It is currently 23 Nov 2017, 11:51

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
Posts: 23

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 8

Concentration: Healthcare, Technology
Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2014, 14:16
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

48% (01:16) correct 52% (01:33) wrong based on 611 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Can someone clarify for me too, why option C is incorrect? All explanations in favor of option A or against option C I read before don't seem convincing enough. The source of this question is GmatPrep Exam Pack 1, so it is crucial for me to understand testmaker's logic here.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 8

Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 148

Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2014, 19:38
pretzel wrote:
I don't understand why the OA is A either.

Even I chose the wrong answer initially. After going through the forum feel A is better choice. Here is my view on A.

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job.
- This line states that Currently Judges are involved in some other profession rather to be as judges since the pay scale is less The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.This line states that the more eligible candidate to be judges has chosen the profession as Teaching.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.
-- Pat is stating that "Since very few judges" --> he is talking about currently who ever is performing the role of a judge. But Mel statement is based on the candidate who are currently involved in teaching profession

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members. --> Based on above desc, A fits in to it perfectly
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 148

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10132

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2015, 13:08
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.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 21 Mar 2014
Posts: 39

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 13

Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2015, 00:12
why not E .....?
_________________

kinaare paaon phailane lage hian,
nadi se roz mitti kat rahi hai....

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 13

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2015
Posts: 82

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 323

Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V42
GMAT 2: 750 Q50 V41
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2016, 05:58
EMPOWERgmatRichC

Can you please explain this question ?
_________________

Appreciate any KUDOS given !

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 323

Intern
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 46

GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V48
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Aug 2016, 13:19
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.

I did it by process of elimination

Why not B?
The cause and effect relationship in his statement is completely sound.

Why not C?
He did'nt straight away said that there will no negative effect (absence of negative effects), instead he points of towards the possibility that there may be "little or no negative effect". (if little was not there then this was a good option)

Why not D?
He did give evidence that very few judges are involved in teaching and lectures.

Why not E?
This is completely irrelevant, no where stated.

I am not sure about why A should be right
Can anyone help?

And if you liked my explanations kudos please

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 46

Manager
Joined: 20 Jun 2013
Posts: 50

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT 1: 430 Q39 V25
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Other)
Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2017, 13:38
hello experts can any one explain why B is wrong... this would be really helpful.. thanks

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 20

Manager
Joined: 15 Jun 2016
Posts: 94

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 3

Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2017, 10:40
Expert,
Could you clearly specify why option A is better answer over option C?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 3

Board of Directors
Status: Aiming MBA
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 2775

Kudos [?]: 920 [0], given: 67

Location: India
GPA: 3.65
WE: Information Technology (Health Care)
Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2017, 10:52
VKat wrote:
Expert,
Could you clearly specify why option A is better answer over option C?

Option C is wrong because it says PAT is saying there will be no Negative effect(See here: by pointing to the absence of negative effects).

But actually Pat said there may be little negative effect. So, we cannot ignore this little effect and say no negative effect.

Option A is right because It says PAT is giving assurance about future based on current situations. It may happen that in future there are many judges who start receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements. Hence, we can not say, this ban "will" have little or no negative effect.

I hope that makes sense.
_________________

How I improved from V21 to V40! ?

Kudos [?]: 920 [0], given: 67

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 468

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 50

Location: India
Schools: Duke '20, Tepper '20
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 May 2017, 22:51
A is my go. mel talks about besties while Pat gives the situation as a whole i. e. including everyone.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 50

Re: Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low   [#permalink] 03 May 2017, 22:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by