It is currently 11 Dec 2017, 18:09

### 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

# The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 133 [1], given: 0

The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 05:02
1
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:15) correct 44% (01:30) wrong based on 309 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?

A)Major industry foresaw the drop in employment.

B)Some major industries had appreciable capital reserves.

C)An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

D)The government could pass legislation mandating that major industries set aside a fixed amount as capital reserves every year.

E)The drop in the employment rate was more severe this year than last.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 133 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 06:18
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?

C)An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

This clearly mentiones that just increasing capital reserves will not stop the employement rate. There are other factors/variables that can affect the employement rate.

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 24 Apr 2008
Posts: 161

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 07:14
I go with C as well!

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 653

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 7

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 07:44
aaron22197 wrote:
The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?

A)Major industry foresaw the drop in employment.

B)Some major industries had appreciable capital reserves.

Conclusion is "if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.". This stament is saying that this was already the case and still we experienced the employment decline. Please explain the flaw in this choice.

C)An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

D)The government could pass legislation mandating that major industries set aside a fixed amount as capital reserves every year.

E)The drop in the employment rate was more severe this year than last.

I am confused between b and c

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 7

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 07:51
rao_1857 wrote:
aaron22197 wrote:
The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?

A)Major industry foresaw the drop in employment.

B)Some major industries had appreciable capital reserves.

Conclusion is "if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.". This stament is saying that this was already the case and still we experienced the employment decline. Please explain the flaw in this choice.

C)An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

D)The government could pass legislation mandating that major industries set aside a fixed amount as capital reserves every year.

E)The drop in the employment rate was more severe this year than last.

I am confused between b and c

The author does not quantify 'some'. We really can't say how many. What if some = 2?? would that be a sufficient sample to generalize on??....nope!!

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 166

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

Location: Vienna, Austria
Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 08:44
guys - is it now C or B ?

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 22 May 2007
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 133 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2008, 08:59
ashwin is correct. C it is.

Kudos [?]: 133 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 14 Nov 2008
Posts: 66

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 1

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2013, 10:31
The conclusion is that "if major industries increase their capital reserves, the
employment rate will not decline in the future." Why? Because major industry did
not have capital reserves. The author assumes that having capital reserves is
sufficient to prevent a decline in the employment rate. We are asked to cast
doubt (i.e., weaken) the author's claim.
(A) Whether the drop in employment was foreseen does not relate to the core of
the argument, which is that capital reserves will prevent another decline in the
employment rate.
(B) The fact that some major industries had appreciable capital reserves does
not contradict the claim that an increase in these reserves would prevent a future
drop in employment rates.
(C) CORRECT. The author neglects to take into account the fact that other
factors, such as an increase in labor costs, could adversely affect the
employment rate. For example, if the cost of labor becomes prohibitively
expensive, even with increased reserves, the employment rate could decline.
(D) Legislation mandating a certain level of reserves does not contradict the
claim that increased reserves would prevent a drop in employment rates.
(E) The fact that the employment rate was more severe this year than last does
not contradict the claim that an increase in reserves would prevent a drop in the
employment rate.

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 1

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10155

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2015, 02:46
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.

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10155

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2016, 03:33
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.

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 30 Oct 2012
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 19

Location: India
WE: Marketing (Manufacturing)
Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2016, 03:47
aaron22197 wrote:
The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by predictions of slow economic growth in the coming year. However, those predictions would not have affected the employment rate if it had not been for the lack of capital reserves of major industries. So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the validity of the argument above?

A)Major industry foresaw the drop in employment.

B)Some major industries had appreciable capital reserves.

C)An increase in labor costs could adversely affect the employment rate.

D)The government could pass legislation mandating that major industries set aside a fixed amount as capital reserves every year.

E)The drop in the employment rate was more severe this year than last.

Option C.
This options states the other factors which can affect the employment rate.
_________________

It’s not over until I say it’s over

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 19

Manager
Joined: 09 Sep 2013
Posts: 83

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2016, 04:53
The basic assumption is that the capital reserves will help.
So something like it is assuming that no other factor exists.
But if there is some other reason that could lead to the conclusion then it will weaken
C does exactly that

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 8

Director
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 690

Kudos [?]: 252 [0], given: 855

Location: United States
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2017, 20:54
Conclusion :- "So if major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will not decline in the future."

Weaken :- "Major industries increase their capital reserves, the employment rate will decline in the future."

To weaken, we just need to find a choice that tells us there are other ways to decrease the employment rate. The answer choice C fits the bill :-

(C) CORRECT. The author neglects to take into account the fact that other factors, such as an increase in labor costs, could adversely affect the
employment rate. For example, if the cost of labor becomes prohibitively expensive, even with increased reserves, the employment rate could decline.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Kudos [?]: 252 [0], given: 855

Re: The recent decline in the employment rate was spurred by   [#permalink] 12 Apr 2017, 20:54
Display posts from previous: Sort by