Last visit was: 09 Jul 2025, 05:08 It is currently 09 Jul 2025, 05:08
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
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 9 July 2025
Posts: 102,604
Own Kudos:
739,737
 [3]
Given Kudos: 97,717
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 102,604
Kudos: 739,737
 [3]
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
dkpkoti
Joined: 23 Aug 2024
Last visit: 04 Jun 2025
Posts: 69
Own Kudos:
82
 [1]
Given Kudos: 119
Location: India
GPA: 8.2
Posts: 69
Kudos: 82
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Shwarma
Joined: 10 Sep 2023
Last visit: 25 May 2025
Posts: 215
Own Kudos:
188
 [2]
Given Kudos: 65
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q82 V83 DI84
GPA: 4
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q82 V83 DI84
Posts: 215
Kudos: 188
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Abdelaali91
Joined: 23 Oct 2016
Last visit: 16 Jun 2025
Posts: 94
Own Kudos:
110
 [1]
Given Kudos: 50
Posts: 94
Kudos: 110
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The core argument is that because most of the houses were purchased by their owners at least 50 years back and the size of the families of their owners has increased considerably since then, the government's move to fine these owners is unjustified.

Answer choice E comes up with new information that refutes the hypothesis that the additinal floors will be used by family members.
User avatar
prantorboni
Joined: 28 Nov 2020
Last visit: 24 Jun 2025
Posts: 152
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 221
Products:
Posts: 152
Kudos: 149
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­The city administration is planning to impose severe fines on all house owners in the old part of the city who are adding extra floors to their houses. The government claims that the purchase agreement for these houses clearly states that the owners were to add no extra floors to the houses.The government’s move is unjustifiably harsh because most of these houses were purchased by their owners at least 50 years back and the size of the families of these owners has increased considerably since then. Surely, the owners cannot be fined if they want to create more space for their family members to stay in.

The government’s move is unjustifiably harsh because the families of these owners has increased considerably in last 50 years. Surely, the owners cannot be fined if they want to create more space for their family members to stay in.

To weaken this arguement, we need to find a way that states owners are not creating more space to accomodate their family members.

Now, consider option E,
(E) Most of the house owners in the old part of the city who are adding floors to their houses are doing so primarily for the purpose of renting out these floors.

This aligns with our presumtion. Answer, E.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 9 July 2025
Posts: 102,604
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 97,717
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 102,604
Kudos: 739,737
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
­The city administration is planning to impose severe fines on all house owners in the old part of the city who are adding extra floors to their houses. The government claims that the purchase agreement for these houses clearly states that the owners were to add no extra floors to the houses.The government’s move is unjustifiably harsh because most of these houses were purchased by their owners at least 50 years back and the size of the families of these owners has increased considerably since then. Surely, the owners cannot be fined if they want to create more space for their family members to stay in.

Which of the following most weakens the argument above?

(A) Constructing additional floors in houses situated in the old part of the city costs a huge sum of money as there is a severe water shortage in this area and the water needed for construction work has to be transported on diesel tankers.

(B) Construction of additional floors in houses situated in the old part of the city will ruin the aesthetics of this locality and make it unattractive for future buyers.

(C) The children of some of the house owners who stay in the old part of the city stay in other countries and not necessarily with the house owners.

(D) The addition of extra floors will not affect the market value of the houses in the old part of the city.

(E) Most of the house owners in the old part of the city who are adding floors to their houses are doing so primarily for the purpose of renting out these floors.
­

Official Explanation



Answer: E

The argument concludes that the house owners in the old part of the city should not be fined by the government for adding floors to their houses because they are doing so to provide extra space for their family members. To weaken the argument, we need to show that the reason why the house owners are doing so is not this but something else. E provides one such reason—if the house owners are adding these floors to rent them out then it has nothing to do with the argument’s reasoning that they are trying to make more space for their family members. Thus, this option immediately weakens the argument.

(A) If the house owners are ready to bear this extra cost, then who is the government to fine them? After all, they are still only just trying to provide extra space for their family members.

(B) This still doesn’t weaken the argument that the house owners are justified in adding these floors as they need extra space for their family members to stay.

(C) Family members does not only include children; there could be other family members staying with these house owners as well. Also, some doesn’t really tell us anything.

(D) If anything, this strengthens the argument by suggesting that increasing the market value of the houses is not the reason why the house owners are adding these floors.­
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts