Last visit was: 17 May 2026, 19:25 It is currently 17 May 2026, 19:25
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
705-805 (Hard)|   Weaken|         
User avatar
shanks2020
User avatar
Joined: 02 Dec 2018
Last visit: 14 Feb 2026
Posts: 236
Own Kudos:
40
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 236
Kudos: 40
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 14 Sep 2020, 07:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.

C needs to defend the plan, not come up with a new plan. Irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.

Whatever the current situation is, it needs improvement. That is why city council is coming with a plan.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.

This doesn't help defend the plan. If anything, it is a factor against the plan.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.

This just tells us what the current situation is in nearby malls. They have free parking with no time limit. Does it make parking space somewhat scarce? May be. Do people prefer spending time looking for parking in free parking spaces or do they prefer paying parking charges? We don't know.
So will our plan improve our condition or not? This doesn't tell us.

There are 3 ways of parking:
- Scarce free street parking - Our condition right now
- Free parking space without time limits (which might make parking space somewhat scarce) - Condition of nearby malls
- Paid metered parking with time limits (which ensures that parking is generally available) - Our condition with the plan

Option (A) tells us that people prefer third one to first one. So it says that our condition is likely to improve (so the plan is likely to work)
Option (E) tells us what kind of parking nearby malls have. But it doesn't tell us what people prefer. So we don't know whether our plan will work or not.

Answer (A)
Show more

Hi VeritasKarishma AndrewN

I rejected option A, since it was not given that the neighbourhood mall had space issue. There is no such link given.
In fact, it supports Kayla's objection. Y- Because shoppers know that they have to pay there, and then dislike hunting spaces, so they will go to the neighbourhood mall and shop. While option B reduces the effect of payment - if you leave early then you don't pay. Hence, at least better than option A which does not give any link.
Can you plz. let me know where i am going wrong in my thought process.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,489
Own Kudos:
7,686
 [2]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,489
Kudos: 7,686
 [2]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 14 Sep 2020, 18:24
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020

Hi VeritasKarishma AndrewN

I rejected option A, since it was not given that the neighbourhood mall had space issue. There is no such link given.
In fact, it supports Kayla's objection. Y- Because shoppers know that they have to pay there, and then dislike hunting spaces, so they will go to the neighbourhood mall and shop. While option B reduces the effect of payment - if you leave early then you don't pay. Hence, at least better than option A which does not give any link.
Can you plz. let me know where i am going wrong in my thought process.
Show more
Hello, shanks2020. Others have offered their input above, but I thought I would add my two cents to the mix. You have to be careful to read the question carefully and then look to follow the linear logic of the passage, particularly on tougher CR questions, in which a few distraction answers might sound plausible. Look at the exact question once more:

Quote:
Which of the following, if true, would be the most logically effective rebuttal a proponent of the city's plan could make to Kayla's objection?
Show more
We are looking for a rebuttal, yes, but you cannot lose sight of the fact that this rebuttal needs to come from a proponent of the city's plan. What is that plan? Well, that keyword shows up, conveniently, right in sentence two. The city plans to add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available. A proponent of this plan would thus need to justify charging people to park. Moreover, look at the argument or objection that Kayla offers. The premise to her assertion that the plan will backfire is that shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, nothing more. If we had any doubts about what the rebuttal needs to address, that should all but erase them.

Choice (A) justifies the charge. Not just some, but most shoppers would rather pay to park than drive around, looking for a place to park. This is just what we need in the rebuttal, from the point of view of our proponent.

Choice (B) offers an alternative to the plan. It may sound reasonable, but the plan does not consist of ensuring that parking is available without a fee. We can conclude that this is not the kind of rebuttal we are seeking.

Choice (C) does not address the plan at all and should be an easy elimination.

Choice (D) does not address the available parking at the lot, not to mention that, once again, no proponent of the plan would offer such a statement in support of the city's proposal. Are we to understand that just because people will pay to park in one place, they will automatically accept paying to park in another? That is a tenuous connection at best.

Choice (E) does not address the plan either, shifting the focus instead to these nearby malls that may or may not have reasonable parking accommodations. And of course, we have no compelling reason why people would simply accept paying for parking at the meter. Kayla argued that shoppers' dislike of paid parking would derail the plan. That argument could still hold here.

I hope that helps. I had a lot of fun with this one. If you have further questions, feel free to ask.

- Andrew
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 13 May 2026
Posts: 16,465
Own Kudos:
79,641
 [1]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,465
Kudos: 79,641
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 18 Sep 2020, 00:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shanks2020
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.

C needs to defend the plan, not come up with a new plan. Irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.

Whatever the current situation is, it needs improvement. That is why city council is coming with a plan.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.

This doesn't help defend the plan. If anything, it is a factor against the plan.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.

This just tells us what the current situation is in nearby malls. They have free parking with no time limit. Does it make parking space somewhat scarce? May be. Do people prefer spending time looking for parking in free parking spaces or do they prefer paying parking charges? We don't know.
So will our plan improve our condition or not? This doesn't tell us.

There are 3 ways of parking:
- Scarce free street parking - Our condition right now
- Free parking space without time limits (which might make parking space somewhat scarce) - Condition of nearby malls
- Paid metered parking with time limits (which ensures that parking is generally available) - Our condition with the plan

Option (A) tells us that people prefer third one to first one. So it says that our condition is likely to improve (so the plan is likely to work)
Option (E) tells us what kind of parking nearby malls have. But it doesn't tell us what people prefer. So we don't know whether our plan will work or not.

Answer (A)

Hi VeritasKarishma AndrewN

I rejected option A, since it was not given that the neighbourhood mall had space issue. There is no such link given.
In fact, it supports Kayla's objection. Y- Because shoppers know that they have to pay there, and then dislike hunting spaces, so they will go to the neighbourhood mall and shop. While option B reduces the effect of payment - if you leave early then you don't pay. Hence, at least better than option A which does not give any link.
Can you plz. let me know where i am going wrong in my thought process.
Show more


shanks2020

option (B) is irrelevant. We need to judge the merits of the plan proposed. A new plan, whether better than current plan proposed or worse is absolutely irrelevant to our argument.
The question stem clearly asks for: ... most logically effective rebuttal a proponent of the city's plan could make...

We need a rebuttal from a proponent of the plan proposed. It must give us some merit of the plan proposed only.

Note in my explanation I am not assuming that neighbourhood malls have scarce parking too. The point is that as per option (A), since hunting for parking is worse than paying at meters, the plan will likely IMPROVE current situation. It may not make the situation ideal but will improve.

Currently, people hate hunting for parking space so no one comes here to shop. What they do, we do not know.
With paid meters, they will feel better (as per (A)) so some may start coming here. Some may still go to neighbourhood malls, we don't know.
Again, the point is that a proponent of the plan needs to give why the parking meters will make the situation BETTER than before. That is all.
avatar
aritrar4
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 12 Jun 2020
Last visit: 06 Sep 2024
Posts: 103
Own Kudos:
100
Given Kudos: 147
Location: India
Schools: S.P.Jain Institute (A) IIMA PGPX'23 (A) IIMC MBAEx'23 (A) ISB '23 (I) IIMB EPGP'23 (D)
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 3: 710 Q50 V35
GPA: 3.73
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: S.P.Jain Institute (A) IIMA PGPX'23 (A) IIMC MBAEx'23 (A) ISB '23 (I) IIMB EPGP'23 (D)
GMAT 3: 710 Q50 V35
Posts: 103
Kudos: 100
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 14 Dec 2020, 22:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi AndrewN , VeritasKarishma I need a little guidance from you on this question. Though I selected option A, I still want to confirm whether I eliminated the other 4 options based on the correct understanding -

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.
- This suggests that the conditions of the plan are more preferable to shoppers than the present scarcity of parking spaces. So the plan should work

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.
- This isn't what the plan suggests, but is a different plan altogether, so this is irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.
- This is again irrelevant since it does not tell us what the effect of the plan would be on those shoppers.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.
- This tells us that there is a separate paid parking present elsewhere, but this cannot be a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. The problem is that there is scarce parking in the neighborhood. I'm not sure whether this strengthens Kayla's comment - maybe in spite of the paid parking, people choose not to park there but still hunt for open parking spaces so they may not choose the new paid parking either or it weakens Kayla's comment - if one paid parking is inadequate to address the scarcity of parking, a second paid parking should help . In either case, I think this is not a proper rebuttal of Kayla's comment. Please help whether this thought is correct.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.
- This does not serve as a rebuttal of Kayla's comment since it exemplifies the condition of nearby malls which do not have parking time limits. However, we don't know about parking scarcity there. It could be worse than this neighborhood, or could be better with plenty of parking spaces available. Since we don't know how the current parking conditions are in other malls, we cannot use this as a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. Please help on this too.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 13 May 2026
Posts: 16,465
Own Kudos:
79,641
 [2]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,465
Kudos: 79,641
 [2]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 14 Dec 2020, 22:47
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
aritrar4
Hi AndrewN , VeritasKarishma I need a little guidance from you on this question. Though I selected option A, I still want to confirm whether I eliminated the other 4 options based on the correct understanding -

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.
- This suggests that the conditions of the plan are more preferable to shoppers than the present scarcity of parking spaces. So the plan should work

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.
- This isn't what the plan suggests, but is a different plan altogether, so this is irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.
- This is again irrelevant since it does not tell us what the effect of the plan would be on those shoppers.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.
- This tells us that there is a separate paid parking present elsewhere, but this cannot be a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. The problem is that there is scarce parking in the neighborhood. I'm not sure whether this strengthens Kayla's comment - maybe in spite of the paid parking, people choose not to park there but still hunt for open parking spaces so they may not choose the new paid parking either or it weakens Kayla's comment - if one paid parking is inadequate to address the scarcity of parking, a second paid parking should help . In either case, I think this is not a proper rebuttal of Kayla's comment. Please help whether this thought is correct.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.
- This does not serve as a rebuttal of Kayla's comment since it exemplifies the condition of nearby malls which do not have parking time limits. However, we don't know about parking scarcity there. It could be worse than this neighborhood, or could be better with plenty of parking spaces available. Since we don't know how the current parking conditions are in other malls, we cannot use this as a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. Please help on this too.
Show more

We are rebutting Kayla's position so we are in favour of parking meters. In (D), the fact that there is already a paid parking meter in our neighbourhood doesn't help us say that our plan of putting paid parking meters will be successful. If anything, if the current paid parking meter stays unused, it supports Kayla.
So in any case, this doesn't support us.

In (E), we do not know the parking availability in other malls so it doesn't impact the outcome of our plan.
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,489
Own Kudos:
7,686
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,489
Kudos: 7,686
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 15 Dec 2020, 10:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
aritrar4
Hi AndrewN , VeritasKarishma I need a little guidance from you on this question. Though I selected option A, I still want to confirm whether I eliminated the other 4 options based on the correct understanding -

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.
- This suggests that the conditions of the plan are more preferable to shoppers than the present scarcity of parking spaces. So the plan should work

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.
- This isn't what the plan suggests, but is a different plan altogether, so this is irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.
- This is again irrelevant since it does not tell us what the effect of the plan would be on those shoppers.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.
- This tells us that there is a separate paid parking present elsewhere, but this cannot be a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. The problem is that there is scarce parking in the neighborhood. I'm not sure whether this strengthens Kayla's comment - maybe in spite of the paid parking, people choose not to park there but still hunt for open parking spaces so they may not choose the new paid parking either or it weakens Kayla's comment - if one paid parking is inadequate to address the scarcity of parking, a second paid parking should help . In either case, I think this is not a proper rebuttal of Kayla's comment. Please help whether this thought is correct.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.
- This does not serve as a rebuttal of Kayla's comment since it exemplifies the condition of nearby malls which do not have parking time limits. However, we don't know about parking scarcity there. It could be worse than this neighborhood, or could be better with plenty of parking spaces available. Since we don't know how the current parking conditions are in other malls, we cannot use this as a rebuttal to Kayla's comment. Please help on this too.
Show more
Hello, aritrar4. I will say that I agree with what VeritasKarishma has written already in response to this message. Furthermore, I wrote a detailed post on each answer choice just a few posts above, here. It seems as though your thinking fits pretty closely with my own. If you have further questions or concerns after consulting that post, let me know, and I would be happy to address them.

- Andrew
avatar
saman283
avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2020
Last visit: 20 Feb 2022
Posts: 19
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 15
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V35
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
GPA: 3.55
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
Posts: 19
Kudos: 3
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 21 Apr 2021, 07:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma, I am still unclear why option A is the right answer? Here is how I thought about this problem:

Kayla's argument is that people dislike paying so they will go to nearby malls. So essentially there are three options - (a) scarce parking, (b) paid parking, (c) free parking at nearby malls. We want to weaken Kayla's argument so we want to say that people will pay and NOT go to nearby malls.

Option A: says that people prefer (b) over (a) but what about (c)? Even if people prefer (b) over (a), they could still prefer (c) as suggested by Kayla. So how does this option substantiates that plan will work?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 13 May 2026
Posts: 16,465
Own Kudos:
79,641
 [1]
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,465
Kudos: 79,641
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 23 Apr 2021, 01:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
saman283
VeritasKarishma, I am still unclear why option A is the right answer? Here is how I thought about this problem:

Kayla's argument is that people dislike paying so they will go to nearby malls. So essentially there are three options - (a) scarce parking, (b) paid parking, (c) free parking at nearby malls. We want to weaken Kayla's argument so we want to say that people will pay and NOT go to nearby malls.

Option A: says that people prefer (b) over (a) but what about (c)? Even if people prefer (b) over (a), they could still prefer (c) as suggested by Kayla. So how does this option substantiates that plan will work?
Show more


The point is that the situation will become better with paid meters. Right now situation is (a). It will be made (b) which is better than (a). This will improve the situation. Then can we say that making it (b) will backfire? No. It will improve the situation, even if it will not make it ideal.

Currently situation is (a) so some people shop here, some use (c).
If we improve it and make it (b), possibly more people will shop here and some will still use (c).

Then we cannot say that (b) will backfire.
User avatar
adityaganjoo
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2021
Last visit: 04 Oct 2022
Posts: 138
Own Kudos:
32
Given Kudos: 154
Posts: 138
Kudos: 32
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 24 Apr 2021, 08:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.
Show more

VeritasKarishma What if the neighboring shopping areas have large number of free parking places and thus, allowing the shoppers comfortable free parking? Why did we assume that the parking alongside the street is the only option left to them?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 13 May 2026
Posts: 16,465
Own Kudos:
79,641
Given Kudos: 485
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,465
Kudos: 79,641
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 26 Apr 2021, 01:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
adityaganjoo
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.

VeritasKarishma What if the neighboring shopping areas have large number of free parking places and thus, allowing the shoppers comfortable free parking? Why did we assume that the parking alongside the street is the only option left to them?
Show more

We did not assume that this is the only option. The free parking in other neighbourhood malls exists right now also so those who use it, do use it and may use it in the future too. This plan improves the condition in this neighbourhood so it is a step up for this neighbourhood. Hopefully more people will start shopping here.
Check discussion on this at the end of page 2.
User avatar
ueh55406
User avatar
Joined: 19 Dec 2020
Last visit: 31 Aug 2021
Posts: 145
Own Kudos:
50
Given Kudos: 316
Posts: 145
Kudos: 50
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 30 Apr 2021, 05:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.

C needs to defend the plan, not come up with a new plan. Irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.

Whatever the current situation is, it needs improvement. That is why city council is coming with a plan.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.

This doesn't help defend the plan. If anything, it is a factor against the plan.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.

Answer (A)
Show more


Isn't D saying that people are already paying to park and since the "parking is scarce" this means there is no reduction in the number of people availing this paid parking space. So, people are fine with paid parking ?? what am I missing?

Thanks, in advance.
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,207
Own Kudos:
964
 [1]
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,207
Kudos: 964
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 30 Apr 2021, 17:32
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ueh55406
VeritasKarishma
LoneSurvivor
How to eliminate E? Any strong reasoning because E says that as their is no time limit for parking space, people will again find it difficult to park. Does not it weaken the argument?

GMATNinja AjiteshArun VeritasKarishma MartyTargetTestPrep MagooshExpert


K - Many people don't shop here because of scarce street parking.
C - Add parking meters with time limits that ensure that parking spaces are generally available
K - This plan will backfire. Shoppers dislike paying at parking meters, so most will probably drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking

Questions: What should C say now? How should the city council rebut Kayla's objection (that the plan will backfire since people dislike paying at parking meters)

A. Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.

If C says that the plan will make the situation better (even if not ideal), that helps. If most people dislike hunting for street parking (the current situation) much more than paying at meters (the plan) then it is expected that the plan will make the situation better. It may not completely turn the situation around but will still make it better. Hence it is unlikely that the plan will "backfire". This is correct.

B. The city could post signs with street parking time limits to ensure that parking spaces become available without forcing shoppers to pay at meters.

C needs to defend the plan, not come up with a new plan. Irrelevant.

C. Currently, most shoppers in the neighborhood drive only occasionally to shop at malls in other neighborhoods.

Whatever the current situation is, it needs improvement. That is why city council is coming with a plan.

D. The neighborhood already contains a parking lot where shoppers must pay to park.

This doesn't help defend the plan. If anything, it is a factor against the plan.

E. The nearby malls with free parking have no parking time limits to help ensure that parking spaces in their lots become available.

Answer (A)


Isn't D saying that people are already paying to park and since the "parking is scarce" this means there is no reduction in the number of people availing this paid parking space. So, people are fine with paid parking ?? what am I missing?

Thanks, in advance.
Show more


ueh55406 : people are already paying to park and since the "parking is scarce" this means there is no reduction in the number of people availing this paid parking space. So, people are fine with paid parking

No, you assumed if people pay then they are fine. They still dislike to pay .
Kayla: —shoppers dislike paying at parking meters --> ( given in argument)

You can assume scenarios: 1. parking space is less 2. people don't want to pay . they need to pay only when they have no alternatives. In normal circumstances, they don't want to shop at these places.
So even if city increases parking lots with paid parking , people may not still go there . That's what city proponents reply to Kayla that such plan is of no use.

I hope it helps.
User avatar
ali267
User avatar
Joined: 21 Apr 2021
Last visit: 01 Feb 2023
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 9
Posts: 16
Kudos: 1
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 31 Oct 2021, 11:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
My problem with option A is that, even if "Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.", they could well still dislike paying for metered parking spaces enough such that they would prefer to drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking.

Now if A said "Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.", i.e. if they took out "street", then that would make more sense to me. This implies that even free parking at malls may not suffice if they are scarce. But since A limits the response to street parking, it doesn't say anything about what shoppers would prefer between free mall parking or metered parking spaces.
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,471
Own Kudos:
5,651
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,471
Kudos: 5,651
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 31 Oct 2021, 12:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ali267
My problem with option A is that, even if "Most shoppers dislike hunting for scarce street parking spaces much more than they dislike paying for metered parking spaces.", they could well still dislike paying for metered parking spaces enough such that they would prefer to drive to other neighborhoods to shop at malls with free parking.
Show more
Here's the thing.

(A) basically says that shoppers PREFER paying for metered parking over hunting for spaces.

Currently shoppers have to hunt for spaces.

The plan is to switch to having them pay for metered parking.

Thus, the plan is to switch to something they LIKE MORE.

Switching to something shoppers like more won't cause them to go to malls instead. Quite the contrary, it should cause them to shop in "our neighborhood" more than they have been.
User avatar
amathur88
User avatar
Joined: 06 Feb 2021
Last visit: 20 Mar 2023
Posts: 5
Given Kudos: 9
Location: India
Schools: ISB '24
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.9
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: ISB '24
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
Posts: 5
Kudos: 0
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 31 Oct 2021, 19:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How can we assume that there is a scarce parking problem in the other neighbourhood? its not mentioned anywhere.
I don't understand how can A be correct without any evidence for this assumption
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,471
Own Kudos:
5,651
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,471
Kudos: 5,651
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 31 Oct 2021, 20:39
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
amathur88
How can we assume that there is a scarce parking problem in the other neighbourhood? its not mentioned anywhere.
I don't understand how can A be correct without any evidence for this assumption
Show more
Hi amathur88.

Notice that choice (A) indicates that, by adding parking meters, "our neighborhood" will be improving the situation for shoppers by going from something shoppers like less. hunting for scarce parking, to something they like more, paying for metered parking.

Since we know that shoppers will like the new situation better than the old situation, we can expect that they will shop in "our neighborhood" more than they have been regardless of what other neighborhoods are like.

For a similar example, let's say that "our neighborhood" were to improve its ambiance or the types of stores there. All other things held equal, we'd expect shopping in "our neighborhood" to increase.
User avatar
hadimadi
User avatar
Joined: 26 Oct 2021
Last visit: 03 Dec 2022
Posts: 113
Own Kudos:
31
Given Kudos: 94
Posts: 113
Kudos: 31
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 13 Mar 2022, 04:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyTargetTestPrep, AndrewN

Hi,

continuing the discussion on (A):

(A) Just says that people prefer paying than to be forced to hunt for parking. They dislike both, but the former more than the latter. How can we infer from this that this improves the situation in our neighborhood? It could still be that people prefer free parking over paying, and paying over having to hunt. That way, they still would rather drive to the other neighborhoods.

Obviously, it could also that most people prefer paying over having to hunt, and also over having to drive to a neighborhood for free parking. This way, only some would drive to neighborhoods. Would this case be enough for a effective rebuttal by a proponent?

Thanks
avatar
AndrewN
avatar
Volunteer Expert
Joined: 16 May 2019
Last visit: 29 Mar 2025
Posts: 3,489
Own Kudos:
7,686
 [1]
Given Kudos: 500
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,489
Kudos: 7,686
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 13 Mar 2022, 05:21
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hadimadi
MartyTargetTestPrep, AndrewN

Hi,

continuing the discussion on (A):

(A) Just says that people prefer paying than to be forced to hunt for parking. They dislike both, but the former more than the latter. How can we infer from this that this improves the situation in our neighborhood? It could still be that people prefer free parking over paying, and paying over having to hunt. That way, they still would rather drive to the other neighborhoods.

Obviously, it could also that most people prefer paying over having to hunt, and also over having to drive to a neighborhood for free parking. This way, only some would drive to neighborhoods. Would this case be enough for a effective rebuttal by a proponent?

Thanks
Show more
Hello, hadimadi. I think you have to keep sight of just what the passage says and what the question stem asks of us to avoid associative reasoning. You are correct that some people could still prefer driving elsewhere for free parking to paying to park at a meter. However, a proponent of the plan would want to address the opening statement that many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because street parking is scarce. Of course, the plan proposes to ensure that parking spaces are generally available by adding metered parking, so our goal is to get into the mindset of a proponent of the plan to fix the following:

Argument: street parking is scarce → many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood

Proposal: add metered parking to ensure the general availability of parking

Counterargument to Argument (answer choice (A)): most shoppers—not just people in general—would rather pay to park than hunt for scarce street parking spaces

Projected outcome: street parking will not be scarce → most shoppers will not be reluctant to shop in our neighborhood

In short, a proponent would not worry about the preferences of some people, or of people in general, but of most shoppers, who are in the neighborhood to shop.

Perhaps that all makes more sense now. Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,471
Own Kudos:
5,651
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,471
Kudos: 5,651
 [1]
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 13 Mar 2022, 08:08
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hadimadi
MartyTargetTestPrep, AndrewN

Hi,

continuing the discussion on (A):

(A) Just says that people prefer paying than to be forced to hunt for parking. They dislike both, but the former more than the latter. How can we infer from this that this improves the situation in our neighborhood? It could still be that people prefer free parking over paying, and paying over having to hunt. That way, they still would rather drive to the other neighborhoods.

Obviously, it could also that most people prefer paying over having to hunt, and also over having to drive to a neighborhood for free parking. This way, only some would drive to neighborhoods. Would this case be enough for a effective rebuttal by a proponent?

Thanks
Show more
I would add to Andrew N's helpful response that we are starting from a base situation and changing it.

In the base situation, hunting for parking is necessary, and there are also other places where parking is free.

In the new situation, hunting for parking will not be as necessary but paying for metered parking will be, and there are also other places where parking is free.

Notice that the only difference between the base situation and the new situation is the change from hunting for parking to paying for metered parking.

Now, what's at issue is whether more or fewer people will shop in "our neighborhood."

(A) says that people prefer paying for metered parking over hunting for parking.

So, notice that by adding parking meters, we will go from the base situation to a new situation in which the ONLY DIFFERENCE involves something that people PREFER OVER the base situation.

As a result, we should have an increase in shopping over the base situation.

So, the rebuttal is that, regardless of anything going on with free parking elsewhere or how many people like to drive elsewhere free parking, we have still made the situation in "our neighborhood" preferable to what it was.
User avatar
custodio
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Last visit: 03 Feb 2023
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 46
Posts: 34
Kudos: 10
Kayla: Many people are reluctant to shop in our neighborhood because 07 Jul 2022, 09:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
saman283
VeritasKarishma, I am still unclear why option A is the right answer? Here is how I thought about this problem:

Kayla's argument is that people dislike paying so they will go to nearby malls. So essentially there are three options - (a) scarce parking, (b) paid parking, (c) free parking at nearby malls. We want to weaken Kayla's argument so we want to say that people will pay and NOT go to nearby malls.

Option A: says that people prefer (b) over (a) but what about (c)? Even if people prefer (b) over (a), they could still prefer (c) as suggested by Kayla. So how does this option substantiates that plan will work?
Show more

(c) free parking at nearby malls -> supports Kayla's argument.

In fact, (c) should be "not sure about available free parking at nearby malls" (option E). So,
if available free parking-> supports Kayla's argument
if no available free parking-> does not weaken Kayla's argument (this is exactly like the current situation in the city)
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7393 posts
AbhishekP220108
575 posts
bhanu29
368 posts