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

 It is currently 22 May 2019, 03:55

### 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

# Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2852
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2013, 10:08
jaituteja wrote:

Hi e-gmat,

I agree with your explanations for C.

I chose option D, since it states that there will be an increase in number of cars in the region(has emearged ---> leading to)

Hi Jai,

Option D does not states that there will be an increase. It states that there has been an increase in the number of cars. The region has emerged as a leading hub and this fact has led to increase in the number of cars.

jaituteja wrote:
Now, the arguments states that "The government is planning to implement a plan that would allow all the current owners of gasoline-run cars to switch to electric cars at a minimal cost."

Since, it mentions that the plan allows only for current owners, we cannot say that the new cars(increase in number of cars) will be the electric cars and not the gasoline-cars.

I think my comments above should help somewhat. Since the number of cars has already increased, even if we are only talking about current owners, we are covering a almost all of them.
Secondly, the first line of the argument says that 99% of the people who drive for more than 2000 miles a year already have a gasoline car - so almost all the heavy users of cars would get electric cars and therefore, the pollution should be reduced significantly.

Thus, option D does not weaken the argument.

Does this help?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________
Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 195
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Oct 2013, 06:41
eGMAT: Why are you assuming that the electric cars will be inconvenient? For all we know it can also be convenient to plug your car in the house and charge it rather than standing in line at the gas station. There can be several such assumptions.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2852
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Oct 2013, 09:43
1
1
mohnish104 wrote:
eGMAT: Why are you assuming that the electric cars will be inconvenient? For all we know it can also be convenient to plug your car in the house and charge it rather than standing in line at the gas station. There can be several such assumptions.

Hi Mohnish,

I am not assuming it. Electric cars may indeed be more convenient.

The reason why option C weakens the argument is that it brings in a new variable "convenience" which the argument has not even considered. The passage has so far focused on the costs. Now option C comes and say that "convenience" is more important than costs and you have not even looked at "convenience".

Wouldn't that make you less sure of the argument?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 64
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2014, 08:56
I just wanted to confirm if such type of ambiguous questions do appear in GMAT as well??
As the questions I have seen in the OG and other GMAT official sources, options which require too vague assumptions (obv if it is not an assumption question), are rare. The OA of this question is also of similar type.
In fact, I have read from different sources(manhattan cr strategy guide) that weakening type questions should not have any additional evidence to ans. The option should just weaken either the conclusion or the assumption of the argument.
Please if any expert could clear it.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2852
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jan 2014, 19:06
Sukant2010 wrote:
I just wanted to confirm if such type of ambiguous questions do appear in GMAT as well??
As the questions I have seen in the OG and other GMAT official sources, options which require too vague assumptions (obv if it is not an assumption question), are rare. The OA of this question is also of similar type.
In fact, I have read from different sources(manhattan cr strategy guide) that weakening type questions should not have any additional evidence to ans. The option should just weaken either the conclusion or the assumption of the argument.
Please if any expert could clear it.

Hi Sukant,

Thank you for posting this query.

I think how we define something "vague" is actually vague itself. I suggest that you look at the official question (OG13 Q94) and the discussion around this in the below thread:

as-a-construction-material-bamboo-is-as-strong-as-steel-and-135997.html

The correct option in the above question requires you to understand/assume where multistory buildings will be required most. If we say this is vague assumption or additional information required to make this option correct, then essentially we are going against the official question.

Regarding what you read in Manhattan or other guides, I am not sure what you mean when you say it should require additional evidence. A correct weakening choice is an additional evidence (i.e. in addition to the argument) that weakens your belief in the conclusion. Now, if you think (I am just guessing) that a correct choice should not bring rely on new information to make it correct, then look at below official question:

twenty-years-ago-balzania-put-in-place-regulations-130755.html

The correct option is C, which relies on information after "because" in the option statement. So, the first part of option C will not explain the paradox unless we know the part after "because". So, the option gives you two pieces of information which complement each other to explain the paradox and hence make the choice correct.

Let me know if you still have questions.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 64
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jan 2014, 15:49
1
Hi Chiranjeev,
Thanx for ur response. As I said, I have seen very rare such questions. But in the example question you have given, the ans is a little bit clear as there is no other option actually targeting any disadvantage of bamboos over steel and concrete. In fact, in the question all the options assumed something or other and finally, I could easily mark option (b) because of the above said reason. In the current question being discussed, I can clearly see from option (a) that if there are people who won't spend any money when they actually required to, how can govt get the funds or how can govt provide these subsidized electric cars.
U are right that sometimes, we have to assume something to get the right answer, but in this question from option (a), I can explicitly tell that govt won't be able to do so if people aren't willing any more to buy even if they have told the opposite in the surveys. I actually donot have to assume anything. This is quite clear.
But in option (c), firstly, I have to assume that electric cars are more convenient that gasoline cars ( hell of an assumption, considering the fact that 'convenience' word is not even used once during the passage). I say I am an expert and gasoline cars are more convenient than electric cars. Then, option (c) cant be the answer. This was actually what I meant by saying 'vague' assumptions because we are taking too far fetched information to prove a point.
The only concern for govt is funds and an interested market; option (a) destroys the second point (interested market). Govt cannot sell cars if they donot get an interested market. From option (c), we are also (though by taking such assumptions) attacking the second point (an interested market), but via option (a) we donot have to assume anything that is far beyond the scope of the passage.
You can check all examples of OG as well in which assumptions are being taken in the options, but there will be explicit assumptions such as the one you showed. Never will there be any question in which an option explicitly answers the question and an option which answers by assuming way too much.
I think I have made my point. Please correct me wherever I am wrong...
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2852
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2014, 00:42
Sukant2010 wrote:
Hi Chiranjeev,
Thanx for ur response. As I said, I have seen very rare such questions. But in the example question you have given, the ans is a little bit clear as there is no other option actually targeting any disadvantage of bamboos over steel and concrete. In fact, in the question all the options assumed something or other and finally, I could easily mark option (b) because of the above said reason. In the current question being discussed, I can clearly see from option (a) that if there are people who won't spend any money when they actually required to, how can govt get the funds or how can govt provide these subsidized electric cars.
U are right that sometimes, we have to assume something to get the right answer, but in this question from option (a), I can explicitly tell that govt won't be able to do so if people aren't willing any more to buy even if they have told the opposite in the surveys. I actually donot have to assume anything. This is quite clear.
But in option (c), firstly, I have to assume that electric cars are more convenient that gasoline cars ( hell of an assumption, considering the fact that 'convenience' word is not even used once during the passage). I say I am an expert and gasoline cars are more convenient than electric cars. Then, option (c) cant be the answer. This was actually what I meant by saying 'vague' assumptions because we are taking too far fetched information to prove a point.
The only concern for govt is funds and an interested market; option (a) destroys the second point (interested market). Govt cannot sell cars if they donot get an interested market. From option (c), we are also (though by taking such assumptions) attacking the second point (an interested market), but via option (a) we donot have to assume anything that is far beyond the scope of the passage.
You can check all examples of OG as well in which assumptions are being taken in the options, but there will be explicit assumptions such as the one you showed. Never will there be any question in which an option explicitly answers the question and an option which answers by assuming way too much.
I think I have made my point. Please correct me wherever I am wrong...

Hi Sukant,

I see that you have some good understanding of the official questions. Let me put here two points to explain my case: one in favor of option C and one against option A.

1. In option C, even if you ignore "convenience" part, there is one more information embedded in option C as I explain in my detailed solution. Option C also says that people near retirement age constitute more than 50% of the population. Now, we know from the argument that the government's plan relies on a survey of middle-aged people.

Option C suggests that the government's plan might not work for a majority of population (unless you assume that the priorities of both the categories of people are same).

In other words, option C suggests that the surveyed people are actually not representative of the population. Now, since the argument relies on the survey results, the argument is weakened by option C. Actually, some official questions are actually built around this idea of representative sample. You can refer to my article on Representative Samples:

article-representative-sample-a-concept-tested-in-gmat-cr-158832.html

2. The problem with option A is "some". It suggests that some people will not switch to electric cars. Right?

Now, an important point to consider here is that does the argument require all people to switch for the plan to be successful. The answer is No.

Even if 10% of the people don't switch, the plan will very likely to succeed.

This plan is going to affect the population of the whole country. It is rather expected that there would be some people who will not switch. The plan does not rely on or expect all people to switch.

Just because we know some people will not switch, our belief in the plan does not go down.

On the other hand, if option A had suggested 50% of the people will not switch, then it might be correct.

I hope it helps.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________
Intern
Joined: 09 Apr 2018
Posts: 20
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Nov 2018, 05:25
Having read the OA and the discussion here, this questions sounds a Low Quality one. The assumptions are just too many.

A. Between 1% and 100% people won't switch. "Some" NEVER ensures LESS then 50%, thus, a definite scenario exists in which this very well can stop the plan from succeeding.

C. Assumptions:
Assumption 1: All/Most people near retirement age have a consideration towards convenience.
Chief consideration is between "convenience to drive" and "cost to drive", NOT cost of buying a new car. Nowhere it's mentioned that Electric cars are cheaper to drive.
"Chief consideration" towards A over B.
Assumption 2: All/Most people will ALWAYS go with their Chief Consideration.
Assumption 3: Electric Cars are LESS convenient to Drive.
Finally, 20% reduction can come with 20% people switching to Electric Cars, lets say 60% people are near retirement age, out of rest, there is HIGH PROBABILITY that at least 20% people would be there who would switch. What is middle-age? 40s, 30s? 50-100% Middle Aged people would buy Electric Cars.
Assumption 4: Near retirement and retired people DO NOT DRIVE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS than Middle aged people. What if retired people drive only 200 kms a month, while middle-aged ones drive 2000. In that case, it doesn't matter if they switch or not to.

The point I am trying to make is, this question needs to grill down on so many things and still keep the ambiguity. Generally, of all the OGs I have completed, I have seen questions of almost every type where one needs to make Assumptions, but none this far-fetched.

In other questions shared as exampled in this discussion, for instance the Bamboo question, I find them far different from this, because the choices are such that one may eliminate others.
C might be a better choice, if it mentioned Convenience Vs Cost (open ended) or Convenience Vs Cost to Buy. In that case, it's easier to assume that replacing a car comes with some inconvenience which near retirement people don't wish to do.
Re: Per a recent survey carried out in Rambo City, capital of Papula count   [#permalink] 30 Nov 2018, 05:25

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 28 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by