is possible for one driver who walks to make a greater contribution to pollution prevention than another driver who walks. Totally unrelated.
D) On average, buses pollute more than cars do, but buses usually carry more passengers than cars do.Public transportation is out of context.
E) Those who previously rode as passengers in a vehicle whose driver decides to walk instead of drive migh themselves decide to drive.Similar to A, weakens the argument.

Hope it helps. And I agree it's a tough one. I didn't get it the first time around.
_________________

Rock On

Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 196
Location: India
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 13:10
atish you assumed too much I think.

_________________

Cheers,
SD

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Posts: 137
Location: Streamwood IL
Schools: Kellogg(Evening),Booth (Evening)
WE 1: 5 Years
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 13:19
1
SudiptoGmat wrote:
atish you assumed too much I think.

Haha I might have, but would you care to provide ANY explanation for your answer, so we can compare who assumes more and who assumes less. Let's compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges.
_________________

Rock On

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 375
Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2010, 18:19
So funny,
atish, I agree your assumption is sooo deep. Hope it is the right answer. I chose C by the way.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 318
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2010, 11:40
Solving an arguement... gives rise to a new arguement! (Who assumes more?)
_________________

Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!!

|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|

~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Posts: 318
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2010, 15:42
atish wrote:
For second one

A) If automobile passengers who never drive walk instead of ride, there will not be fewer vehicles on the road as a result.Weakens- says that if passengers in the carpool walk instead of take a ride, the driver would continue to drive. So his/her walking would make no difference.
B) Nonmoving running vehicles, on average, emit half as much pollution per second as moving vehicles, but the greater congestion is, the more nonmoving running vehicles there are. If more people decide to walk, 2 things can happen. 1) Pollution caused by their own cars would be eliminated, which is obvious. 2) That would result in reducing congestion, hence exponentially reduce the emissions from other cars. Correct Answer
C) Since different vehicles can pollute at diffferent rates, it is possible for one driver who walks to make a greater contribution to pollution prevention than another driver who walks. Totally unrelated.
D) On average, buses pollute more than cars do, but buses usually carry more passengers than cars do.Public transportation is out of context.
E) Those who previously rode as passengers in a vehicle whose driver decides to walk instead of drive migh themselves decide to drive.Similar to A, weakens the argument.

Hope it helps. And I agree it's a tough one. I didn't get it the first time around.

And atish wins!!!

Nice explanation by the way! Read it the second time and found it convincing! +1...
_________________

Cheers!
JT...........
If u like my post..... payback in Kudos!!

|For CR refer Powerscore CR Bible|For SC refer Manhattan SC Guide|

~~Better Burn Out... Than Fade Away~~

Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 515
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 08:16
yes the explanation in the favor of B is convincing , comparing apples to oranges or monkeys to chimpanzees is not the issue here

but anyways even by poe B is better in Q2 . i arrived at B by POE , as all other options seem to either weaken the argument or are irrelevant, so dont strengthen the argument.

anyway thanks for the apple/orange/monkey/chimpanzee entertainment
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 525
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 10:19
joemama142000 wrote:
If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one less vehicle emitting pollution into the air than there would be otherwise. Threfore if people would walk whenever it is feasible for them to do so, the pollution will be greatly reduced.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) Cutting down on pollution can be acheived in a variety of ways.
B) Taking public transportation rather than driving is not always feasible
C) Walking is the only feasible alternative to driving that results in reduction in pollution
D) there are people who never drive but who often walk
E) People sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead

What is the negation of sometimes in E? Powerscore says its Never.
so E would be ;
People Never drive when its feasible to walk instead.
Doesn't this strengthen the arguement rather than weakening?
Manager
Joined: 06 Oct 2010
Posts: 53
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 12:00
That negation would weaken the conclusion of the argument - if people would walk whenever it is feasible for them to do so, the pollution will be greatly reduced.
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 525
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 12:09
Howz that possible...isn't it strengthening the arguement?

Posted from my mobile device
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 515
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 12:51
no it is not strengthening the argument. it in fact destroys the argument ,

see it this way , people never drive when it is possible to walk, so driving is done only when it is absolutely required.

so people already walk 100% of the time , whenever they have a choice between walking and driving, still pollution is not reduced by this measure, hence the conclusion falls.
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1098
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2011, 04:14
Its E.

From B and C, C seems better.

B, if people decide to walk,moving and non moving vehicle will decrease.But this is too much of an assumption.

C restates that the moment one driver decides to walk,non utilization of his car leads to lesser pollution.C asserts this by a comparison too.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Manager
Joined: 14 Apr 2011
Posts: 171
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2011, 09:47
The first one is clear: E. Conclusion statement gives it away by saying that if people would walk whenever its feasible for them to do so, pollution will reduce. This statement assumes that people currently are not walking at every feasible opportunity - E captures this logic.

The second one, just couldnt understand I reached B by POE.
_________________

Looking for Kudos

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 2923
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2017, 04:32
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.
_________________
Re: If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one &nbs [#permalink] 03 Oct 2017, 04:32
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 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®.