Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 03:03

### 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

# Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 276
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 900 [0], given: 325

Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2013, 19:51
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

41% (02:22) correct 59% (01:19) wrong based on 386 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled fines for infringement of traffic regulations. Since 2009, the number of serious car accidents in Laconia has decreased by 20 percent. Based on this evidence, it can be concluded that it was the increased fines that brought about the decrease in the number of serious car accidents.

Journalist: However, you must also consider that until 2009, the Laconian police force classified as serious all car accidents in which more than two vehicles were involved; starting in 2009, only accidents that involved more than three vehicles were considered serious.

The journalist attacks the politician’s argument by doing which of the following?

(A)Undermining the validity of the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends.

(B)Presenting additional information that suggests that evidence presented by the politician is not accurate.

(C)Suggesting that the politician uses evidence about few cases to draw a general conclusion.

(D)Presenting information that is more recent than information on which the politician’s argument is built.

(E)Implying that the politician manipulates information about the percent decrease to draw a conclusion about a number decrease.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by guerrero25 on 10 Jun 2013, 02:04, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Current Student
Joined: 04 Mar 2013
Posts: 69
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
Schools: Booth '17 (M)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
GPA: 3.66
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 27

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2013, 00:35
guerrero25 wrote:
Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled fines for infringement of traffic regulations. Since 2009, the number of serious car accidents in Laconia has decreased by 20 percent. Based on this evidence, it can be concluded that it was the increased fines that brought about the decrease in the number of serious car accidents.

Journalist: However, you must also consider that until 2009, the Laconian police force classified as serious all car accidents in which more than two vehicles were involved; starting in 2009, only accidents that involved more than three vehicles were considered serious.

The journalist attacks the politician’s argument by doing which of the following?

(A)Undermining the validity of the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends.

(B)Presenting additional information that suggests that evidence presented by the politician is not accurate.

(C)Suggesting that the politician uses evidence about few cases to draw a general conclusion.

(D)Presenting information that is more recent than information on which the politician’s argument is built.

(E)Implying that the politician manipulates information about the percent decrease to draw a conclusion about a number decrease.

C, D and E are not suitable. Out of A and B, A is more appropriate because B says that the journalist's evidence suggests that the politicians argument is not accurate. But the passage merely mentions that the basis of the statistic changed. So essentially the assumption behind the figure has changed but the figure itself cannot be deemed inaccurate
_________________

When you feel like giving up, remember why you held on for so long in the first place.

Intern
Joined: 21 Jun 2013
Posts: 44
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 129

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2013, 04:21
guerrero25 wrote:
Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled fines for infringement of traffic regulations. Since 2009, the number of serious car accidents in Laconia has decreased by 20 percent. Based on this evidence, it can be concluded that it was the increased fines that brought about the decrease in the number of serious car accidents.

Journalist: However, you must also consider that until 2009, the Laconian police force classified as serious all car accidents in which more than two vehicles were involved; starting in 2009, only accidents that involved more than three vehicles were considered serious.

The journalist attacks the politician’s argument by doing which of the following?

Clearly the contention is between A and B. Let's break the argument into evidences and assumptions.
Politician:
Evidence 1: 2009 GoL increased fines for traffic violation.
Evidence 2: Since 2009 SCA reduced by 20%.
Assumption: Increase in fine led to the decrease in number of SCA.

Journalist:
Evidence: Until 2009, SCA = accidents involving 2 cars. Starting 2009, SCA = accidents involving 3 cars.

(B)Presenting additional information that suggests that evidence presented by the politician is not accurate. Incorrect , because the evidence provided by the journalist talks only about the SCA and its meaning. It does not invalidate any of the evidences provided by the politician.
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 344
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 291

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2013, 02:10
I took 10 mins but finally figured out A
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10369
Followers: 998

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Dec 2014, 06:57
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.
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 355
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 126 [1] , given: 70

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2014, 22:24
1
KUDOS
guerrero25 wrote:
Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled fines for infringement of traffic regulations. Since 2009, the number of serious car accidents in Laconia has decreased by 20 percent. Based on this evidence, it can be concluded that it was the increased fines that brought about the decrease in the number of serious car accidents.

Journalist: However, you must also consider that until 2009, the Laconian police force classified as serious all car accidents in which more than two vehicles were involved; starting in 2009, only accidents that involved more than three vehicles were considered serious.

The journalist attacks the politician’s argument by doing which of the following?

(A)Undermining the validity of the assumption on which the politician’s argument depends.

(B)Presenting additional information that suggests that evidence presented by the politician is not accurate.

(C)Suggesting that the politician uses evidence about few cases to draw a general conclusion.

(D)Presenting information that is more recent than information on which the politician’s argument is built.

(E)Implying that the politician manipulates information about the percent decrease to draw a conclusion about a number decrease.

Politician: Increased fines-------- LED TO -------- decrease in the number of serious car accidents.

Assumption...1. Nothing else led to decrease in SCA.
2. SCAs did not lead to Increased fines.
3. It was not coincidental - that Increased fines and decrease in the number of serious car accidents happened simultaneously.

A. Correct...... see 1. above .... it was not fines but incorrect interpretation of what is SCA that led to the increase in SCA.

B. Wrong. EVIDENCE CANT BE WRONG.... Evidence is evidence..... interpretation may be wrong. Addl info may weaken the assumption but not negate a fact.......

Current Student
Status: Applied
Joined: 02 May 2014
Posts: 168
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
GPA: 3.35
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 46

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2014, 00:26
The choice A talks about the assumption. lets see how the journalist undermines the assumption.He gives additional information is correct but he is also undermining the assumption.Because for the politician to conclude that serious accidents decreases by 20 percent means he has to assume a situation that number of accidents had remained the same .But the journalist attacks this assumption by stating that the domain of what a serious has changed and that earlier what was considered a serious accident is now not considered. so this reason is the best. Hope this explanation helps.
Director
Joined: 23 Jan 2013
Posts: 586
Schools: Cambridge'16
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 41

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Mar 2016, 00:11
took 1'44'' to take A

Causation bias is clear after reading the Politician statement. And assumption is "no other reason for declining the accidents"

Journalist attacks these assumption
Chat Moderator
Joined: 04 Aug 2016
Posts: 441
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 43 [0], given: 107

Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2017, 21:16
The journalist agrees with the conclusion and evidence stated by the politician; however, he provides an alternate cause which could have led to the conclusion.

hence A
Re: Politician: Early in 2009, the government of Laconia tripled   [#permalink] 10 Apr 2017, 21:16
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Politician: The current crisis in mathematics 8 03 May 2017, 03:45
3 Because of an economic downturn in Laconia 6 17 Dec 2016, 06:09
8 Because the government of Laconia provided considerable tax 11 17 Feb 2017, 09:15
6 Until 2002, when Laconia became part of the tariff union, 7 14 Jul 2014, 01:24
5 Certain politicians in the country of Birangi argue that a 17 28 Oct 2015, 21:53
Display posts from previous: Sort by