It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 01:22

### 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

# Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 316

Kudos [?]: 79 [2], given: 3

Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 620 Q39 V35
GMAT 2: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q50 V40

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 13:53
2
KUDOS
I would go with A,
This was a pretty tricky one ,
this is my explanation for the argument :

UtterNonsense wrote:
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.
Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the
private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.
Possible solution.see explanation below.

B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
Possible solution.see explanation below.

C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions
from major donors and general public.
argument doesn't mention anything about contributions or if the government too is collecting contributions.Eliminate

D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
Maybe.but is not a strong enough argument.If anything competition will get us the best private environmental group. Eliminate

E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the
private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.
Irrelevant.Eliminate

Now the questions says :Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above
A although far fetched,is realistically possible. B is also a realistic possibility.
now if A and B were to come true. the consequences of A are much worse than B .
Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives but at least they try to achieve the conservation objective.
If someone looking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks joins the private environmental groups as member and eventually takes over their leadership : this situation is worse than the previous one.

Consequences of A > consequences of B
Hence A is a stronger argument.
_________________

My GMAT Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/third-time-s-a-charm-142800.html#p1145912
Quant Concept Videos : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/2012/07/gmat-quant-videos.html
My GMAT Blog : http://gmatlife.blogspot.com/

Kudos [?]: 79 [2], given: 3

Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 159

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 19:09
Tricky question.... Initially went with B. Option A is the right answer.

Option A talks about "abolishing all restrictions on exploitation the natural resources"

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 12

Intern
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: Schulich (A)
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 19:46
Nice explanation. Even the OG didn't explain it that well. Kudos.

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 28

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 20:29
Crazy question. Maybe it is late, but that whole stimulus threw me for a loop. The answers weren't any help either.
_________________

GMAT Day: Nov. 19, 2011

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 25 Jul 2011
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: Schulich (A)
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.13

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2011, 21:57
UtterNonsense wrote:
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.
Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?
The question suggests that conservative objectives would be better served if private environmental groups take over.
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the
private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. If people (in this case environmental groups) who seek to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources ( i.e. opposite of conservation) take over than the very motive of conservation is negated. Hence the right choice.
B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives. Close choice. The two parties might agree on ways to achieve conservation but it doesn't say that both of them are not interested in conservation. Hence it can not weaken.
C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions
from major donors and general public.
D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the
private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 7

Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 51

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

27 Jul 2011, 13:11
Good one! A it is.

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 6

Manager
Joined: 11 Feb 2011
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2011, 10:24

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 20 Nov 2010
Posts: 214

Kudos [?]: 42 [1], given: 38

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2011, 12:19
1
KUDOS
Couldn't comprehend. Tough one!
_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MGMAT 6 650 (51,31) on 31/8/11
MGMAT 1 670 (48,33) on 04/9/11
MGMAT 2 670 (47,34) on 07/9/11
MGMAT 3 680 (47,35) on 18/9/11
GMAT Prep1 680 ( 50, 31) on 10/11/11

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CR notes
http://gmatclub.com/forum/massive-collection-of-verbal-questions-sc-rc-and-cr-106195.html#p832142
http://gmatclub.com/forum/1001-ds-questions-file-106193.html#p832133
http://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-prep-critical-reasoning-collection-106783.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html?hilit=chineseburned

Kudos [?]: 42 [1], given: 38

Manager
Joined: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 127

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2011, 13:54
B is out of scope.

A is correct.

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 12

Intern
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 49

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 18

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2011, 16:52
I choose A.

Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.

Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.
As regulations/restrictions are framed by government, the government will never seek to abolish the restrictions. If the park is managed by private environmental groups, the people seeking to abolish the restrictions that stops them from exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private group and get those laws/restrictions abolished.
(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives. (might arrive at alternate ways to achieve the conservation objectives)
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public. [color=#0000FF](out of scope)

(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas. (this will lead to conservation)
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources. (out of scope)

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 18

Manager
Status: Bell the GMAT!!!
Affiliations: Aidha
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 43

Location: Singapore
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
GMAT 2: 620 Q49 V27
GMAT 3: 700 Q49 V36
WE: Other (Other)

### Show Tags

06 Sep 2011, 18:50
IMO A. The argument mentions that the conservation objectives would be better served by private environmental groups. In other words, the private environmental groups will conserve better whatever is given to them. In this case its parks and hence may be the natural resources. We can attempt to guess the answer with this information only. We are required to weaken the argument. So lets ask ourselves, why should the parks be handed over to private groups? The obvious answer is because they conserve better. Now what if they don't conserve or may be rather exploit the resources - in both these cases the conclusion will be weakened. A does that.

goalsnr wrote:
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.

Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. -It says people who dnt want resources to be conserved will join private groups and hence will eventually exploit the resources. CORRECT
(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.-we are not bothered about the ways to achieve the objective. Argument does not talk about the objectives at all.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.-out of scope
(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.again when you read this you should ask - so what?
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.
out of scope and very specific
_________________

If my post did a dance in your mind, send me the steps through kudos :)

Kudos [?]: 83 [0], given: 43

Manager
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2011, 01:09
A for me

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

_________________________
Try and you will succeed !

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Posts: 13

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 6

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2011, 08:09
got confused with stem - 'assuming it is a realistic possibility'

I thought A isn't a realistic possibility so didn't go for it!

Of course, the stem meant the opposite - that I should consider it a realistic possibility!

And so A it is....

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 6

Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 798

Kudos [?]: 846 [0], given: 5

Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2012, 12:04
goalsnr wrote:
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.

Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.
(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.
(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

In order to solve this type of CR problem (weaken the conclusion), you need to properly understand the argument structure, especially any key assumptions (unstated by required by the argument).

Here is the argument structure:
Some [people/groups] favor putting government enterprises under private control. Premise
The national park system is run by the government. Premise
Conservation efforts would be better served if private environmental groups operated/financed National Parks. Suggestion/Conclusion

Back to assumptions - they bridge the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion. In our case here the premises only establish that some people favor private control and the national parks are currently run by the government. How can we conclude anything about how well the conservation efforts will be served? We have to make assumptions about the private environmental groups ability to serve these conservation efforts. Our weakening answer will most strongly attack the assumption that private environmental groups can and will serve conservation efforts.

A. If people seeking to abolish evironmental regulations gained control over the private environmental groups running the national parks, we could no longer conclude that conservation efforts would be served. This seriously weakens the conclusion (suggestion).
B. This does weaken the argument somewhat because it casts some doubt on the ability to provide the BEST conservation efforts. The suggestion, however, is that private groups will better serve conservation efforts, not that they will always provide the best possible solutions. While it does cast some doubt, it does not invalidate the conclusion (suggestion) as A does.
C/D/E. All are out of scope.

A is correct.
_________________

Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

Kudos [?]: 846 [0], given: 5

Manager
Status: exam is close ... dont know if i ll hit that number
Joined: 06 Jun 2011
Posts: 187

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 1

Location: India
GMAT Date: 10-09-2012
GPA: 3.2
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2012, 21:17
completely missed that one

went with b
_________________

just one more month for exam...

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 1

Director
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 534

Kudos [?]: 360 [0], given: 75

Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2012, 07:10
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.

Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.
(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.
(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

If there will be the privatization of govt.enterprises then the "bad people" would be willing to join the pvt. groups in order to get advantages, they can abolisg the restrictions on exploitation on natural resources and hence ruin the environment for their own profits.

(A) wins
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Kudos [?]: 360 [0], given: 75

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 217

Kudos [?]: 415 [0], given: 121

Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Sep 2012, 10:04
A) gives us the reason why private environmental groups shouldn't be put in charge of operating and financing the national park system.
_________________

Kudos if you like the post!

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

Kudos [?]: 415 [0], given: 121

Intern
Joined: 26 Jun 2012
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 5

Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2013, 06:44
Its definitely A because A is the only answer that weakens the argument. A pretty easy one though.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 5

Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2013
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2013, 07:25
goalsnr wrote:
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.

Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?

(A) Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership. (A) Of course those who want to abolish the restrictions placed on exploiting the natural resources can not as well want to join the group that is working towards conservation. So I think A does it.
(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.
(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
(E) Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.

A is the correct answer. I initially took it to be C, just because the private could not possibly seek any contribution from general public. The sentence question states 'if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing'. I ruled C out and take A as my best answer.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 8

Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2013, 09:48
A: Think from a practical aspect. A private ( environmental) group is easier to be approached and the laws can be bent for revenue. This is not the same with the government. Thus, the situation mentioned is quite possible.

B:Things which might seem "best" to one might not seem the same to someone else. To one the best way to attain 700+ in GMAT might be to study day-i and day-out, while for someone else getting such score might be to study smart.
So, this is quite ambiguous.

(rest are quite irrelevant)

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 8

Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private   [#permalink] 02 Sep 2013, 09:48

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 48 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by