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

 It is currently 18 May 2019, 23:58

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 114
Schools: HBS '16, Stanford '16

Show Tags

07 Sep 2013, 09:42
The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper:

"As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement effots have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine."

Quote:
The argument claims that the efforts of authorities to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country have ironically resulted in increasing the illegal trade of cocaine. However, the argument makes unwarranted assumptions, and it doesn’t provide enough information to support some of its premises. In other words, the argument has several flaws that are going to be discussed next.

First, the argument readily assumes that there is a causal relationship between the authorities efforts and the increased traffic of cocaine. Maybe there is an alternative explanation. For instance, we could imagine that the increased sales of cocaine are result of a higher price of that drug, so criminals are focusing their efforts in selling more that drug. In this sense, the author must provide information able to eliminate alternative explanations to make more solid the argument.

Second, the argument also indicates that the authorities efforts have made drug traffickers to reduce the trade of marijuana and heroin. Again, that is a claim that lacks of enough evidence. Maybe the traffickers are selling less of these drugs because drug producers in foreign countries are having problems in processing those drugs because of a lack of raw material. Thus, if the author wants to make his or her argument more convincing, he or she has to provide more evidence about the possible causes of the reduced traffic of these illegal drugs.

Third, the author makes the unwarranted assumption that entering illegal drugs in the country is an important factor that explains how the drug trade behaves. Maybe most of the illegal drugs consumed in the country are not imported; perhaps the majority is produced locally. So, the author cannot conclude that preventing international traffic is a cause in the increased sales of heroine. Therefore, the author must show how representative are imported drugs in the market of illegal drugs.

In conclusion, the author makes assumptions without enough evidence, and he or she doesn´t provide enough information to support some of his or her premises. In this sense, the author must provide the data required in the paragraphs above.

Thanks!
Princeton Review Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Posts: 158

Show Tags

08 Sep 2013, 22:03
this essay has all the main components necessary but lacks the complete analysis to get top scores. if your body paragraph introductions explained a little more than just saying your point, your score would be greatly improved. Also, avoid terms such as "will be discussed next" it is too informal for this type of essay. however, you have three good points and use good topic sentences. I would score this essay a 4 - 4.5
danzig wrote:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper:

"As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement effots have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine."

Quote:
The argument claims that the efforts of authorities to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country have ironically resulted in increasing the illegal trade of cocaine. However, the argument makes unwarranted assumptions, and it doesn’t provide enough information to support some of its premises. In other words, the argument has several flaws that are going to be discussed next.

First, the argument readily assumes that there is a causal relationship between the authorities efforts and the increased traffic of cocaine. Maybe there is an alternative explanation. For instance, we could imagine that the increased sales of cocaine are result of a higher price of that drug, so criminals are focusing their efforts in selling more that drug. In this sense, the author must provide information able to eliminate alternative explanations to make more solid the argument.

Second, the argument also indicates that the authorities efforts have made drug traffickers to reduce the trade of marijuana and heroin. Again, that is a claim that lacks of enough evidence. Maybe the traffickers are selling less of these drugs because drug producers in foreign countries are having problems in processing those drugs because of a lack of raw material. Thus, if the author wants to make his or her argument more convincing, he or she has to provide more evidence about the possible causes of the reduced traffic of these illegal drugs.

Third, the author makes the unwarranted assumption that entering illegal drugs in the country is an important factor that explains how the drug trade behaves. Maybe most of the illegal drugs consumed in the country are not imported; perhaps the majority is produced locally. So, the author cannot conclude that preventing international traffic is a cause in the increased sales of heroine. Therefore, the author must show how representative are imported drugs in the market of illegal drugs.

In conclusion, the author makes assumptions without enough evidence, and he or she doesn´t provide enough information to support some of his or her premises. In this sense, the author must provide the data required in the paragraphs above.

Thanks!

_________________
Special offer! Save \$250 on GMAT Ultimate Classroom, GMAT Small Group Instruction, or GMAT Liveonline when you use the promo code GCVERBAL250. Or, save \$150 on GMAT Self-Prep when you use the code GCVERBAL150. Enroll at www.princetonreview.com
Current Student
Joined: 03 May 2017
Posts: 45
Location: United States (NJ)
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
GRE 1: Q166 V160
GPA: 3.2

Show Tags

12 Jul 2017, 13:46
The argument claims that the enforcement efforts of the authorities to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country have resulted in an increase in the illegal use of cocaine. This conclusion is based on the premise that as the authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country, many drug traffickers have switched from marijuana or heroin to cocaine. The argument is based on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that that the drug traffickers have switched from marijuana and heroin to cocaine because of an increased vigilance from the authorities. However, there is no evidence provided to support this assumption. In fact, the argument states that marijuana is bulky and heroin has a small market. Hence, it leads one to infer that due to these reasons, the drug traffickers have switched to cocaine. The argument fails to establish the correlation between an increased vigilance of authorities to the increase in the cocaine trafficking. Hence, this assumption is not valid.

Second, the argument does not provide any data regarding how successful the traffickers are in attempting to smuggle cocaine in the country. In order to access the success or failure of the authorities in diminishing the trafficking, it is necessary to analyze this information. For example, even if many traffickers have now switched to cocaine, there is no evidence that they are actually being successful in doing so. Therefore, without this crucial information, this assumption is not very sound.

Third, the argument does not present any statistics of cocaine usage before and after the increased vigilance from the authorities. The argument merely provides a weak reasoning that since many drug traffickers have switched to cocaine, there is an increase in the cocaine usage. However, there is no evidence cited to support this assumption. It is quite possible that even though there is an increase in the availability of cocaine, there is no increase in its usage. Hence, this assumption is not convincing.

In conclusion, without further evidence, the argument stands unsubstantiated and open to debate. The author must provide further evidence as stated above to make the argument more compelling.
Display posts from previous: Sort by