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

 It is currently 22 Apr 2019, 09:55

### 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

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

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 02 May 2017
Posts: 11

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2017, 21:32
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
“This city should be able to improve existing services and provide new ones without periodically raising the taxes of
the residents. Instead, the city should require that the costs of services be paid for by developers who seek approval
for their large new building projects. After all, these projects can be highly profitable to the developers, but they can
also raise a city’s expenses and increase the demand for its services.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
****************************************************************************************************************************************

The argument claims that the developers, who seek approval for their large new building projects, should pay for the city's new and existing cost of services instead of periodically raising the taxes of city's residents. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on which it should be evaluated.
The conclusion is based on several assumptions, for which there are no clear evidences. Hence the argument is weak and unconvincing.
First, the argument vaguely states that the new and existing cost of services should be covered by the developers and not by periodically raising
taxes of the residents. The argument does not mention what kind of services does the city have and the city require, he fails to evaluate whether these services are required by the city or not,or if the developers would have any incentive to pay for these services. For example, if the services that the city needs is better education system,
what is the incentive for the developer to invest in education system when his primary interest is to build real estate.Another example would be if the city demands to have wider roads, but in order to do so , there would be a need cut the trees lining the roads, so in that case, is that a valid service? In order to strengthen this assumption , the author should clearly mention the services the city intends to improve or add and if the developer would be willing to contribute.
The author further fails to mention, whether the developers can afford to pay the equivalent amount of money as the city would expect from its residents.
For example the revenue that is retrieved from taxes, is a million dollars but the developers worth is in hundreds of thousands, the developer would never be able to pay for the services.To strengthen, the author should provide additional information, such as , the developers would only contribute some percentage of their earnings towards the city's services.It would help us evaluate if the developers can afford to contribute towards these services. Without these additional factors, this assumption is a stretch and unsubstantiated.
Second, the arguments states that the large new building projects are highly profitable to the developers. The author fails to mention any basis to reach this conclusion.
He does not provide any additional evidence, on how he was able to evaluate the profitability of those projects without them even being built. Also, the profitability could be relative.For example, a few gain of hundreds of dollars could also be profitable in the eyes of the author but it could be possible that the city can not afford new services for the whole city from a few hundred dollars.The author needs to provide more evidence to strengthen this assumption, such as, he could provide the annual profit earned by the developer, or what is estimated profitability of these projects based on relevant credible studies.The lack of this additional evidence makes the assumption weak.
Finally, the argument claims that the development projects increase the city's expense and it's demand for the services. the author, again, fails to mention the basis of this assumption.The cause and effect relationship between development of a project and increase in city's expense is unestablished. For example, if the author mentioned that with new development project,the city's tourism expenses rise, there is no direct relationship between one another. This assumption could be strengthened by the author if he provided more details.For instance, the author should provide the expenses that would directly be impacted by new development projects, such as water , electricity, etc.Without clear examples and their impacts, this assumption is unconvincing.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasoning. It could be strengthened if the author provided relevant key factors.In order to assess the merits of this decision, one must have the full knowledge of all the contributing factors.However as it stands, this argument is weak and unsubstantiated.
Intern
Joined: 05 Jul 2017
Posts: 2

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2017, 04:49
Hi Chokila,

Great job writing on a difficult topic! I think this AWA is more difficult than some others, because the paragraph didn't give a lot of information to work with. You've extrapolated some excellent points though.

While I'm not an expert at AWA grading, I have taken the GMAT twice myself and so I've got some experience writing the AWA and seeing how my own writing was judged. On that experience, I'd rate your writing as sitting between a 3 and a 4. Here are some critiques and reasons I would grade it as such:

- frequent minor errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics
- develops and organizes ideas satisfactorily but struggles in connecting them with transitions
- does not convey meaning as clearly as it could

For example:

frequent minor errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics:
1. ...for which there are no clear evidences. Hence the... "evidences" should be "evidence"
2. ...wider roads, but in order to do so , there... to strengthen this assumption , the author should ...provide additional information, such as , the developers would... There are a lot of little errors like this, where you've got space leading a comma, that could be easily eliminated if you'd left time for yourself to read back through your essay after you were done. You've made your writing longer than it really needs to be - instead, make it a bit shorter and spend time reading through it before submitting it. It'll make a world of difference.

I hope this advice doesn't agravate you and is indeed helpful! You are well on your way to being a great AWA writer. Make sure you get a little more practice on the little things that can be easy to miss.
Intern
Joined: 02 May 2017
Posts: 11

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2017, 06:55
Hi Ben
Thanks for the feedback. Could you please highlight where I was not able to convey the meaning clearly.
And again thanks for the feedback.
Display posts from previous: Sort by