Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 15:19 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 15:19

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 354
Own Kudos [?]: 3661 [19]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 871
Own Kudos [?]: 8553 [17]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
Send PM
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 603
Own Kudos [?]: 673 [5]
Given Kudos: 17
Concentration: Strategy
Schools:Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
 Q48  V33 GMAT 2: 670  Q46  V36 GMAT 3: 720  Q49  V40
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
SVP
SVP
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2437
Own Kudos [?]: 1682 [0]
Given Kudos: 210
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
B for me. Will explain if this is the OA.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Posts: 110
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
E is the only one that makes sense to me. They are ruling out all factors that there can be anyway to increase funds. I have no idea though.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 65
Own Kudos [?]: 24 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I say B.
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 866
Own Kudos [?]: 6809 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Concentration: Finance
Schools:CBS, Kellogg
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
jingy77 wrote:
E is the only one that makes sense to me. They are ruling out all factors that there can be anyway to increase funds. I have no idea though.


Agree with you, E

Because the argument "E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds", "This reasoning in the commissioner's argument is flawed". We do not must find the flaw of the argument.
User avatar
SVP
SVP
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2437
Own Kudos [?]: 1682 [1]
Given Kudos: 210
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
1
Kudos
hahah showdown time B vs E ... cmon prasanna we need the OA.
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1212
Own Kudos [?]: 349 [3]
Given Kudos: 12
Schools:Chicago Booth '11
 Q50  V38
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
2
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
im joining th B gang

The problem or flaw with the argument is that he is saying

We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan.

So he is ruling out every other option. Why though? What in the argument states that another plan couldn't work either? Why is his plan the only one to solve the problem?
What if there were other ways to reduce expenditures in another plan?

Therefore in B, he is confusing what could be an adequate solution to a required solution (ONLY is key here)
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
Posts: 73
Own Kudos [?]: 425 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
OA is B - found on another thread.
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 30 May 2009
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Concentration: Finance, General Management and IMS
Schools:Haas, Darden, Booth, LBS, Insead and IMD
 Q46  V23
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
1
Kudos
terp26 wrote:
im joining th B gang

The problem or flaw with the argument is that he is saying

We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan.

So he is ruling out every other option. Why though? What in the argument states that another plan couldn't work either? Why is his plan the only one to solve the problem?
What if there were other ways to reduce expenditures in another plan?

Therefore in B, he is confusing what could be an adequate solution to a required solution (ONLY is key here)



Sound reasoning. I used the same.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2010
Posts: 90
Own Kudos [?]: 136 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
prasannar wrote:
Commissioner: Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures. The plan before you outlines feasible cuts that would yield savings of a billion dollars over the coming fiscal year. We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan.
This reasoning in the commissioner's argument is flawed because this argument
(A) relies on information that is far from certain
(B) confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution
(C) inappropriately relies on the opinions of experts
(D) inappropriately employs language that is vague
(E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds

Confusing. I would still go with E.
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Jan 2010
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 31 [1]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Is this really how this passage is written in the OG? Terrible! I had to read it multiple times to figure out what was being said and who was being addressed. I can't think rule of a grammar rule that allows you to place the speaker in front of a passage with a colon and then followup it up with a string of dialogue that does not have quotations or indicators of who the speaker is addressing; except maybe in a script.

that aside, I picked B
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Posts: 88
Own Kudos [?]: 91 [0]
Given Kudos: 8
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
prasannar wrote:
Commissioner: Budget forecasters project a revenue shortfall of a billion dollars in the coming fiscal year. Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds, our only choice is to decrease expenditures. The plan before you outlines feasible cuts that would yield savings of a billion dollars over the coming fiscal year. We will be able to solve the problem we face, therefore, only if we adopt this plan.

This reasoning in the commissioner's argument is flawed because this argument

(A) relies on information that is far from certain
(B) confuses being an adequate solution with being a required solution
(C) inappropriately relies on the opinions of experts
(D) inappropriately employs language that is vague
(E) takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds




I will go with B

it is the only option which talks about the solution .........whether adequate or required
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 130
Own Kudos [?]: 68 [0]
Given Kudos: 7
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
It is clearly stated that "Since there is no feasible way to increase the available funds".....So that eliminates E from the choice!
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 57
Own Kudos [?]: 74 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
big debate between B and E

E takes for granted that there is no way to increase available funds, which acording to me cannot be a flaw because there may be or may not be another way to increase available funds.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 29 Sep 2008
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 335 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
B.suffecient vs necessary condition
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 276 [0]
Given Kudos: 4
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
I will go with B

Forecasters forecasting is possibility ---> need adequate solution if problem comes but he is giivng required solution when problem actually exists .
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Posts: 113
Own Kudos [?]: 748 [0]
Given Kudos: 21
Location: India
Concentration: Finance
 Q49  V19 GMAT 2: 620  Q44  V31
WE 1: 6 Year, Telecom(GSM)
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
B is the answer.
Solution should provide the way out in which, decrease in expenditure should outstrip the revenue shortfall .
But in his solution there is nothing which can convince us for that.Hence answer is B
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
Posts: 412
Own Kudos [?]: 216 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Location: United States (DC)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V45
GPA: 3.37
WE:Information Technology (Consulting)
Send PM
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
1
Kudos
jingy77 wrote:
E is the only one that makes sense to me. They are ruling out all factors that there can be anyway to increase funds. I have no idea though.


E attacks one of the premises that the argument is based on.

However, the question asks you to point out a flaw in the REASONING within the argument. In questions where you're asked to evaluate the reasoning of an argument, the validity of the premise is not relevant.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: CR 30: Commisioner [#permalink]
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne