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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
100%
(00:54)
correct 0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 1
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Is the provincial government really as corrupt as people say? Well, I know one woman who, when her husband got his first driver's license, said that she would not permit him to drive the family car until he actually learned how to drive.
Which of the following is the point the speaker wants to make?
A) The provincial government is very corrupt
B) It is not difficult to learn to drive
C) Governments everywhere are more or less corrupt
D) A license should not be required to drive a family car
E) Governmental corruption should not be tolerated
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
I beleive A is the answer unless there is a trick somewhere..It seems very straight forward.
Although the tense and feeling oif the argument may be that he wanted to tell the opposite of it but the example he gave suggests that the government is very corrupt
Husband gets a driving license without knowing how to drive (only a corrupt government can issue licenses by taking bribes). A proves this and the wife (home minister) has every right based on this evidence to stop her husband to drive their family car.
We can infer that the woman's husband was able to obtain a driver's license even though he did not know how to drive. This was narrated to prove the first sentence that the provincial government was corrupt.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.