GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Sep 2019, 02:59

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

The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 492
The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 06 Aug 2019, 03:03
16
34
Question 1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1883 sessions

68% (02:55) correct 32% (02:55) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1815 sessions

79% (00:54) correct 21% (01:18) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1823 sessions

17% (01:06) correct 83% (00:58) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1734 sessions

89% (00:29) correct 11% (00:41) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 5
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1707 sessions

71% (00:34) correct 29% (00:48) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 6
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1701 sessions

55% (01:14) correct 45% (01:14) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1685 sessions

62% (00:32) correct 38% (00:40) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 8
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 1681 sessions

54% (00:40) correct 46% (00:39) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently considered a cure-all for urban problems. It is erroneously assumed that if new residents can be diverted from existing centers, the present urban situation at least will get no worse. It is further and equally erroneously assumed that since European New Towns have been financially and socially successful, we can expect the same sorts of results in the United States.

Present planning, thinking, and legislation will not produce the kinds of New Town that have been successful abroad. It will multiply suburbs or encourage developments in areas where land is cheap and construction profitable rather than where New Towns are genuinely needed.

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers, accordingly, will face increasing burdens, and industry and commerce will seek escape. Unfortunately, this mechanism is already at work in some metropolitan areas.

The promoters of New Towns so far in the United States have been developers, builders, and financial institutions. The main interest of these promoters is economic gain. Furthermore, federal regulations designed to promote the New Town idea do not consider social needs as the European New Town plans do. In fact, our regulations specify virtually all the ingredients of the typical suburban community, with a bit of political rhetoric thrown in.

A workable American New Town formula should be established as firmly here as the national formula was in Britain. All possible social and governmental innovations as well as financial factors should be thoroughly considered and accommodated in this policy. Its objectives should be clearly stated, and both incentives and penalties should be provided to ensure that the objectives are pursued. If such a policy is developed, then the New Town approach can play an important role in alleviating America’s urban problems.
1. The passage contains information that answers which of the following questions?
(A) Where did the idea of New Towns originate?
(B) How does Britain’s New Town formula differ from that of other European countries?
(C) What is the purpose of building New Towns?
(D) What incentives and penalties will be necessary to make a New Town formula workable?
(E) Why have European New Towns been financially successful?



2. The author believes that New Towns are not being built where they are genuinely needed because
(A) the government offers developers incentives to build in other areas
(B) the promoters of New Town are motivated chiefly by self-interest
(C) few people want to live in areas where land is still cheap
(D) no studies have been done to determine the best locations
(E) federal regulations make construction in those areas less profitable



3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III



4. According to the passage, as compared with American New Towns, European New Towns have been designed with greater concern for
(A) social needs
(B) financial factors
(C) urban congestion
(D) the profits of developers and builders
(E) the environment



5. The author’s tone in discussing “developers, builders, and financial institutions” (lines 25-26) can best be described as
(A) critical
(B) pedantic
(C) evasive
(D) captious
(E) vitriolic



6. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes
which of the following about suburbs?
(A) They are a panacea for urban problems.
(B) They will soon be plagued by the same problems that now plague cities.
(C) They are poor models for New Towns.
(D) They drive up property values in inner cities.
(E) They alleviate some, but not all, of America’s urban problems.



7. It can be inferred from the passage that the author considers the present American New Town formula to be
(A) thoroughly considered
(B) insufficiently innovative
(C) potentially workable
(D) overly restrictive
(E) financially sound



8. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) arguing for a change in policy
(B) exploring the implications of novel idea
(C) comparing and contrasting two manifestations of the same phenomenon
(D) proposing a radically new solution to an old problem
(E) summarizing recent research on a topic



Originally posted by eyunni on 03 Dec 2007, 20:42.
Last edited by SajjadAhmad on 06 Aug 2019, 03:03, edited 1 time in total.
Updated complete topic (85).
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 128
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Dec 2007, 06:21
2
C
B
C
A
A
C
B
A

I disagreed most with previous posts on 3, 6 and 7.

3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III

I don't think it can be E, simply because the number of low-income residents will not increase (rather the proportion of low to high income residents will increase)

6. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes
which of the following about suburbs?
(A) They are a panacea for urban problems.
(B) They will soon be plagued by the same problems that now plague cities.
(C) They are poor models for New Towns.
(D) They drive up property values in inner cities.
(E) They alleviate some, but not all, of America’s urban problems.

The little said about suburbs includes: "our regulations specify virtually all the ingredients of the typical suburban community" - so already the American New Town is based on suburbs, and it isn't working too well.

7. It can be inferred from the passage that the author considers the present American New Town formula to be
(A) thoroughly considered
(B) insufficiently innovative
(C) potentially workable
(D) overly restrictive
(E) financially sound

I think there are a few clues to this answer.

"A workable American New Town formula should be established" - so it's not thoroughly considered or workable.

I'd love to see the OAs.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 763
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2007, 22:23
2
marcodonzelli wrote:
I thought 3 could be E.
Look at this period: Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers......

It seems that the tax base will lower, that some residents will go away and that it will be a concentration of low income groups....so why is it A and not E?

Moreover, could someone explain me the eigth question? Please, more passages like this!!!


#3 says that it will increase the NUMBER of low-income residents. The passage just says it will increase the CONCENTRATION of low-income residents because many high-income citizens will leave. This leaves a higher percentage of low-income left, but it's not causing more to move in.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 949
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2007, 22:06
1
I thought 3 could be E.
Look at this period: Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers......

It seems that the tax base will lower, that some residents will go away and that it will be a concentration of low income groups....so why is it A and not E?

Moreover, could someone explain me the eigth question? Please, more passages like this!!!
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2014
Posts: 3
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 May 2015, 04:22
1
Radhika11 wrote:
would someone explain why in Q3, stmt 2 is not considered in the answer ?


Because if new towns were able to divert the residents from existing ones then the problem would have been solved.
"Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further"

Regards,
Appy
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 558
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 07 Sep 2016, 05:35
1
jlgdr wrote:
Insufficiently Innovative? Give me a break!!


Makes perfect sense
FROM THE PASSAGE :- "Federal regulations designed to promote the New Town idea do not consider social needs as the European New Town plans do. In fact, our regulations specify virtually all the ingredients of the typical suburban community, with a bit of political rhetoric thrown in."

Essentially just a overrated suburb and not with an ounce of originality in, social concern or actual urban problem. American policymaker just take a suburban model, add some stupid political agenda and political speech about society and blah blah to it to it and then assumed/pretended that they created a new town.
_________________
Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Originally posted by LogicGuru1 on 24 Jun 2016, 02:43.
Last edited by LogicGuru1 on 07 Sep 2016, 05:35, edited 2 times in total.
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3585
Reviews Badge
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2017, 02:29
1
1
sleepynut wrote:
hi,appreciate your help :-)
I agree with your reasoning.But that is not my question
I wonder why (ii) is incorrect in question #3 as the OA is (A).


Hi,

As explained by one of our friends above, this option is slightly on the difficult side.

It says it will divert residents from exciting cities. Which residents? Low income or high income? This thing is not clear.

Let's say this option meant Low income, in that case it would be good for the cities while the same is not true the other way round.

I hope that makes sense. :)
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3585
Reviews Badge
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2017, 06:41
1
Can someone please explain why Statement 2 in question 3 is incorrect?

Statement 2: The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.

We are already given in the passage that

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens

I think this means the same what option B is saying.

Please confirm.
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 20
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V30
Reviews Badge
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2017, 23:48
abhimahna wrote:
Can someone please explain why Statement 2 in question 3 is incorrect?

Statement 2: The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.

We are already given in the passage that

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens

I think this means the same what option B is saying.

Please confirm.


3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas. This option would weaken existing city if it explicitly stated high income citizens instead of residents because residents could include low income citizens. Also other areas is not specified. Other areas could be another Urban city which will not make any difference.
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3585
Reviews Badge
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 May 2017, 05:32
arvind910619 wrote:
Hi,

Can any one explain why Question 3 has A as answer.
Please throw some light behind the reasoning of the answer.


Hi,

These lines answer your question.

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income.

So, if they are unable to pay tax, it means "They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities."
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3585
Reviews Badge
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 May 2017, 23:47
sleepynut wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone explain #3?
I wonder why not (C).It is mentioned that ill-considered projects will weaken the existing cities further by drawing away high-income citizens.

Thanks


Hi,

If high income citizens move from the cities, the proportion of low income citizens would increase rather than the number.

Let's say we have 25 low income and 75 high income citizens. Proportion of Low income = 25/100 = 1/4.

But now, say 50 high income citizens moved away. Proportion of Low income = 25/50 = 1/2.

So, even if the low income citizens remain the same, we have their proportion increased and not the actual number.

I hope that makes sense. :)
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Nov 2017
Posts: 9
CAT Tests
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Apr 2018, 06:54
3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III


II. is not the answer as it would be sagacious to infer that, New Towns would not divert all the existing residents. Only high income residents who no longer consider that place matches their status would migrate to other cities.
III. Proportion and not the actual number of low income residents is going to increase, hence III can't be selected.

So A) is the answer.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 100
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Nov 2018, 17:47
Akshit03 wrote:
vivekdixit07 wrote:
GMATBLACKBELT wrote:
C
B
C
A
A
C
C
A


For 7 i was downt to B and C and just guessed. I can see why either could be correct here and i really am not gunna argue why C is incorrect.

However, question 3... I cannot see how this is A. It doesnt make any sense actually.

3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.
III. They will increase the number of low-income residents in existing cities.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III

"tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income. The remaining taxpayers, accordingly, will face increasing burdens, and industry and commerce will seek escape. Unfortunately, this mechanism is already at work in some metropolitan areas. "

E is def incorrect, it just says the proportion of low income residents will increase not the actual amount of people. so III is out.

Now I and II, it states in the passage that people will be drawn away so why is II not correct????


As quoted by you above, author nowhere mentions that it will divert "residents" . It does mention " drawing away high income citizens" but these citizens are just a part of city residents"



Drawing away income citizens is same as diverting them, If they are drawn away, then it means the city is diverting them. I don't see why 2 should be wrong as per my understanding. Can you explain?


The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas is not accurate ...

Per the passage -- its only a problem if financial well off people leave from existing cities

Per option II -- it doesn't say which kind of residents ...if it said "rich citizens" then option II is right ...but given it doesn't state that ...its plausible that the residents being discussed are poor ..

The passage does NOT comment on if poor people leave the city for another location ...
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Apr 2018
Posts: 104
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Marketing
GMAT 1: 600 Q45 V28
GPA: 3.8
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Nov 2018, 19:54
3. According to the author, ill-considered New Towns will tend to weaken existing cities in which of the following ways?
I. They will cause an erosion in the tax base of existing cities.
II. The will divert residents from existing cities to other areas.

"but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and"
means diverting residents. Why option II is incorrect then
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Jan 2018
Posts: 41
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V40
GMAT 3: 720 Q50 V37
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jan 2019, 08:16
Any idea why option C. I and II is incorrect in Question 3.
In the passage it clearly says:

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income.

I would think high-income citizens are sub-set of the residents of the city.
Would like to see the official explanation from Manhattan on this.
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Nov 2018
Posts: 146
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GPA: 3.99
WE: Engineering (Computer Hardware)
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Aug 2019, 11:18
souvikgmat1990 wrote:
Any idea why option C. I and II is incorrect in Question 3.
In the passage it clearly says:

Such ill-considered projects not only will fail to relieve pressures on existing cities but will, in fact, tend to weaken those cities further by drawing away high-income citizens and increasing the concentration of low-income groups that are unable to provide tax income.

I would think high-income citizens are sub-set of the residents of the city.
Would like to see the official explanation from Manhattan on this.


In the paragraph it says that the suburbs will tend to drive away high income citizens. But the option says it will drive away residents of the city. Now residents can include both low as well as high income. High income are small subset of residents. Hence cannot be use to justify the option. For eg: if we say people of New-York don't like football can be generalize it to say all the people of USA don't like football. Hence II is incorrect.

Hope the explanation clarifies your doubt.

Please give kudos if you like the explanation.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2019, 11:18
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The idea of building “New Towns” to absorb growth is frequently consid

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne