The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake destroyed over half the city and cha

Question

Which of the following best completes the passage below?

The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake destroyed over half the city and changed the development of the California economy, but much of the damage was actually caused by fire. It has been estimated that as much as 90% of the total destruction was a result of fire damage rather than movement of the earth. This figure is likely exaggerated, however, because the nearly universal practice of insuring San Francisco properties against fire but not earthquake damage all but guaranteed that ………..

A) most damage to the city was blamed on fire
B) the city would eventually be rebuilt
C) insurance companies were forced to offer earthquake coverage
D) residents subsequently moved to other cities where earthquake coverage was available
E) buildings not damaged by fire were never repaired

Which of the following best completes the passage below?

The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake destroyed over half the city and changed the development of the California economy, but much of the damage was actually caused by fire. It has been estimated that as much as 90% of the total destruction was a result of fire damage rather than movement of the earth. This figure is likely exaggerated, however, because the nearly universal practice of insuring San Francisco properties against fire but not earthquake damage all but guaranteed that .

most damage to the city was blamed on fire
the city would eventually be rebuilt
insurance companies were forced to offer earthquake coverage
residents subsequently moved to other cities where earthquake coverage was available
buildings not damaged by fire were never repaired

OA is A...pls somebdy care to explain...the meaning of the last sentence of the passage and the reason for A..

ichha148 · Answer

A looks correct

This figure is likely exaggerated, however, because the nearly universal practice of insuring San Francisco properties against fire but not earthquake damage all but guaranteed that .most damage to the city was blamed on fire

pls explain the above line...i have included the ans in it.. To me it dsnt make sense

This line tries to say that most damage was blamed on fire so, buildings can claim insurance money 
If the building clamis that the damage is because of Earth quake then there will be no money.

Well, i am not good in explaining.let me know if you are still confused , i will try to provide better explaination

rohansherry · Answer

Yes the reasoning is correct .... I thought about it before going through the options but ....the A and the last sentence dsnt mean that .....Also i m least aware what does it mean...pls explain the sentecne language.and how does it explain

ichha148 · Answer

I did not understand this part - the A and the last sentence dsnt mean that ? Please elaborate

vanilla · Answer

I guess this means that option A and E are similar in meaning. I also agree with this. Both seem to convey the same message.

rohansherry · Answer

This figure is likely exaggerated, however, because the nearly universal practice of insuring San Francisco properties against fire but not earthquake damage all but guaranteed that .most damage to the city was blamed on fire

pls explain the above line...i have included the ans in it.. To me it dsnt make sense

pls explain the above line...i have included the ans in it.. To me it dsnt make sense

ruplun · Answer

Can u explain ...the meaning of "however" here...

BangOn · Answer

Estimation: as much as 90% of the total destruction was a result of fire damage rather than movement of the earth.

The fig. above is questionable and that contrast is introduced by 'However'. This is because protection against fire is provided by insurance but same is not true for earthquake.

gowrinkishore · Answer

It has been estimated that as much as 90% of the total destruction was a result of fire damage rather than movement of the earth. However, this figure is likely to be an exaggerated one.

The role of 'however' is to indicate a contrast or contradictory opinion.

In those times, San Francisco properties had insurance against fire damage, but none against earthquake damage. So what would the building owners do? To claim insurance, it is likely that they would have claimed that the buildings were damaged by fire, rather than by the earthquake. Thus, some of the buildings would have been damaged by the earthquake, but would have been categorized under fire damage. This is why the figure of 90% is likely to have been an exaggerated estimate.
Hope this is clear.

Aviral1995 · Answer

VeritasKarishma   GMATNinja  could you please explain the question stem all but guaranteed.
Also, difference between A and c?

kshitijkuthiala · Answer

Can someone tell me the difference between A & E?

AnirudhaS · Answer

Estimated 90% fire damage.
This figure is exaggerated.
Why?
Because of the universal practice of insuring San Francisco properties against fire but not earthquake damage

This ensured what? 
If I were a home owner and my property got affected by earthquake, I am likely to blame the cause of damage on fire and recover some insurance money.

Option A says this exactly.

Rohitq · Answer

Context of passage - Earthquake ----- damage -----most damage by fire (approx. 90 %)
Author's argument -----> The stats given in the context, on the 90% of damage, is a bit exaggerated, he says---  however  (but he still agrees with the fact in the context), he believes that the blame to fire is not all wrong, since San Francisco has a pretty strong insurance for fires but still suffered most of the damage (This is the evidence to his conclusion)

And then he would end the argument by concluding that ---> the Blame on fire is not all wrong, the evidence of insurance calls for such conclusion.

A - Satisfies this logic

let me know if this makes sense or answers your doubts.

Cheers to learning!!

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake destroyed over half the city and cha

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The 1906 San Francisco Earthquake destroyed over half the city and cha

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards