Last visit was: 19 Jun 2024, 12:19 It is currently 19 Jun 2024, 12:19
Close
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
Your Progress

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 632
Own Kudos [?]: 4815 [143]
Given Kudos: 10
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
Tutor
Joined: 22 Oct 2012
Status:Private GMAT Tutor
Posts: 366
Own Kudos [?]: 2418 [46]
Given Kudos: 138
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT Focus 1:
735 Q90 V85 DI85
GMAT Focus 2:
735 Q90 V85 DI85
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V47
GRE 1: Q170 V168
Send PM
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jul 2011
Posts: 305
Own Kudos [?]: 114 [19]
Given Kudos: 3
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V40
Send PM
General Discussion
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 617
Own Kudos [?]: 2921 [8]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
7
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
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 parksmight join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over theirleadership. -> If this were realistic possibility then it would harm the conservation objective.Since the objective is to conserve natural resources of the parks.Thats Y they wannt to approach private players .Hence if this were correct argument falls apart.hence IMO (A)

B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieveconservation objectives. -> this says private players dont agree with the best ways to achieve conservation.What if they have better ways .this is a vague statement.There are possibilities they have better innovative methods and approaches than currently best ones ELIMINATE

C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have toseek contributions from major donors and general public. ->irrelevant here

D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain parkareas. -> irrelevant

E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the bestefforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered byinsufficient resources.
-> too specific examples -> this is outside scope of argument since giving ownership to private players does not lead to extinction of condor but other reasons could also lead to.ELIMINATE


IMO (A)
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 19
Own Kudos [?]: 23 [2]
Given Kudos: 18
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
2
Kudos
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)
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 781
Own Kudos [?]: 2597 [5]
Given Kudos: 5
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
2
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
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.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 10 Aug 2016
Posts: 32
Own Kudos [?]: 77 [0]
Given Kudos: 28
Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q47 V21
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
WE:Supply Chain Management (Manufacturing)
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
Why not E?

E suggests the failure of Private group despite no crunch of resources. This Shows that Conservation might not be better served by private group.

ChiranjeevSingh , please help !!
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4404
Own Kudos [?]: 31111 [1]
Given Kudos: 641
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
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.


Passage Analysis

Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands
There are at least a few people who support changing government owned enterprises to private ownership.

suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if
They say that the aims of nature conservation will be better served

private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system,
Private environmental groups were made in charge of running and financing the national park system.

which is now run by the government.
Currently the national park system is run by the government.

Question Stem Analysis

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

This is a weaken question stem. It asks which of the following if true weakens the argument most.

Prethinking

Weaken framework

What new information will decrease one’s belief in the statement that putting private environmental groups in charge of the national park instead of the government will better serve conservation objectives?

Given that some people who favor privatization support the idea.

Weakener 1- Private environmental groups may be infiltrated by people who have exploitative intentions.
Weakener 2-Private environmental groups do not have the management experience to handle conservation efforts of such a large scale.

Answer Choice Analysis

(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.
CORRECT
This option is in line with our weakener 1. Hence this is the correct answer choice.

(B) Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives.
INCORRECT.
Whether they agree or not, what will get implemented is what matters. Also, how the non-agreement hurts the conservation objectives is not clarified in the option. Hence this is an incorrect answer choice.

(C) If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.
INCORRECT
How the private environmental groups amass funds does not tell us why it is not better to give them control over the national park system. Hence this is an incorrect option.

(D) There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.
INCORRECT
The option does not say how this condition stands against meeting the conservation goals. Hence it is not the right answer.

(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.
INCORRECT
This option speaks about a specific conservation objective – and tells us that even with sufficient funds, private groups may not be able to achieve that particular objective. But the option does not provide any information to compare governmental management to private management for this objective. So, this does not in any way weaken the notion that private groups will do a better job than the government. Hence this cannot be the correct answer. ­
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Aug 2021
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 162
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
Are we having 2 weakener's for this question? Option A and Option B, with one having severe consequences than the other?

ChiranjeevSingh, please suggest!
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 3480
Own Kudos [?]: 5190 [0]
Given Kudos: 1431
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
Expert Reply
Light304 wrote:
Are we having 2 weakener's for this question? Option A and Option B, with one having severe consequences than the other?

ChiranjeevSingh, please suggest!

Only (A) truly weakens the argument.

Some other choices, such as (B) and (C), may seem to indicate that the suggestion is not a good one, but don't really.

For instance, what (B) says, that "private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives" doesn't mean that the plan of "putting governmental enterprises into private hands" is not a good one.

After all, even if private groups do not always agree on the best ways of achieving the objectives, they could still all use ways that are very effective in achieving the objectives. For instance, one group could operate one way, and another group could operate in a different way, and at the same time, both groups could have great success in achieving conservation objectives.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Oct 2023
Posts: 68
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]
Given Kudos: 70
Send PM
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
ChiranjeevSingh wrote:
AbhiGarg2007 wrote:
Why not E?

E suggests the failure of Private group despite no crunch of resources. This Shows that Conservation might not be better served by private group.

ChiranjeevSingh , please help !!

Let's look at this statement:

X is more intelligent than Y.

Can the above statement be weakened by saying "X cannot solve some z type of problem"?

The answer is No. Right?

Why?

Because we don't know whether Y can solve z type of problem. If both cannot solve one problem, we don't get to know anything about their relative intelligence.

Similarly, in this question, option E tells us that private environmental groups cannot do the given thing. But the question is: can government do that thing? We are not given. Thus, we can't say whether one is better than the other. Thus, this option has no impact.

Does it help?

Regards,
CJ

Isn't B also weakening the argument because it directly attacks the "conservation objectives" while in A it talks about change of leadership ­which may or may not cause exploitation of natural resources.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6954 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
821 posts